The Rejection of Authority and Government

[GloomCookie]

So this is something I've been noticing a lot of recently, and no it has zero to do with the rise of authoritarianism in the world, but just a rejection of the authority of law and order in general by numerous people. I watch a lot of police body cam footage and things of that nature, and while sure criminals are anti-law enforcement in general, a lot of people have become openly brazen in their rejection of authority. Most notably this includes so called Sovereign Citizens and their kind, people who believe that somehow they can just reject the laws of a country or nation because of some made-up legal jargon that has no bearing, such as a belief that the Articles of Confederation are still in effect in the United States.

And I don't understand why this is becoming a major issue. I understand that we have more government now than ever before, but it comes with living in a much more complex society than ever before. Why do some people hold this belief that they can reject the inconvenient portions of modern society while trying to exclusively benefit? Did I miss something along the way? Or is this a very symptom of society growing more complex due to things like the Internet, where people who would previously be isolated and cut-off from support in these radical beliefs now able to identify friends and confidants and push these agendas?

Also, please don't bring the authoritarians into this, that's a completely different conversation. There is a minimum level of government necessary to make sure that things get done, and while it can be slow, it is still a necessary function. Anarchy also should be avoided because of the same reasons. Please keep conversation civil. Thank you!

[Vekseid]

I wrote about this awhile ago.

Varied friends are the key checks on this sort of thing (and other things). People who will help bring you down to Earth.

And people today have fewer friends than ever. There is a crisis of loneliness in modern developed society, and it is only getting worse.

Institutions help gird against this, and they have been under attack at every turn. Religious institutions used to be a major one, but they've been having their own issues of late. The military is another, but as parts of it get privatized, this benefit gets severely weakened. Schools and college are others, but college is pricing itself out of this and schools at least in the US are treated as a cost rather than an investment in the country's future.

Of course nothing stops anyone from creating their own. Anywhere people will get exposed to others outside of their own control qualifies. Volunteer organizations. 'Small' forums like Elliquiy here. Even your own gaming group qualifies, if you play with sufficiently random people.

Without these institutions, without people in your personal sphere of influence who will say 'my friend, you are whack', people who believe whackout ideas - or seek them out - tend to congregate.

This alone is a health crisis of sorts. Pedophiles get driven out of every other community, but find each other to reinforce what they do as 'right'. And as long as they have no friends outside that group, they don't have to listen to anyone telling them they are wrong.

There is a conversation about what is needed here that needs to happen.

[GloomCookie]

With all due respect, I'm not understanding how a group of marginalized people like pedophiles relate to groups such as sovereign citizens rejecting the rule of law in the United States and beyond. I understand that marginalized groups do have it rough, but that is a separate discussion, as you yourself pointed out a while ago.

I'd prefer this topic to remain focused on anti-authority groups please. Thank you.

[Vekseid]

With all due respect

If you did you would have responded to my post, rather than picked a single related point and decided to make the thread about it.

If you want this thread to be about something else, I wrote several hundred other words for you to respond to.

[Zaer Darkwail]

He mentioned pedophiles as an example of a pattern. People who are lonely, without IRL friends or family to connect or talk to, go internet and into forums and groups which closest match their mindset. These social groups then form their own opinions and biases and then they alienate themselves from to the rest of the world and society as well.

So, if stick to sovereign citizens and separate them as one such social group, anybody who is against taxation, law, anarchism, or anti-government gathers in forums and reinforces each other's beliefs and makes them believe themselves to be right by some clause. The effect which reinforces these beliefs despite proof given otherwise (including outdated laws) is called belief perseverance (link to Wikipedia).

Now, a lonely person with beliefs finds a group who supports the ideals (wrong as they are) and then faces law reinforcements, and any possible proof given will be backfired and denied outright just from belonging to a social group where you had grown an emotional attachment into a just sheer finding people to talk to and share a belief in.

Also, even without the internet people can find social groups to agree with if they are active but the internet makes it a thousand times easier and faster. Now how/why do so many people follow this trend while some other people who are lonely do not join 'any mobs' so to speak? Well, some people are followers and some are leaders. Those who are followers gather around together to form groups while leaders can go by themselves without joining any groups.

This is my thoughts on the subject of why there are increasing anti-governmental attitudes and especially from sovereign citizens. There are likely dozens of other issues helping make it happen (like the government's own actions displeasing the general population and government providing less for people making them care less about laws/government or society as a whole and focusing themselves) but wanted this to be the brief reply.

[Beorning]

I may be mistaken, I do agree that the Internet plays a role here. It makes it much easier for people with fringe beliefs to connect and create their own echo chambers. C.f. anti-vaxxers, flat-earthers and others.

On possibly related note, I'd like to ask something: what the heck are the "auditors"? Youtube is occassionally displaying these videos for me: "Auditor refuses to show ID to a cop", "Auditor argues with a cop about making photos in the street" etc. Is this connected to the rejection of authority by sovereign citizens etc.?

