The Rule of Assholes: every group has their assailed, the true test of a group is if they put them in charge.
The rule of assholes was invented due to a disturbing growing adherence to the false equivalency fallacy in order to attempt a straw man argument about a hypocrisy that may or not be there. There are those who feel that if you point out hundreds of instances of a wrongdoing, your whole argument can be undone if your opponent can find singular incidents where others are doing the same thing.
Basically, the argument becomes you can’t call out group A on bad behavior because I can find instances of group B doing the same thing.
The Rule of Assholes answers this by acknowledging that every group will have someone who will push action past moral boundaries. That is inevitable. The Rule of Assholes, however, responds to this inevitability not by absolving all groups, but by making how the leadership responds to the assholes. Does the leadership reject the assholes? Does the leadership take responsibility by trying to offer restitution? Or does the leadership encourage the assholes? Does the leadership show off the asshole as the ideal? Does the leadership give the assholes a place in the leadership.
Essentially, we all have that friend who drives like an asshole, but smart people make him a passenger and never give him the keys to the car.