← Back to context

Comment by lmm

1 day ago

> Does it make you feel good to participate in a meaningless charade of security theater? Or would you rather spend your time doing some of value?

I think there is a lot of value in being part of a democratic society that has structured dispute-resolution processes. Part of the cost of that is occasionally going along with something pointless (even if some things warrant civil disobedience, not everything does), and that's a vital democratic responsibility. So yes, I do feel good doing that - the same kind of good I feel when I pick up someone else's litter or give up my time for jury service. If anything, going along with a law you disagree with is harder, and more virtuous, than those.

3 comments

lmm

Reply
cucumber3732842  18 hours ago

So "Just don't be gay/smoke weed, it's not legal, if you don't like it there's a process to get that changed" is the kind of viewpoint that's compatible with your ideology then?

Law in a democracy ALWAYS lags public sentiment because without sentiment to pander to no politician will lift a finger. Overt sentiment always lags behind closed doors sentiment because practically nobody is gonna display overt sentiment until there's some indication from their experience that support for their sentiment is there. There MUST be room for petty noncompliance to let people discover that the noncompliance in some unknown case is perhaps not bad in order to kick start the process.

People like you are actively working to prevent and delay alignment between the people and the government/laws. If everyone subscribed to your ideology nothing would ever get done. If more people subscribed to it then things would change slower than they do.

You can tell yourself whatever you need to sleep at night but this sort of compliance as a virtue ideology you subscribe to is the evil that keeps our democracies from delivering good results promptly. I'm not saying go murder your neighbor because "fuck the law" or whatever, but an ideology that does not permit for deviance when such deviance is tasteful is a bad one.

  • lmm  8 hours ago

    > So "Just don't be gay/smoke weed, it's not legal, if you don't like it there's a process to get that changed" is the kind of viewpoint that's compatible with your ideology then?

    Sure (although I don't think there's ever been a law against being gay, only against particular acts).

    > There MUST be room for petty noncompliance to let people discover that the noncompliance in some unknown case is perhaps not bad in order to kick start the process.

    Petty noncompliance isn't the only source of information, and even if it was, that doesn't negate the cost to society.

    > People like you are actively working to prevent and delay alignment between the people and the government/laws. If everyone subscribed to your ideology nothing would ever get done. If more people subscribed to it then things would change slower than they do.

    So the wild swings of public opinion will be tempered somewhat, and society's path will be smoothed. Yes, that's the point. Same spirit as having a constitution and a second chamber rather than making everything run on a simple majority.

    > I'm not saying go murder your neighbor because "fuck the law" or whatever

    But you are. That's where your ideology leads once people start following it in practice.