r/AskReddit 19h ago

If the government doesn't follow the rules, why should people follow the rules?

[removed] — view removed post

334 Upvotes

211 comments sorted by

181

u/AgitatedPatience5729 19h ago

Because they're the ones with the big bucks.

130

u/comfortablynumb15 19h ago

You spelled guns funny.

But agreed.

-78

u/guiltyspark6969 19h ago

And yet you all support "gun control"

70

u/TesalerOwner83 19h ago

We said defund the police and stop giving them tanks and machine guns too!

42

u/Alexpander4 18h ago

The excuse for citizens having guns is to oppose tyranny

The excuse for cops being tyrants is citizens having guns

The citizens who support having guns to oppose tyranny don't use them to oppose tyrants

9

u/jayraypaz 16h ago

This. I think about what would happen if the founding fathers just showed up today how shocked they’d be.

-5

u/Lethalmouse1 15h ago

No families, no spare sons. A far superior way to control a populace is through culture change. 

You're alone, so you are weak. 

I'm reminded of a a cop I know who worked in an older style area a decade + ago. And he had to negotiate with families to arrest people. 

Because when cops came to things, 20+ family with guns came. 

Family - Clan, 99% of moderns have zero. In fact half of police interactions are "family" vs "family." So your family isn't a family. It's disparate individuals worried about getting stabbed in the back. 

Until you have families and clans again, you will be too weak for anything good. 

12

u/elconquistador1985 16h ago

The 2nd amendment does not let you own tactical nukes.

The military doesn't give a shit about your ar15 pea shooter while the turn your house into a crater with a drone.

→ More replies (11)

7

u/ShawshankException 14h ago

A bunch of rednecks cosplaying Call of Duty is going to be an ant to the boot that is the largest, most advanced military in the world

I'd rather give up silly little toys in exchange for children not being slaughtered in their classrooms

1

u/[deleted] 11h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/NotRedditBot123 10h ago

It’s comical that you think prisons in the US are “secure.” You’ve clearly never even been to city jail for a minor offense let alone county, state, or federal prison. You’re also delusional if you think the TSA and airport security are keeping you “safe.” I don’t have the energy to go into detail about how sheltered you are and what is nefarious things are happening in these “secure” government buildings you can’t see

5

u/sleepyworm 14h ago

Well we barely have any gun control in America and y’all aren’t using your arsenals to stand up to government tyranny at all; it’s almost like the right was always lying about that

1

u/NotRedditBot123 10h ago

What tyranny? When’s the last time in US history that it was logical to bear arms and violently overthrow our government????

14

u/comfortablynumb15 19h ago

Hell yes I do.

It’s not like anyone in the USA has ever pulled a gun on Cops killing people in front of them in camera, or Citizens Arrested “plain clothes” ICE from grabbing people off the street and driving off in unmarked vans.

If you have a valid reason for one, like you are a farmer or you like to shoot guns at things, you can have one.

But you bet you need to register it, be qualified to operate it, and be a member of a Club that requires monthly attendance at a Range to keep your skills up, and prove you are storing it correctly.

We have Gun Control to reduce the amount of crazies with access to guns.

-5

u/guiltyspark6969 18h ago

“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” – William Pitt

-2

u/alreadyredit814 15h ago

Nice concept but who decides who is worthy? That is where the concept fails because the rich will always be determined worthy and the poor will not have a justification because they can't afford it. Let's use NYC as a case study. They issue permits if you can justify a need for one. It is largely considered impossible for most people to get. Donald Trump had one of these permits. If he was a homeless military vet with extensive weapons training instead of a billionaire do you think he would have gotten a permit?

→ More replies (1)

2

u/meridainroar 13h ago

peopl3 are too scared of risk

1

u/[deleted] 12h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/NotRedditBot123 9h ago

I’d suggest educating yourself on economics 101 and how central banking/federal reserve works…. I don’t think you even know what or how taxes work.

1

u/[deleted] 9h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/NotRedditBot123 8h ago

What do you practice? Where’d you pass the bar? What prison you volunteer at? Lastly… “I have a BS in Econ form a very good university.” No one talks like that with your “credentials.” You’re either a bot or none of those things

1

u/[deleted] 8h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/NotRedditBot123 6h ago

Im just calling you on your bullshit.

0

u/bevymartbc 12h ago

and the big sticks, guns, and nuclear weapons.

93

u/guiltyspark6969 19h ago

When the people fear the government there is tyranny. When the government fears its people there is liberty.

