To better understand the importance of strong, functioning institutions, we offer a hypothetical-philosophical learning exercise that explores the interplay between hate, corruption, and their broader impact on justice within economic and social systems. This kind of reflection encourages us to think deeply about our shared purpose, the moral compass we follow, and the kind of society we wish to build. Each of us bears the responsibility to consider not only our individual future but also the generational values we choose to uphold. If we want a better society, we should encourage behaviors that bring us closer to that vision.
In this thought experiment, it becomes increasingly evident that harm was not random, but coordinated—intended to mistreat some individuals in order to benefit others. A local judge, seemingly aware of the misconduct, nevertheless sided with the perpetrators—demonstrating a failure of ethical judgment. Setups, smear campaigns, endangerment of children, misuse of public resources, and long-standing patterns of abuse affected multiple victims. Alarmingly, the perpetrators boasted openly about their actions, reinforcing a culture of hate, while whistleblowers faced retaliation for speaking up. In this closed, clan-based system, justice lacked accountability—suggesting that dehumanization had become normalized.
Suppose a self-entitled “better-than-thou” clan was repeatedly shielded over many years. As their impunity grew, so did their abuse of power. They projected their narrow worldview onto others—using the courts not to uphold justice, but to enforce loyalty to their group. In such a system, it was not about right or wrong, but about which group you belonged to and what ideology you followed. Supporting a shared social contract seemed distasteful to some. In reflection we realize corruption alone cannot cause this level of harm without hate, and hate alone cannot fester this deeply unchecked without corruption. Together, they become the tools of underdeveloped souls.
Instead of being held accountable, the wrongdoers retained their influence and positions—perpetuating cycles of harm and increasing long-term risk. Even worse, their misconduct was rewarded, as if part of an unspoken system of expectations. Waves of hate continued with no remorse, no correction. Survivors and observers described the system as “protected,” “immune,” and even “kangaroo justice.”. Investigations into perpetrators blocked and investigations into concerned citizens opened in a hasty effort to keep the wrongdoing hidden.
A two-tiered reality emerged: one class received institutional support while another was systematically excluded. As these patterns deepened, they undermined the work of the vast majority of good officials in order to appease the minority of corrupted officials. A trend line of decision making was created thereby highlighting the motivations. But this trajectory is not irreversible—if we recommit to the true mission of those institutions. That kind of commitment cannot be faked; it leaves a clear fingerprint on every outcome it touches.
What happens when the law no longer protects everyone equally? We must strive for a higher moral order, undo unjust gains, and enforce meaningful accountability. While some may resist equality—passively or even aggressively—the path forward is clear. Rectifying past wrongs is not only a moral obligation but also a safeguard against future harm. Consider the devastating rumor of a young girl, allegedly coerced and targeted by compromised officials until she took her own life. If true, it stands as a tragic example of unchecked power and systemic neglect.
Though others may lie, hate, or abuse authority, we must act with integrity—because these institutions were created for a reason. At their core lies a choice: to uphold what is right or enable what is wrong. The vast majority of people—including most officials—support the purpose of our institutions with their tax dollars and their trust. Justice must not be based on clan loyalty but on fairness, truth, and accountability. Only then can institutions truly serve and protect the people. It is our responsibility to defend that purpose—and to remove those who intentionally fail to fulfill it.
History often asks: How did we allow this to happen, especially when so many knew it was going on? Hindsight makes morality appear clearer. But the true value of theoretical and philosophical thought experiments lies in revealing the mechanisms of moral failure and helping us build models for future prevention. True moral judgment considers conduct consistently—before, during, and after the fact—to identify patterns of integrity or corruption.
In the end, the words learning, adapting, and growing remind us of our ongoing duty to uphold democratic principles—even when they fall out of favor in insular, clan-based systems. Our future depends on our ability to be more philosopher (seeking purpose) and less technician of the law (playing the game). We must ask ourselves: What is the true purpose of justice (the purity of its philosophy) and how should it guide its human-made counterpart (the law)?
*This is a hypothetical philosophical thought experiment for learning purposes so take with a grain of salt.
