Line in the Sand

Most people still take pride in being “law-abiding taxpayers.” It still gives them a warm, fuzzy feeling to know that they “play by the rules,” in spite of the fact that “the rules”—as made up by so-called “law-makers”—have gotten continually more unjust, arbitrary, idiotic, and sometimes downright evil. Most of those who have been trained to respect and obey “authority” quickly get uncomfortable at the idea that they should pick and choose which “rules” to follow, and which “laws” should be broken, maybe even resisted. Most people don’t like to think about the fact that, throughout history, those who “played by the rules” were the ones who funded, created, and carried out mass injustice, oppression and murder. Pick any tyranny in history and ask yourself, were the “rule-breakers” the problem? No. The rule-makers and the rule-enforcers—those who claimed to act on behalf of “government” and “law”—have always been the biggest oppressors, thieves and murderers. Meanwhile, those who have resisted authoritarian injustice have always been labelled rule-breakers, criminals and terrorists.

So no, doing as you’re told, playing by the rules, and following the law, is usually not the way to be a good human being. Usually it is the way to enrich and empower the most evil people on Earth. Does that mean that I think that everyone should run off and ignore the “rules” against theft and murder, for example? Of course not. But the truth is, the arbitrary dictates that a bunch of politicians have declared to be “the law” are absolutely irrelevant to whether something is good or bad. Morality doesn’t change just because politicians did some “legislative” ritual. People should always strive to do what is right, whether or not it is “legal.”

People have no trouble agreeing with this when they are considering other times or other places. We all recognize that “laws” in favor of slavery, for example, or many of the “laws” which were enacted and enforced in North Korea, the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, were illegitimate and immoral, and that it was good when people disobeyed and resisted such “laws.” Indeed, every July 4th many millions of American celebrate a large-scale illegal and seditious uprising by a bunch of “lawless,” “criminal” tax evaders and cop-killers. But few dare to apply the same standards and principles to the present.

Which brings us to the part that makes most “law-abiding taxpayers” very uncomfortable. Where is your “line in the sand”? How patently unjust do “the rules” have to be before you would feel right disobeying them? At what point, if any, would you even forcibly resist an oppression being done in the name of “law”? We all know—whether we like to think about it or not—that every “law” is a threat of violence from “government”: they are commanding you to behave a certain way, with the promise that if they catch you disobeying, they will send men with guns (“law enforcers”) to punish you. The ruling class doesn’t take kindly to those who don’t blindly obey their every whim.

With that in mind, do you have a “line in the sand”? Is there any point at which you would disobey and resist the “rules” made up by power-happy politicians? Yes, in some cases you may choose to obey out of self-preservation, just to avoid trouble for yourself. But there is a difference between that and feeling a moral duty to do whatever those who wear the label of “government” tell you to do. When would you choose to be the rebel, the “criminal,” the “terrorist,” by not bowing to the ruling class? Whether you like it or not—whether you are comfortable thinking about it or not—in the end there are really only two positions you can have:

1 - “Any injustice that is done in the name of law and authority, I will go along with. And I will not merely cooperate with it; I will fund it with my hard-earned money. I will not only allow, but will empower and enable those who wield political power to do absolutely anything they want, to myself, to my family, to my neighbors, to countless innocent strangers, without me lifting a finger to stop them. I am a proud, law-abiding taxpayer, and I will continue to set aside my own judgment and conscience in favor of blind, unquestioning obedience to my political masters."

2 - “At some point I will draw a line in the sand, a point beyond which I will not obey. At some point I will not cooperate with tyranny, I will refuse to finance injustice being inflicted upon my fellow man. And I will do this, knowing full well that the ruling class will send men with guns after me if they find out that I am not following their dictates. But I will disobey and resist nonetheless because I am a moral human being, and because I care about doing the right thing more than I care about having the approval of authority.”

Pick one. And if it’s the latter, you might want to decide now where your “line in the sand” will be.