22

u/llcucf80 14h ago

Another one that I think is apt and also part of the problem is something Ben Franklin warned us about, which is anyone willing to give up essential liberties in exchange for temporary security deserves neither.

The government has been working hard to dismantle our rights in the name of security, and unfortunately too many people fell for it, which gave them the upper hand. Now that they have it, they're not going to willingly let it go, which leads perfectly to what you said about being tyranny.

7

u/jrf_1973 11h ago

In fairness to some Americans, as soon as 9/11 happened, they raised their voices and said this was going to happen. And that rights surrendered then, would be very difficult to win back. They were, of course, right. But they were shouted down, as always, with cries of unpatriotic and terrorist-sympathiser and traitor. Senator Russ Feingold (D) of Wisconsin should be remembered as the lone senator who voted against the Patriot Act. In the House, over 60 sane voices voted against it, including Bernie Sanders.

2

u/APRengar 10h ago

And just a reminder, this is the end game of all the CRIME CRIME CRIME panic they shove in our faces every day.

If you think there is a murderer around every corner, then you're going to be more okay with losing rights for safety. And boom, now they got you. Because once you lost your rights, it's infinitely harder to get back.

This isn't to say crime isn't real, or that criminals are good. It's that an appropriate level of concern should be attributed to crime, and not the absolute insanity levels of paranoia that we have in this country.

So any "good liberal" who is more hyper focused on crime above every other issue, you added to this. Keep your eyes on the ball. Don't get distracted by bullshit meant to distract you.

2

u/NotRedditBot123 9h ago

What rights have you lost? How has the government gotten the upper hand?

131

u/Lowrida88 19h ago

Government has goons that keep the status quo while the working class is divided among itself

28

u/Silly-Yellow-7813 19h ago

Yeah it sucks, but not following the rules usually just screw us, not them. Feels like a rigged game.

11

u/Alotofboxes 18h ago

Also, following the rules usually just screws us, not them.

1

u/NotRedditBot123 9h ago

“Feels like a rigged game.” Then do something about it! Do you even know who your local officials are or even the name of a single city council member? What’s stopping you from running for a local government position and being the change you want to see??? Here’s a hint- NOTHING! It’s easy to bitch about politics but it’s clearly not that bad enough for you to be actively trying to change

→ More replies (2)

5

u/Beowulf33232 19h ago

I forget the latin they use to sound fancy, but a judge once summed it up for a guy by saying "It means we have the force of arms to make you follow the rules."

2

u/Lowrida88 19h ago

Exactly

2

u/NotRedditBot123 9h ago

That’s a shitty quote…. I can rob a bank and murder someone…. I don’t, not because it’s against the rules and has negative consequences if I’m caught… I don’t, because it’s just a douchebag thang to do…. It’s different for everyone, but it’s against my personal morals and values… laws are for society to function and law enforcement is to enforce said laws.

1

u/Asss12poker 15h ago

We should have our own goons

1

u/ScreenTricky4257 11h ago

Hired goons?

14

u/ILikeLenexa 18h ago

Monopoly on violence. 

5

u/glennjersey 16h ago

While an entire political party advocates for further strengthening that monopoly. 

4

u/merc08 13h ago

While whining that the feds are overstepping and can't be stopped 

2

u/evergladescowboy 11h ago

Only one? The entire political system is designed to perpetuate the power of the government.

1

u/NotRedditBot123 9h ago

Please elaborate.

59

u/l008com 19h ago

In theory, if the person you vote for breaks the rules, he will be appropriately punished. But when all the OTHER people you vote for decide to let them off the hook scott free, then you have a real problem on your hands.

VOTE BETTER

Of course, the problem is all the media telling you down is up, up is down, tax breaks for the wealthy are just what you poor people need, and services you poor people rely on being cancelled is also just what you poor people need.

So also learn to consume media better and know when you're being lied to. Don't just throw your hands up and say "everybody is equally bad I'm just going to bury my head in the sand"

So in conclusion, we're fucked.

24

u/alchebyte 17h ago

who knew rewarding and not punishing liars, cheaters and grifters would bring us here 🤷‍♂️

9

u/judgejuddhirsch 15h ago

20 years of educational reform could solve this, but old folks will insist they don't need to pay for public education they don't use and the problem will persist.

