There is a moral imperative to disregard the law when the law does not deliver justice.
"But without
religionlaws how will I know what's right or wrong?" Anarchists are just atheists who go one god further.
The genocide of non-human animals for our pleasure is legal.
You sound like the dudes who find a thread about women's issues and shout "yeah but what about men's issues!"
You deserve to be heard but can you do it without turning it into whataboutisn.
Do you even know what whataboutism is ?
His post is entirely on point regarding the op. You can agree or disagree with his view of it, but to say that he's trying to deflect onto something else is myopic.
Unless you think his post is sarcastic and is trying to downplay the topic in the op ? But then that's just a literacy issue.
Ethics: refer to a set of principles and guidelines that are established by a community, organization, or society to promote responsible and respectful behavior.
Law reflects the ethics of the populace, not the other way around.
"Ethical" is a social construct that's time-bound based upon the beliefs and actions of the people.
Slavery was ethical, for the population of slavers. The holocaust was ethical, based upon the beliefs of Nazis.
"Ethics" isn't a guideline, it's a benchmark.
History is written by the winners and we are all a product of our environment, including our time. If we were born 200 years ago in the US South, we'd be perfectly fine with slavery.
That doesn't make it right, we have a different perspective here in the present, where we understand (or at least understood) basic human rights, and that black people are, indeed, human.
Well, you and the meme creator need to look up how the definitions of "ethics" and "morality" differ. Although the definition of "ethics" that you quoted is already a good start.
If we were born 200 years ago in the US South, we’d be perfectly fine with slavery.
This is blatantly false. Lincoln didn't wake up one day and suddenly think "hey maybe slavery is bad". Abolitionists had been fighting for centuries.
Abolitionists were a growing minority. Lincoln didn't just wake up one day and free the slaves...but we are still 18 years away from the 200 year anniversary of the emancipation proclamation.
But society (US society) as a whole accepted slavery as a fact of life.
Just like we accept suicide nets, sweat factories, "inmate labor", ,Uighur camps, and North Korean "mercenaries" as facts of life today. We don't want them, we just choose to forget they exist. Through our collective inaction, we passively condone them.
Plenty of individuals oppose them enough to actively avoid supporting them in any way, but they are such an inconsiderable minority of consumers, in the eyes of the corporate lords.
well because law generally serves the powerful
well because law
generallyonly serves the powerful
this is a wonderful reminder of the truth
We can plot it on 2 axis as a 2x2 grid:
legal & legitimate | illegal & legitimate ---------------------------------------------- legal & illegitimate | illegal & illegitimateDefinitions:
- legal: conforms to the law
- illegal: breaks the law
- legitimate: the right thing to do
- illegitimate: the wrong thing to do (not sure if this translation is correct, but this is what I mean)
Examples:
- legal & legitimate: Doing things which are allowed and fine, both morally and legally. Like crafting things and selling for a fair price.
- illegal & legitimate: Might be as small as crossing the street when the lights are red (although no one is nearby), or as big as rebelling against systemic injustice // 2nd row of OP picture
- legal & illegitimate: Exploiting others, benefitting from negative externalities, though under legal protection. Like the 1st row of OP picture, and things like fossil fuel extraction, colonialism, imperialism
- illegal & illegitimate: Villainous deeds like murder
I learned this idea during a training workshop for social disobedience (climate action, sit-in). Of course we saw ourselves on the legitimate side, partially covered by law, partially breaking it, but ultimately not caring so much about that part due to the perceived legitimateness. Against the fossil fuel industry, which we see as illegitimate, though sadly protected by law.
PS: Not sure if intended, but this sub's image very much reminds me of the movie SMILE, which might be my all time horror favorite.
"Never forget in the story of Jesus, the hero was killed by the state" - Killer Mike
I just finished a book this afternoon and this was a huge theme of it. Wonderful book, but hard to recommend. "Wind and truth" by Brandon Sanderson. I love his stuff, but you would need to read around 20 gigantic books to get to this point. Still, worth the effort if you like fantasy.
I just finished the first book of the Mistborn series. I can't wait to read Wind and Truth in 15 years!
😄I think you just solved what I should gift my girlfriend for birthday 🤭
Yes, please don't recommend people jump straight into the 5th book in an entire series of bricks.
Also, anyone talking to that character immediately becomes Super Kami Guru in my head. NAAAALE!
Poweful message, this.
using the law as a metric for ethics is called appeal to authority, a very common fallacy