[Zaer Darkwail]

On possibly related note, I'd like to ask something: what the heck are the "auditors"? Youtube is occassionally displaying these videos for me: "Auditor refuses to show ID to a cop", "Auditor argues with a cop about making photos in the street" etc. Is this connected to the rejection of authority by sovereign citizens etc.?

Well, according google searched definition what 'auditor' means;

1. a person qualified to audit accounts
2. a person who hears or listens
3.  Australian, US and Canadian
a registered student who attends a class that is not an official part of his or her course of study, without actively participating it

I guess when youtube video says 'auditor' it means a registered student in a course that is not officially part of the main field of study (and does not actively participate in it, sort like study aside from the main field). Not sure why they use auditor instead of 'registered student'. May be some media guideline to redirect attention away from other students.

[Keelan]

I may be mistaken, I do agree that the Internet plays a role here. It makes it much easier for people with fringe beliefs to connect and create their own echo chambers. C.f. anti-vaxxers, flat-earthers and others.

On possibly related note, I'd like to ask something: what the heck are the "auditors"? Youtube is occassionally displaying these videos for me: "Auditor refuses to show ID to a cop", "Auditor argues with a cop about making photos in the street" etc. Is this connected to the rejection of authority by sovereign citizens etc.?

Speaking from the US, I'm familiar with primarily 2 types of 'auditor': 1A Auditors (First Amendment Auditors), and 2A Auditors (Second Amendment Auditors)

Essentially these are people who are of their own volition 'testing the system' (aka the local government) and documenting their testing to ensure that the system is not engaging in overreach or - alternatively - to show where laws are actually incoherent and demonstrating such.

1A auditors are likely to do things like deliberately record cops conducting their business in public, engage in disruptive speech in public that is technically legally protected, do protests and assemblies that are likely a borderline case, etc, with the idea of the cops getting involved so they have the 'opportunity' to demonstrate whether they're going to 'overstep' the law and attempt to interfere and arrest them.

2A auditors are the same, only it's with firearms. This would include people going fishing or hunting while armed (which is usually legal, often even if you're fishing in a somewhat urban area with a river running through it), going around open-carrying in public places where it's technically legal but may not be commonly seen, and in more extreme cases doing so while open-carrying a longarm which is again technically legal. Again, the point is to stress-test the system to ensure that the police are not going to overstep and infringe on the rights of 2A-enacting citizens (aka. people who are legally armed and legally carrying in public). Another component for the ones doing so more subtly is often to show that the mere presence of a firearm being carried legally by a citizen is not on it's own a threat or reason to call the police.

Some of the 2A guys actually also conceal-carry in places where they SHOULD NOT as well, simply to point out how dumb things like 'no gun zones' that have no means of enforcement are as well.

The truth is that these groups are a mixed bag with a couple people engaged in less over-the-top displays to varying degrees of sincerity, while others are... basically just being assholes making a stir and being disruptive for the sake of being disruptive.

Particularly the 2A ones, because yeah, TECHNICALLY here in AZ I *COULD* walk around in a plate carrier loaded with level IV plates and mags and carrying an AR15 on a sling across my chest and so long as I keep my hands OFF the weapon and don't point it at anyone it's TECHNICALLY LEGAL, but even I - who have regularly seen firearms on people's hips while they were shopping or getting gas for their car and think it's normal - would fully expect the cops to show up everywhere he went since it's so far outside the norm even here that it would have most everyone concerned.

So, TLDR: In the USA an 'auditor' in such videos are people who are essentially stress-testing the system and complying with the laws and holding the cops to the expectations of the laws and not their course of business, usually on a specific subset of the laws, while documenting it to show the world if and when they are following the laws, or infringing upon them.

[Zaer Darkwail]

Ah, thanks for clarifying Keelan. I guess the reason (as an outsider from the US), why it may have grown more frequent, is by increased general population's dislike of governments, and thus stress testers more frequently test the law. Albeit I would view it as a purposeful provocation for police to overstep their bounds just out of spite. From social media, I have seen folks criticize and dislike most politicians or government decisions (or they may be the loudest birds in the otherwise silent flock).

[Vekseid]

In this specific case auditors aren't testing the law so much as they are testing peace officers' knowledge of it. It does come off as a bit assholish, but some 2A cases aside I think it is better on balance overall.

[Oniya]

Mr. Oniya is a bit of a fan of the 1A auditor videos, (mostly the filming-of-police variety), and some of them have actually had instances where the police 'scored' very high on both knowledge and de-escalation of the situation that was being filmed.

[GloomCookie]

In this specific case auditors aren't testing the law so much as they are testing peace officers' knowledge of it. It does come off as a bit assholish, but some 2A cases aside I think it is better on balance overall.

Except that, according to the ruling in Heien v North Carolina, police officers are exempt from needing to know the law when it comes to certain circumstances that can include detainment, searches, and arrest.

