On the subject of how the laws of the land are formed.

In most societies, it is agreed that laws of some kind are required. As we saw earlier, it is important that laws are created to govern the amount of freedom that individuals have; what people can and cant do legally (and socially, for that matter). While initially, this problem seems easy to resolve, it is probably true that while these are some of the most important laws that can be made in a society, the least progress has been made in finding a working solution. Any law made in one society differs radically from another made in a different society; If we were to look at the morals that were present in Nazi Germany, we would be appalled; as indeed would the Nazis looking on our society. But people are the same, and the majority of people in Nazi Germany had no problem with the regime (There was more outcry in Nazi Germany against the closing down of a sports club than the entire Holocaust.), as if they had always been agreed on the subject in question. It would appear that the laws were self-justifying and obvious; A Nazi would say that the Jews were an inferior race. However, this is one of the many opinions that are brought about through custom. Custom is brought about through the subject of feelings, not the subject of reason, as they should be. This Nazis opinions are not brought about through reason; for if they were, then they would surely abandon their scheme; as it is they are brought about from a multitude of influences, such as the opinions of others; like Hitler, or others in the society. At other times it is their prejudices and superstitions, or envy or jealousy. These often boil down to their desires and fears for themselves; selfishness. These things often combine into class prejudices: the German is out of work, and is told that the Jews are stealing the jobs, he becomes angry, and the process continues until an opinion if formed. Opinions can be extreme and cause extreme things to happen. A large portion of the morality of a society comes from these influences. It is very difficult to say that this is right or this is wrong without considering the influences from the society in question. All feelings of superiority, be they racism, sexism or any other prejudice, come about mostly through the creation of class interests and feelings. Another cause of this morality that should be noted is religion. If society believes that a gods preference are X moral value, then they are going to adopt that value as a value of their society. Although this is not essentially directly in relation to selfishness, it is often more dangerous than the previous cause of morality, as more radical morals can be generated, if the god in question is a human creation. If the God exists, then this morality is entirely justified, but that debate that cannot be proven either way, and shall not be discussed here.

Thus, the likings and dislikings of society are what often becomes the rules (under law and opinion, most of the time). This has typically been never been rectified on the whole, often the debate as to what society should like or dislike is what is considered, rather than deciding if the likings and opinions of society should in turn become laws. There is, in fact no recognised way of testing if the interference of the governments laws, brought about through public opinion, are justified. As a consequence of this, it seems that government interference is both used improperly and condemned improperly. It seems that we need a standard to judge if the laws that we make are uninfluenced by public opinion. On the danger of legal/social tyranny and how we can avoid it. In our present society, all aspects of inderviduality are lost in the crowd; public opinion now rules our society. The instincts and bias of the masses are our countries laws. This public is not always the same majority; for example, in America, the most active and influential (the ones whose opinions make laws) members of society are the white population, but in the UK it is the middle class. It doesnt matter who the majority is, just that they are the majority. Especially now, their opinions are not taken from outside sources, like religion or state, they are formed from their own biass and prejudices. This is projected by their leaders, who are elected and make these biases law. This is all fine and well, but this system is not the way for great things to be created. The creation of the good thinks in our society comes from individuals; if we are all to follow the crowd, nothing great will ever be achieved. In history, we have often seen a single great individual go in a way different to society; like Socrates in ancient Greece, and that act spur more men to follow, accomplishing even better things, like Plato or Aristotle. We also see large periods of history where no such men emerge. Any man is capable of greatness, but he must cast off the shroud of custom. Inderviduality is important here. Pressure from the majority is an attempt to make people all the same; Exceptional individuals are, instead of being encouraged to be different, are often deterred. The very action of acting differently, and rebelling against custom, is itself a service. If more people go against tyranny of opinion, then, whether they are better or not, it will benefit society when someone of true genius comes along; instead of being repressed, they will flourish. The fact that so few people are prepared to go against this opinion makes itself a danger to our society.