Verified answer

What you've said about utilitarianism makes no sense to me.

During and immediately after the war here in UK when I was growing up, we had rationing of everything, including food, clothing the lot.

In one sense that period of our history can best be described as utilitarian, in that the entire nation 'shared' by way of rationing, what was available.

In order for utilitarianism to work well, a degree of Socialism must be impossed and accepted by the people. A very large section of the British people would agree with this and thus continue to vote for a Labour government.

Hope all of that makes some sense to you - being a utilitarian or a supporter of a utilitarian state, means believing in equal shares for all.

One other small point, which probably you have noticed but forgotten, is that on the whole the British people are very law abiding and will go to great lengths to obey the laws of the land. Why? Because the laws of the land are 'our' laws, passed in 'our' parliament, by 'our' elected representatives. Thus, the majority agree to obey the laws, even if they do not like them.

That's how I see it anyway - simplistic, but it works for most of us most of the time.

Clive makes a fair point and I do not believe that you are correct.

True utilitarianism, as put forward by Jeremy Bentham and others, involves governing by taking decisions that would bring about the greatest good for the greatest number.

Clive's point, about rationing being for the good of all is a very good example of the principle at work. The example that you cite falls well short - with an individual putting self need first.

That is an inappropriate example of utilitarianism.