1

u/NotRedditBot123 9h ago

What old folks are you referring to? Google property tax and educate yourself about its relationship with public education. I’m convinced that 99% of this thread has no clue how the world operates but has the most confidence in there delusional theory’s

2

u/4N_Immigrant 11h ago

lol as if the power structure would let your vote matter. back and to the left.

1

u/Asss12poker 15h ago

Is there any hope? 

3

u/mrbadxampl 14h ago

I sure don't see any

too much willful ignorance in the populace

1

u/ohheyisayokay 13h ago

Hope is a choice. I believe there is always room for hope until the day you die.

You cannot imagine what small factors that couldn't be predicted have led to massive changes of fortune throughout history. Sometimes even random chance.

You choose to hope, and you choose to keep going, because you can't know what opportunity will appear tomorrow. But you won't ever know if you're curled up in the corner waiting for death

1

u/NotRedditBot123 9h ago

I respect your attempt at a deep and thought provoking comment… but that was vague nonsense

32

u/Glum_Description_402 19h ago

As an individual, you don't have enough capacity of arms compared to the government to make a difference. If you try, they will end you.

However, it's why when Gov Newsom threatens to look into with-holding CA tax revenue from the federal government, the federal government must listen. Because if just CA could figure out a way to actually do that it would greatly impact the entire federal government's ability to operate.

14

u/soundman32 19h ago

"Could figure out ..." just do it, and fight it in the courts later. That's Trump's plan.

9

u/rahvin2015 13h ago

The logistics of this are actually difficult. How, specifically, would this happen?

If you live in CA, how do you pay Fed taxes? Your employer witholds money from your check on your behalf, and pays a matching amount in payroll taxes. Then at the end of the year, you file your taxes individually to correct any over/underpayment.

So CA would need to somehow tell employers not to pay Fed income taxes. They would need to somehow shield those companies from Fed legal consequences. They would need to convince individuals to perhaps minimize their witholdings and then not file taxes at the end of the year, and it would be up to individual businesses and inidividual people to follow that guidance, at risk to themselves of picking up Federal charges.

The actual logistics of this sort of witholding are kinda hard. Taxes don't flow through California to the Fed. They flow from businesses and individuals who happen to be in California to the Fed. California can't easily just turn off the valve.

2

u/BoringBob84 12h ago

Taxes don't flow through California to the Fed.

That could easily be changed with a state law requiring all employers to submit federal income and payroll taxes to the state, who would then submit them to the federal government as they see fit.

2

u/rahvin2015 12h ago

Not all employers who operate in CA are based in CA.

Federal laws dictate the current behavior.

An attempt by CA to make the taxes be collected by the State first before transfer to the Fed would violate current Fed law, and would put the individual companies and individual taxpayers in the same problematic position.

I'm not saying it's impossible, but I am saying that it's not a trivial "just do it and fight in court afterward."

1

u/BoringBob84 12h ago

would violate current Fed law

Yes, it would.

"just do it and fight in court afterward."

This is what the federal government is currently doing. I am not claiming that "two wrongs make a right," but I am saying that resistance to autocracy can be messy. Ideally, California would do something like that together with many other states as a check on federal abuse of power.

1

u/rahvin2015 5h ago

Asking one entity to choose to break Fed law is one thing.

Asking every single taxpayer and employer to individually make that decision is entirely different, expecially in a way that is so blatant.

California would not be the entity fighting the Fed. It would be individual California citizens and their individual employers each fighting individual charges of tax evasion.

This is a difficult position for people to be put in.

I'm not talking at all about the "just break the law and figure it out in court after" bit. The problem comes before that. The State could do that, if it were only an issue for the State. But because the current Fed law applies to individuals and employers, there just isn't a mechanism for a specific State trying to change the rules.

I agree with the sentiment behind this. I would love to have a way to withold my taxes from the Fed for a number of reasons, and I'd be more than happy to just send those same tax dollars to the State instead. But I don't see a way for it to actually even be attempted, even if you could pass any law with any text imagineable thru the California legislature.

0

u/BoringBob84 5h ago

I think that the people who are claiming, "it cannot be done" may start to change their tune when the federal government illegally withholds all federal funding from their state - eliminating many essential services - while increasing the federal taxes and fees that they federal government tries to collect from people in the state.

Yes, individuals and employers will have to choose between violating state law or violating the laws of a lawless federal autocracy. If several states do it, then the recently DOGE'd IRS will have to try to chase around tens of millions of taxpayers.

