Comment by fn-mote
1 hour ago
This comment irritates me. On one hand, I agree with it. On the other: how is it not just a version of “if you have nothing to hide”?
At some point, you should fight for what you consider basic human rights. Where you draw the line and how you fight is up to you.
It sounds like your attitude is to comply with whatever the authorities want.
It seems like a completely innocent person is the best one to push back on authoritarian overreach.
Am I misunderstanding something here?
No, you're not.
And idk how people don't understand how "politeness" gets weaponized.
This video is an example
https://youtu.be/amSIcL3V5C4?is=hmlOx2t7dHg5j-lJ
Here, the only way this guy could've had a "good attitude" is if he had let the lady do whatever she wants with his service dog. This behavior is very common in situations where people feel entitled to something, but know the counterparty has the absolute right to refuse to cooperate. No matter how politely that information is conveyed, it's "rude" because they're being denied something they want.
The police don't like my attitude when I firmly say "no, sorry, I won't be unlocking my phone. I will only do what I am legally required to do."
People have a hard time understanding this because they are under the impression that they know how to be polite because they do what they think is polite. They are unaware that politeness is subjective and slippery and that people can and do use it to manipulate others into doing things they're uncomfortable with.
[Am in agreement with being conflicted about this advice]
In a normal functioning society with law enforcement that is actually accountable to it's citizens, yes - polite pushback will likely have no horrible consequences.
In a country that is either already in the depths of fascism/authoritarianism - or rapidly heading there, fighting for rights is seen as a "red flag".
See also: "On Tyranny" (Timothy Snyder) and "Do Not Obey in Advance".