WHAT WE DO
Satire holds a unique place in literature, art, and popular culture. As a form of expression, it combines humour, irony, and wit to expose and criticise societal flaws, human vices, and institutional failings.
Satire is our weapon of choice in the war against ignorance and disinformation. We rely on its peculiar capacity to amuse while informing, which allows it to penetrate a wider demographic of content consumers, including those that would otherwise be daunted by the seriousness of the subject under consideration or the complexity of the matter in issue. The enduring nature of satire lies in its ability to challenge authority and reflect society back upon itself in a way that is both engaging and sharp. It critiques by holding a mirror up to society, revealing uncomfortable truths about human behaviour, social conventions, or political systems.
Furthermore, satire has the uncanny ability to both affirm the legitimacy of rightful authority and expose the bastardy of illegitimately seized authority. This is because rightful authority is tolerant of criticism and secure in the face of ridicule. Thus, a society administered by rightful authority celebrates satire as an indelible aspect of free expression fuelled by one's desire to grapple with social and political issues. An illegitimate authority, on the other hand, is perpetually conscious of its sinister origin and irredeemably insecure regarding its sustainability. It is always cognisant that its security lies in its ability to defraud or frighten enough people into acquiescing to the purported legitimacy of its origin. Thus, satire embodies the power to unravel illegitimate authority by deriding its ignobility and inspiring courage in others to act accordingly - its contagion feeds its formidability.
Satire remains an essential part of cultural and political discourse. It allows for critical engagement with social and political issues, offering a unique blend of humour and seriousness that few other forms of expression can match. From ancient Greece to modern social media, satire has evolved but continues to serve as a mirror reflecting society’s flaws, encouraging both humour and reflection.
Whether used to challenge power, expose hypocrisy, or simply point out the absurdities of human nature, satire endures as a vital tool for critique and commentary. Its longevity and adaptability prove that humour, when paired with critical insight, has the power to provoke thought and inspire change.
“Fools are my theme, let satire be my song.”
- Lord Byron
OUR FOUNDING PURPOSE
Socrates once noted that misanthropy essentially arises from an overreaction to the deceit and callousness faced by overly sensitive individuals from those they cherish deeply or trust completely. Unable to accept that such experiences, though unavoidable, represent only a small fraction of all social transactions, the affected individuals grow cynical toward humanity and fault human nature for their woes, inflicted by the betrayals.
Ironically, following his conviction for the offences of “failing to acknowledge the gods that the city acknowledges” and “introducing new deities”, when his influential disciples sought to break him out of prison on the night before his public execution by drinking hemlock, Socrates drank the hemlock as he was being rescued—such was the extent to which his faith in humanity had been shaken. Fittingly, he uttered the following final words to his disciples:
“The hour of departure has arrived, and we go our separate ways—I to die, and you to live. Which is better, God only knows.”
During his trial, Socrates had openly derided the jurors for participating in a hoax; he had felt duty-bound to do so. Likewise, he had appealed to their innate rationality in urging them to perform their duty earnestly, noting:
“I do not think that it is right for a man to appeal to the jury's sentiments to get himself acquitted; he ought to inform them of the facts and convince them by argument.
The jury does not sit to dispense justice as a favour, but to decide where justice lies, and the oath which they have sworn is not to show favour at their own discretion, but to return a just and lawful verdict.
Therefore, you must not expect me, gentlemen, to behave towards you in a way which I consider neither reputable nor moral nor consistent with my religious duty.”
Ultimately, when the jury convicted and sentenced Socrates to death, he proclaimed that though he may have been condemned to death by some misguided men, their wickedness and depravity had earned them the condemnation of Truth itself.
He rebuked his executioners for presuming they could punish him with death, as if they had any knowledge of what fate awaited him beyond the veil.
Moreover, he derided them for thinking that his execution could permanently silence the condemnation of their wrongdoings. He prophesied that, to the contrary, the critics who succeed him would be more belligerent in their demeanour and acerbic in their criticism towards them.
The publishers of Rule O’Flaw are here to fulfil the prophecy and avenge Socrates’ death.
We aim to demonstrate that the inherent moral frailty of the human mind makes contemporary judicial systems fundamentally incapable of reliably administering justice in all circumstances.
They can be predictably manipulated to inflict injustice on specific demographics by institutions that wield significant influence over their operations, either by design or through the unintended consequences of the practical context within which they operate.
More than two millennia after Socrates’ death, the same psychological phenomena that make innocent people vulnerable to being lynched by the mobs continue to imperil their quest for justice in the courtrooms.
“Socrates died for our sins; Jesus Christ had great publicists.”
- Shivesh Kuksal