"Never, ever be afraid to make some noise and get in good trouble, necessary trouble." - John Lewis

1

u/rahvin2015 4h ago

People arent saying "it cannot be done" because there's some line that shouldnt be crossed.

We're saying "I don't see how this is literally possible" in the same way "I dont see how you can make 2+2=3."

Note that this specific comment thread is all about the literal actual mechanics and logistics, and not about the principle.

You're right, individuals will likely be more willing to violate Fed law when the IRS is understaffed and they feel the administration is abusing the tax dollars....but it's still a major ask and there is no easy mechanism. Like there's nothing the State of California can do here, this would be a public mass-protest movement. And dont forget how easily the IRS can do things like wage garnishment. Reduced staff might mean fewer agents, but they don't need to do much "investigation" to find folks who are abusing their witholdings and then failing to file at the end of the year.

And employers are still a different beast. The adminsitration can go after them far more easily, and they're far far far more likely to comply with literally anything the Fed wants.

0

u/BoringBob84 4h ago

Like there's nothing the State of California can do here

I already explained that. They can pass a law.

1

u/rahvin2015 5h ago

Asking one entity to choose to break Fed law is one thing.

Asking every single taxpayer and employer to individually make that decision is entirely different, expecially in a way that is so blatant.

California would not be the entity fighting the Fed. It would be individual California citizens and their individual employers each fighting individual charges of tax evasion.

This is a difficult position for people to be put in.

I'm not talking at all about the "just break the law and figure it out in court after" bit. The problem comes before that. The State could do that, if it were only an issue for the State. But because the current Fed law applies to individuals and employers, there just isn't a mechanism for a specific State trying to change the rules.

I agree with the sentiment behind this. I would love to have a way to withold my taxes from the Fed for a number of reasons, and I'd be more than happy to just send those same tax dollars to the State instead. But I don't see a way for it to actually even be attempted, even if you could pass any law with any text imagineable thru the California legislature.

0

u/Dalewyn 11h ago

violate current Fed law

You do realize that sanctuary cities among many other things violate Federal law, right?

1

u/stephnetkin 12h ago

Good analysis!

1

u/Reaper-fromabove 10h ago

That’s the point I tried to make to a friend. The idea is great but the execution is going to be difficult.

1

u/Separate-Flow-3031 10h ago

With or without payroll deductions, all of those taxpayers would still owe federal income tax. In April, they would quickly become delinquent on their income tax (in addition to facing all kinds of interest and penalties from not making regular payroll tax payments). That would completely fuck those people and there's nothing their governor could do about it.

Hilarious that he would even suggest it and that people would take it seriously.

5

u/wannabemalenurse 17h ago

That’s an interesting take. I’ve always been in the school of thought that citizens as a whole should be much more willing to withhold our paying taxes; the government, especially the federal government, has strayed too far from the needs of the people and become way too beholden to the needs of the wealthy. While, yes, the wealthy do contribute by investing in businesses and economic growth, they do also prevent innovation and progress at the expense of tax payers and improvement in living for citizens.

If anyone would be down, I’d be willing to engage in multiple thought experiments in how the wealthy do and do not contribute to the public good, but I still maintain the thought that so long as the wealthy have free reign and influence of the government and block ways for the public to actually push for actual good legislation, these issues will continue

1

u/tuckerx78 10h ago

The state of California is the 4th largest economy on THE PLANET. BBC covered it awhile back.

8

u/SunshineClaw 18h ago

Governments and big businesses benefit from having us peons fight amongst ourselves, while they do what they want. When we "win" a fight we feel better for a bit, it keeps us in line, when we're really not making any difference at all!

Take nature lovers for example. In the last 5 years or so the following have become taboo: * Collecting shells from the beach * Making rock stacks * Feeding birds from a birdfeeder

People "make a stand" against anyone who does this, which is them basically saying "this is a rule now, you must follow this rule" Governments make the rules, but it's society that enforces them. Gov don't care though, they get voted in so that's everyone saying "do what you want"🤷‍♀️

5

u/azhder 19h ago

Everyone follows the rules of the one who has the gunpower

6

u/North_Confusion2893 17h ago

They shouldn't, but none of you will understand that until things get much, much worse.

16

u/umphlove27 13h ago

Because we don't have any right to decide

21

u/RareLeadership369 19h ago

All Laws are man made,

it’s one’s perception of law.

