What if the problem is the assumption that problems can be solved with rigid rules, universally applied without consideration of context? What if the problem is the assumption that rules make something objective?

There's no universal definition of "asshole". That's okay; you can still have "Don't be an asshole" as a rule, because the interpretation of rules is inherently a subjective act. You can either subjectively interpret this rule, or you can subjectively interpret a convoluted system of rules designed to exclude assholes in an "objective" way, and fail at both excluding assholes AND being objective.

the solution is sunshine laws, careful admittance and a requirement to participate in education and governance by all members

aka just look at all the things project 2025 is attacking and do the opposite

At the risk of opening a can of worms: this is a paradox well-known to Christianity. Jesus teaches us to include the marginalized, to love our “neighbor” without limits. But then Jesus also gives instructions about when to remove people from the community and, of course, expected people to stop being assholes if they truly want to follow Him (Jesus called this “repentance” and “sinning no more”). The assholes made use of the the inclusiveness bit and managed to overrun the Church while also pushing the marginalized out.

I mean yeah it requires maintenance. That's what they did in the US and are trying to do everywhere else in the world now too -- "just go make money don't worry about anything else!". And now our society is falling apart because everyone is just trying to make more money and nobody cares about their community anymore.

It's not like there's an objective definition of "asshole". The distinction is one of degree more than of category - someone does something bad enough and they're an asshole rather than just annoying.

It's why true anarchy and communism are pipe dreams. They all hinge on the assumption that assholes who lust for power over all else stop existing, as well as the idiots they charm with their charisma.

Those people are like a glioblastoma (unsurvivable brain tumor). Sure, you can get rid of the bulk of the tumor, but it's little tendrils remain and it'll come back eventually

One could say that we have an antagonism that unfolds into evolving outcomes over time. I wonder if there's like a name for that, or something!

This is Late Stage Capitalism to a T!

Hermits have it right apparently. Given those logical extremes, the third option of simply having no groups and becoming hyper-independent is THE way to go.