Me Comes First

There is a philosophical debate surrounding a lot of what you’ve laid out. The two main schools of thought being presented are Kantian ethics vs. utilitarianism. Kantian ethics pretty much puts the emphasis on saving an individual while utilitarianism puts emphasis on saving the greatest number of people. Based on the plot, I’d say certain characters have shown themselves to be Kantians vs. Utilitarians at various times, with the “heroes” mostly leaning towards utilitarian.

Emma, David, Snow White, and Regina (now reformed) were willing to sacrifice finding Anna if it meant saving themselves and the town, making them utilitarians in this particular instance. Elsa was not willing to throw her sister under the bus, making her a Kantian. Elsa giving them an empty bag of pebbles was the exact same ploy Hook used when he gave Emma an empty bag to make off with the bean in 2×22, though he did turn around to help the group, making him more of a utilitarian now.

Rumple showed himself to be a Kantian (of sorts). He made a deal with the Snow Queen that she could cast her spell on the town provided she allow himself, Belle, and Henry to leave. That means he was choosing a handful of individuals he cared about directly over the town. Even when it appeared like Rumple was a utilitarian in S3 by sacrificing his life to save everyone from Peter Pan, Belle pointed out that Rumple really did it for her and for Baelfire. The fact that Rumple ended up saving everyone else was a happy consequence of putting his family first, a decision which just happened to align with saving the greatest number of people (so that it appeared to be a very utilitarian act).

Rumple’s current mindset seems to be “Who cares about everyone else’s happiness when your own personal happiness is at stake, right?” While that is presented as being “villainous” it’s basically the same decision that Elsa made when she tricked everyone and made off with the snowflake necklace to find Anna. Elsa’s decision was to find the one person she cared about most (her sister) over a town full of strangers. The thing that probably separates Rumple and Elsa is that Elsa probably rationalized her decision by surmising that once she found Anna, then she’d help Emma defeat Ingrid (which is probably something Rumple didn’t do, since he’d probably just leave the town to its fate and not try and take down Ingrid).

Rumple never ceased being the dark one, in spite of that act of self-sacrifice in S3, and if anything, has become even darker since his resurrection. I think that the combination of being controlled by his dagger and Rumple losing his son in S3 was enough to send Rumple over the edge. Despite his talk at his son’s grave, Rumple very quickly succumbed  to temptation when he saw the sorcerer’s hat in the abandoned mansion; in fact, it’s almost like someone planted it there for Rumple to find. He is all about himself, even though he probably rationalizes it by claiming he’s going to save the ones closest to him like Belle and Henry. Yet, the fact that Rumple would kill even Emma, Henry’s mother and the woman his son loved, is just an indication of how selfish Rumple can be. If Rumple doesn’t have an emotional stake in the person in consideration, then it doesn’t seem to show a moral concern about having blood on his hands.

I can see why Rumple would rather save himself and his loved ones rather than risk dooming them all for a town and its inhabitants who really don’t care whether Rumple lives or dies unless it affects them in some way. For example, “oh no, our magical problem solver is dead”.

At the end of the day, Rumple’s self-interest and the interests of those in town simply don’t align. It’s a clash of two branches of ethics. Even if we can understand why Rumple makes the decisions he does, it’s not going to get him what he wants in the end. Firstly, even if Rumple does successfully leave town, Rumple will be powerless because there is no magic outside of SB. He’d be vulnerable, which is the exact opposite of what he wants. So how does his plan even make any sense? Does he plan to bring magic to all of A Land Without Magic? Also, it’s pretty much the opposite of what he really wants if his idea of “happiness” comes at the expense of the happiness of those he loves, namely Belle and Henry, who’ll lose people they love. Rumple would have to lie to Belle and to Henry for the rest of their natural lives. But, he’d probably justify it by saying he did it to “protect them” from the Snow Queen.

But let’s be honest. If Rumple had wanted to defeat the Snow Queen before she even cast her spell, he could’ve done so with the snap of his fingers. Rumple is the one who ended the Ogres War and freed the children. Rumple is the one who saved Belle’s people in the second ogre’s war. No one currently has Rumple’s dagger to control him, so it would’ve been as easy as breathing for Rumple to destroy the Snow Queen. But he doesn’t even try. In fact, the first thing he does is makes deals with the very woman who would destroy the rest of Henry’s family and the town itself. Yet, Rumple lusts so much after unrestricted power that he makes the deal with the Snow Queen in exchange for knowledge of how to free himself from that dagger. It’s a decision which ultimately leads to the Snow Queen casting her spell while he turns his back on everyone.

Belle wasn’t involved in the second ogre war, that would’ve at least been the third one if not more.

First ogre war involved Rumple which carried on long after which Baelfire was going to be drafted to until Rumple stopped it.

Second Ogre’s war involved Granny’s brothers when she was younger and bitten by the wolf who would later become Red’s grandfather.

Third Ogre war was possibly Belle’s one though there is no clear start and stop for the ogre wars after the first one.

I wish we’d see more of the ogre wars.

Yes, lovely episode