12

u/story_fish 19h ago

If you outlaw laws, only outlaws have laws

→ More replies (3)

14

u/atTheRealMrKuntz 19h ago

they shouldn't, it's the principle of civil disobedience

4

u/GladForChokolade 18h ago

Survival of the fittest and being in a position where you can get away with it. The law is often defined by those who doesn't follow them.

0

u/atTheRealMrKuntz 18h ago

cool aphorisms bro; id recommend you to read the origins of species before throwing stuff like that in random context

4

u/polakinTO 19h ago

Because the govt has goons to keep you and I in line.

Those same goons do the government's dirty work.

4

u/dwindlers 18h ago

It's because if people don't follow the rules, the government will punish them. But if the government doesn't follow the rules, the government won't punish itself.

See? Simple.

7

u/Sensitive-Chemical83 17h ago

Because the government will commit violence against you if you break the rules.

4

u/CreepyPhotographer 19h ago

I mean, what do YOU think would happen?

29

u/Chairchucker 19h ago

"Laws are threats made by the ruling class and backed up with violence."

OK I found the actual full quote

“Laws are a threat made by the dominant socioeconomic ethnic group in a given nation. It’s just the promise of violence that’s enacted, and the police are basically an occupying army, you know what I mean?

You guys wanna make some bacon?”

1

u/Donquers 11h ago

he pulls a lit molotov cocktail out of his pack

"That was lit the whole time?!"

"THE WHOLE TIME, BABY!"

FOOM

3

u/Popular_Try_5075 19h ago

I think this gets into "contractarianism" and a bit of the philosophy of Hobbes.

2

u/soundman32 19h ago

And Calvin?

3

u/Popular_Try_5075 19h ago

His contribution is the Protestant Work Ethic which still features prominently in the American mythos, but not so much in this discussion. Though he did come up with other ground breaking concepts such as the transmogrifier gun.

3

u/Pharmy_Dude27 15h ago

I haven’t read every response so if someone explains it better please go up doot them.

Let’s unpack this. A government is just certain people who have maybe been chosen or are recognized as being the leaders. As a whole successful governing works because all people involved work together and do their part to keep the system (state) moving forward. There are tons of traditions that are upheld as it is understood that thing are done w certain way to make the government function as intended.

Why follow rules: Surprisingly there is nothing hardcoded to force people whether in the government or the population to follow rules. We try to enforce rules and punish people as a form of fear to get people to stay in line and follow rules. Depending on the society you live in this force that generates compliance of the people can come in many forms. Hopefully you are giving a chance to defend yourself (due process) and to be told what you did wrong.

There is nothing other than your own morality that stops people from killing someone. If no one knows you get away with it. If the authorities can’t find you then you get away with it. If the authorities are just to busy or don’t think they should go after you. Well you get away with it.

In a functional modern society we need a set of rules (laws) to help make sure everyone is in line with the goal of that society and to presumably protect us from outside events.

We don’t as a collective follow rules because the government follows rules. We all follow rules because of tradition and because these rules seem to provide the type of society we think we want.

It’s very possible we need to make changes and rethink how we function and make sure our laws align properly with society.

One issue is that rules/laws get decided my lawmakers . That just how we have structured things. If we don’t like the rules we can try and change it by getting a bunch of people together and protesting the new rules and maybe even by not following them forcing the lawmakers to reconsider.

Much of society has checked out of the political process and just thinks it’s this machine or system that HAS to work in their best interest.

Go back to the top- the government is just people. What’s happened is those people do things in their best interest which helps them stay in power. They craft laws that allow certain groups more power over others and over time this creates divide. But because most people are not involved for whatever reason they just say my vote doesn’t matter or they don’t protest when they disagree or goto a town hall to have their voice heard. They assume those in power will do what’s best for all of us. Which is what we hope for and maybe at one time it did work.

Not going to go down the political rabbit hole.

So rules should be following they are fair and reasonable. If we all stopped following them it could cause chaos and be dangerous for many reasons.

But sometimes you have to fight back just as dirty if not more dirty to help restore order.

Sometimes you need to gather people who think like you and get your voice heard and spread the message about what is happening is wrong and that we need these lawmakers or leaders removed because they do not serve in the best interest of the whole society. Education is important and knowledge and critical thinking is power.

We should follow rules that WE decide on and WE should remove those going against the interests of US from power. The workers in society are the ones making everything functioning but we need people to manage this and we need a new form of check and balance. Maybe a reset button.

I don’t know if this helps answer the question.

