Issue17 by mintsh (新鲜出炉~欢迎大家pat)

mintshUID: 2460474

题目：issue17 There are two types of laws: just and unjust. Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and, even more importantly, to disobey and resist unjust laws.
大约用时 1.5h

   To divide existing laws into the just ones and the unjust ones is only one of the categories about laws. There is not any strong evidence to upholds the stance that we shall obey the just laws when protest the unjust ones. This assertion may be deemed convincing and reasonable at the first glance but I disagree with it for the following reasons.
  The first introduction of the laws could date back to thousands of years ago aimed at cementing the rulers’ power and keeping the whole society stable. From this angle, we shall know that the laws are not designed to sustain fairness. So as to put everthing in order in our daily life, authorities declaim various rules and regulations. Laws, considered as one sort of rules, are distinguishing from the rest of rules for their distinct source. Guaranteed by the law enforcement agency, laws take shape gradually to form a compulsory force to regulate people. Unfortunately, a law is implemented followed by demage to either sides. For example, to ensure the health and the future for children, factories were forbidden to employ child labor. Even though the majority admit the equity of the law, the capitalists suffered from the higher cost of human resource and thus complained about the inequity of the law. The situation goes exactly the same for anti-dumping regulations. Therefore, we cannot simply judge the efficiency of a law by its fairness.
   The laws worthy pursuit should be ones that benefit the society in the long run. Apparently, it is our nature to fight for our own profits. When people who base their interests on the similar foundation ressemble, an interest group come into being. Interest groups disturb the normal process of legislation with unexpected profound influence on the politicians and legistation agencies as well. Look into the sanctions on trade, who benefit from relevant laws the most? The answer will never be ordinary people and the alleviation towards unemployment. Instead, the owners whose companies are protected from the complete compitition with those foreign ones take up most of the profit, so they act as the most loyal followers after trade restrains. Acccording to modern economic knowledge, a nation had better adopt multilateral trade policy without restrains. In a short time, it seems to diminish the jobs offered and do harm to domestic industries, however, through complete compitition other prominent industries could earn much more from the economic globalizations and provide more jobs in a few years. This example throws light upon the truth that other than the confusing speeches from interest groups, a law should be valued by its impact on the society.
   Meanwhile, as time went by, laws went through vast changes to correspond to varing world. Laws against history trend have been abolished and new laws were legislated due to social shifts. Take helotism for example, once the faith that everyone is born to be equal disseminated widely the law shielding slaveholders’ ownership on slaves was doubted and finally removed. Later race separation became the topic people focused on when far-sighted scholars pointed out multiculture deserves recommendation. Then the anti-apartheid movement arrived its climax and led to the collapse of laws related to racial discrimination. These things presented the adaption laws made to adjust better to the real world.
  In brief, the classification on law by whether it is impartial or not does not make much sense because it has hardly any connection with the purpose of legislation. Due to the unavoidable fact that no law could exist without impairing certain groups, the destination altered to emphasize on the universal good for the nation as a whole. Moreover, what we shall not neglect is laws autonomous reaction to social shifts.

mintshUID: 2460474

2# Bela1229
呵呵~不好意思~马上编辑