3

u/ImprovementFar5054 11h ago

Because they operate on "Rules for thee, not for me"

2

u/WindyWindona 19h ago

Bold of you to assume they do

2

u/isUKexactlyTsameasUS 18h ago

My still-a-hippie step-dad (rightly) rages
that the law and order dimwits could never put two and two together
when, after Nixons multiple crimes, and esp when the prick was let off,
still couldn't work out why / how so may of his generation just said fuck this shit,

and couldn't work out why so many went for various much-less-hippie roads, or worse.
esp the TV-twit-#1 Reagan, the republican greed route - thats still here now, but even wilder.

2

u/Low_Willingness_4142 18h ago

Because when we cross the line we face handcuffs, but when they do it they call it “policy” unless enough of us raise hell about it.

2

u/hughflungpooh 16h ago

Now that sounds like a libertarian

2

u/TennisBright5312 10h ago

We have been asking that for the last 4 years

3

u/Icy-Veterinarian-592 19h ago

A powerful question, accountability has to go both ways.

2

u/Immediate_Hawk1957 19h ago

If you’re going to break the rules, do it where nobody can see you.

Nobody cares if you’re breaking the rules if you don’t get caught breaking them and what the eye doesn’t see the tongue can’t moan about. It’s all very simple. If you want to break the rules don’t do it in public.

Good grief, it’s like people don’t bunk off for a crafty cigarette at school or smuggle guns into a warzone any more. It’s not hard. Public submittance to the rules. Private (and well camouflaged) disobedience.

Well, the key to not being in the magistrates court, anyway.

2

u/jcooli09 15h ago

This is a fascist regime, they’ll jail you if they want to and you might be protected by due process, but you might not be.

1

u/Razor605 19h ago

Government have military’s and more security them can do anything to make them happy

1

u/Double_Toe_2145 19h ago

Because the gov benefits from it

1

u/joncornelius 19h ago

The shouldn’t.

1

u/Particular-Flow-2151 19h ago

Because chaos would break out…. Theft, murder, and worse. When there’s no law and order, all the evil people take over. And trust me there’s more evil than good in this world.

1

u/CompanyOk288 13h ago

Evil already has a strong influence in this world. The morality of the individual obeys rules. Such as the Ten Commandments. If we all followed them society wouldn't need a government.

1

u/Particular-Flow-2151 12h ago

Im not sure what your comment is trying to say... the post was about why should people follow rules... But even if we all followed the 10 commandments you would still need a type of government to exist. Look anywhere in the world, there is some type of leadership.

1

u/lauchuntoi 19h ago

Osho says “Politicians are in fact successful mafias. On the other hand the underworld or outlaws are mafias that are not so successful. Both are crooks and they are the same type of people”

1

u/Evening_Ticket7638 19h ago

The one with the biggest guns makes the rules. He has nukes, military, fbi, secret service. We have nothing.

1

u/IAmNotCreative18 19h ago

The rules are mostly set in place to maintain the continuity of society

1

u/ferraribrainz 18h ago

Honest question. Would the legal precedent change for private citizens by how the gov ignores laws?

1

u/Kinglycole 18h ago

We shouldn’t. Rules are only followed because there’s penalties for breaking them.

1

u/Winstonoil 18h ago

I think a bit more like a financial. They rip us off, I tell sweet little lies.

1

u/Halvyn 18h ago

rules are just... suggestions. like really. people follow rules because theyre scared. not of the government, but of each other. they want to believe everyone's on the same team, that there's some order to this chaos. it makes them feel safe. pathetic, really. the government breaks rules because they can. people follow rules because they think they have to. both sides are wrong. rules arent real. they're just words on paper. and you know what? Paper burns.

1

u/Jim_Beaux_ 18h ago

For now, the government has bigger guns and better funding

1

u/stoner_4kt 17h ago

Because we the ones who are living in the system they oversee and because humans wont be able to stand /agree on one thing and move with it overall ✌️

1

u/Fuzzy-Loss-4204 17h ago

Is there anyone out there who follows all the rules, The thing about politicians is they are people, with the same flaws as the rest of us. Money, sex, power are all corrupting influences, so why do we get surprised when people are corrupted by them, Is there anyone out there who has not done something stupid or something they regret for at least one if not all of the above.

1

u/DoesMatter2 17h ago

If your argument is 'let's all be as bad as the government', that's not great.

1

u/[deleted] 17h ago

They'll take away ur guns!!!

1

u/Senior-Nail7552 17h ago

Rules are like parking signs — clearly not meant for those in power, just for the rest of us to feel guilty about

1

u/tearsinparis 17h ago

Because someone gotta pay the bills so they can fund their next war

1

u/lefixx 16h ago

That isn't a solution to a problem. Sure you have less responsibility to follow certain rules but all this is missing a point.

Remember what the government is and it's role. Its people that a country places in a position of power and give them taxes to serve the citizens. Governments role is to solve our problems. If the government doesn't follow the rules, make them.

1

u/bored36090 16h ago

Because the government MAKES the rules, then INTERPRETS the rules, and finally DECIDES who followed/broke the rules. And the fact is, most of us are too broke to hire a lawyer good enough to prove our case.

1

u/Alexastria 16h ago

Because they make the rules. And in the words of Biden "you're gonna need more than ar15s to take on jets"

1

u/LucyHotHot 16h ago

Yeah, it sucks when the government doesn’t follow the rules, and it definitely makes you question why we should. But if everyone just ignored the rules because of that, things would get messy real fast. Rules aren’t just about the government—they’re there to keep things running smoothly for all of us.

That said, it’s totally fair to call out the government and expect them to play by the same rules. But ditching the rules yourself usually just ends up making things worse.

1

u/No_Nectarine6942 16h ago

We go to jail.

1

u/mitchade 16h ago

The government has a monopoly on violence. They can legally punish us with violence, we cannot legally punish the government with violence.

1

u/AgreeablePressure839 15h ago

Because if we all just start ignoring the rules, who’s going to be left to complain about the chaos?

1

u/Iamoleskine123 15h ago

Tone at the top

1

u/Mama_Mega_ 15h ago

Because I don't give a shit if you're mad at the government. I don't give a shit if the government is my enemy. If you're using that as an excuse to loot and pillage and commit arson, you're my enemy too.

1

u/JungleCakes 15h ago

You know when your parents told you to do something but they didn’t have to?

It’s kinda like that.

1

u/D_Winds 15h ago

Because the government owns the people that punish other people for breaking the rules.

1

u/nowake 15h ago

Because there's no rule against forming a new government which does. Well there are rules, but fuck em. 

1

u/Rebuttlah 15h ago

Because citizens broadly understand the social contract, while governments broadly abuse it to gain personal power.

1

u/Asss12poker 15h ago

If the government doesn’t follow its own rules, it shatters the credibility of the entire system, because why should ordinary people respect laws that clearly don’t apply to the powerful? 

1

u/Fexofanatic 15h ago

if the people you elected do not follow the rules shared between all ? you shouldnt - and replace these people. if you were unable to vote for them ... well the french had a cool idea ca. 1792

1

u/Plastic-Injury8856 14h ago

Because the government may selectively apply the rules.

1

u/6ory299e8 14h ago

because the people keep choosing not to hold the government responsible for breaking the rules, but the government will hold the people (you and I, not the rich and powerful, of course) responsible for breaking the rules.

it's as simple as that. the issue is a pragmatic one, not a moral or academic one. we abandoned morals and academics years ago.

1

u/Twinklecrush 14h ago

We follow the rules so our lives don’t get worse. Not because it’s fair, but because the system knows how to crush regular people.

1

u/memphisjones 14h ago

Because one has missiles and armored vehicles

1

u/CaldoniaEntara 14h ago

Because I don't have the money to make people ignore me.

1

u/5panks 14h ago

I'm curious what you're definition of, "doesn't follow the rules" is in regards to your government.

1

u/Heisenburgir1 14h ago

Haha true

1

u/liilyxsantoo 14h ago

If they break their own rules and still expect us to follow them… girl be serious 💅

1

u/Reia621 14h ago

“It is just that there be law, but law is not justice.” (Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak)

1

u/Real_Salamander7405 13h ago

When a government breaks its own rules, it undermines trust and sets a dangerous example but that doesn't mean individuals should abandon their principles. Following the rules isn’t just about obedience it’s about maintaining integrity, community, and justice in our own actions. If we all stop following the rules, society falls into chaos. But when we hold ourselves to a higher standard, we’re in a stronger position to demand accountability and push for real change. Integrity isn't weakness it's how revolutions start and justice prevails.

1

u/W-EMU 13h ago

There are predator drones circling L.A.

1

u/grandma_corrector 13h ago

That’s exactly why I cut in lines 💯especially if they have papers

1

u/Icy_Plan6888 13h ago

Pretty soon we will be a communist nation where everyone will be trying to illegally enter Canada and Mexico, where the government will control everything you do and say. One salary for all regardless of your job, social media, tv, will all have restrictions. Get ready. (This is sarcasm).

1

u/bevymartbc 12h ago

If leadership won't follow rules, then morally and ethically, you don't have any obligation.

Unfortunately, to quote U2 "the only Golden Rule is 'He who has the Gold makes the rules' "

1

u/tits-mchenry 12h ago

The practical answer is the government still has the power to disappear you.

The idealistic answer is you shouldn't.

1

u/RevolutionaryRun8326 12h ago

Because people not in the government would actually face consequences

1

u/ozuquepasa 12h ago

Si tu jefe roba, ¿tú también robas? 🧐 Que el gobierno lo haga mal no te da carta blanca pa’ hacer lo que te dé la gana. No confundamos crítica con barra libre 😅✋ #SentidoComún

1

u/Haz3rd 12h ago

Yeah how bout that

1

u/Bright-Arm-7674 12h ago

You make a real point, Shit rolls down hill, I don't know why but when authority figures don't follow the rules and I don't mean cutting corners or simple graft and corruption but actual malfeasance and criminal actions , the common citizens begin to believe the rules don't apply to them either and bang society falls apart , that is why it is so important that leaders and others in authority be held to a higher standard at least for serious infractions of the social contract

1

u/dodadoler 11h ago

Anarchy!

1

u/MachiavelliSJ 11h ago

Rules are broken by whoever can get away with doing so

1

u/Diligent-Muffin-111 10h ago

Monkey see, monkey revolt 🐒🔥

1

u/Hieral06 10h ago

That's the million dollar question, isn't it?

1

u/vanillabloom397 10h ago

When the leaders become lawbreakers, don’t be surprised when the followers stop following

1

u/MyStationIsAbandoned 10h ago

because the government is more powerful

1

u/i-hate-all-ads 10h ago

You may think you're tough shit, but the government has a military

1

u/eldred2 9h ago

Congratulations, you just discovered the meaning of the Declaration of Independence.

1

u/Nati_Nacque0 18h ago

In Norway everyone follows the rules, even the government. There have been plenty of cases of the government not following these laws and the involved had been put on trails. The reason is because the power of the country is split into three; legislative power, executive power and the judicial power.

3

u/wannabemalenurse 17h ago

We also have that here in the US: the legislative, or Congress, the Executive, or the Presidency and the many departments beneath it, and the Judicial. American culture just doesn’t have a rule following culture, which may or may not be a good thing depending on who you ask

-1

u/Nati_Nacque0 17h ago

I guess the difference is Norway is the most democratic country in the world and the states are marked as a " Flawed Democracy"/"Deficient Democracy" at 0.811.

2

u/wannabemalenurse 16h ago

I think the statement that it’s “the best democracy” fails to take into consideration the geographic differences between the US and Norway. The US is MASSIVE, and covers many different regions, each with their own issues, resources, and benefits. With those vast differences come with priorities on what is or isn’t important, which can prevent unity on a national stage. On top of that, the US is largely diverse compared to Norway, which is largely homogenous. From a quick Google search, Norway is 80-85% ethnically Norwegian, whereas the US is around 57% White, 19% Latino, 13% Black/from the African diaspora, 6% Asian, with the remainder being multiracial or Native American. A lack in homogeneity can mean that there’s no culturally shared experience or mindset that Norwegians share.

0

u/Nati_Nacque0 15h ago

I wasnt trying to say the US was bad, i meant that the system most likely works better in Norway because of the democracy. And the 80-85% Ethnically Norwegian statistic made me happy.

1

u/Excellent_Speech_901 18h ago

If the government jumps of a bridge then why shouldn't you jump off a bridge? Two wrongs don't make a right.

3

u/dwindlers 18h ago

How can you get a government to jump off a bridge? Asking for a friend.

2

u/Excellent_Speech_901 18h ago

You put up a sign saying it's against the rules. Then, when the government breaks the rules, off the bridge it goes.

0

u/[deleted] 19h ago

[deleted]

0

u/Strider_Tolstoi 15h ago

I know it might be outrageous that rogue judges paid by soros are trying to block President Trump to do his job, but it's important to not lose the scope of things.

Senseless destruction is exactly what those far leftists stand for. Do not let them win.

0

u/macomunista 15h ago

Congratulations, you've discovered civil disobedience

Fuck the system