The Court published its opinion on December 15, 2014, affirming the lower court by an 8-1 vote.[5] Chief Justice Roberts authored the majority opinion, with Justice Kagan filing a concurring opinion in which Justice Ginsburg joined, and Justice Sotomayor filing a dissenting opinion. The majority held that a police officer's reasonable mistake of law can indeed provide the individualized suspicion required by the Fourth Amendment to justify a traffic stop based upon that understanding. In her concurring opinion, Kagan wrote that the full text of North Carolina's law "poses a quite difficult question of interpretation, and Sergeant Darisse’s judgment, although overturned, had much to recommend it". In her dissent, Sotomayor argued that the reasonableness of a search or seizure should instead be determined by evaluating "an officer's understanding of the facts against the actual state of the law."[5][6]

Basically, if a police officer doesn't know the precise wording of the law, they can still use the "law" to conduct a search even if the initial interpretation was incorrect. In this case, two people were pulled over in 2009 for having a defective tail light, when in fact the North Carolina law didn't specifically state this was an offense worthy of being pulled over for. When questioned, the two people in the car gave conflicting accounts, and Heien, when asked if the officer could search the car, consented, and they found cocaine. Despite the initial stop being unjustified, the court ruled that there was sufficient cause for the officer to feel there was a violation of law and thus the stop was justified, leading to the discovery and seizure of the cocaine.

Ah, thanks for clarifying Keelan. I guess the reason (as an outsider from the US), why it may have grown more frequent, is by increased general population's dislike of governments, and thus stress testers more frequently test the law. Albeit I would view it as a purposeful provocation for police to overstep their bounds just out of spite. From social media, I have seen folks criticize and dislike most politicians or government decisions (or they may be the loudest birds in the otherwise silent flock).

Generally a lot of people have dislike of police because most interactions with police are in negative circumstances, which can and does taint their experience. Getting pulled over by a police officer for any reason is worrying. Hell, even as a law abiding citizen, I still freak the hell out when a police officer gets on my ass, because I worry I'll get the blue light special. But, I also don't go out of my way to antagonize cops either. I've been fortunate to only get pulled over once and the cop was cool about it and just gave me a citation (didn't have a seat belt) and that was that. But not everyone has those same experiences and tend to overreact to the situation. Government officials get similar flack because they're generally felt to be a hinderance on people with unnecessary bureaucracy and rules while doing nothing or passing laws that only make daily life harder.

I went to the DMV to get a "Real ID" the other day, and I had to wait until precisely 8am, get in line, take a number, sit, and wait. I go to the counter, present my documentation and... fuck. I am missing a document.  So I have to get a stamp saying I can come back, leave, go a block down to a completely different building, find the correct area at the Department of Health, obtain a copy of my birth certificate, then go back to the DMV and then submit my paperwork. Total time? Almost 2 hours.

Believe me, I understand the negative sentiments, but I also understand that certain procedures are to make it difficult so someone can't come up and just take your property and do other things because people can and will steal your identity just because they can. Government procedures are a pain in the ass, but that doesn't mean I want to run out and commit a felony just because I was inconvenienced at the DMV.

Mr. Oniya is a bit of a fan of the 1A auditor videos, (mostly the filming-of-police variety), and some of them have actually had instances where the police 'scored' very high on both knowledge and de-escalation of the situation that was being filmed.

I watch police body-cam footage and I do prefer when the police de-escalate a situation vs. just throwing cuffs on someone, but I have also seen videos like... a guy saw a police officer arresting someone on the ground and just ran up and pushed the cop off before running away. Dude had no idea what was happening, just causing trouble for himself and the police. Imagine if the guy had a gun or something and attacked the officer just because someone was wanted for a felony like murder. Some cops do go on power trips, but not all of them >.<

[Zaer Darkwail]

At least where I live (in Finland) police force doubles as social workers in the sense that they talk to people more and the default handling of disturbances or conflicts is to talk them over. Also the case of someone being a nuisance and trouble they do arrest but do not put them in a cell (unless violent or seriously drunk/ill) and instead give a drive home if you are able to tell your address (if you're local).

Ofc not all cops or police circumstances go perfectly nor all police forces be perfect or nice, but in general, there is less aggression towards police in Finland because of how they conduct themselves (and also some police double part-time as ambulance drivers/staff as well). Our police do have guns as well but pulling a gun is an absolute last resort. But it can also overall Finland culture in itself which makes interaction with our police different and US interaction with law/police is what it is because of their culture.

So if there is increasing anti-government and anti-authority behavior growing in US it's because the overall culture is shifting in that direction by various factors. The only way to combat it is by doing cultural shifts. At least I understand in the US there is no sense of global camaraderie in the US but rather US citizens more identify/care for their sub-culture groups (like NY folks vs Detroit, Whites vs Blacks vs Natives, Southern American vs Northern American). There are loads more conflict between various sub-cultures and groups than unity (historically speaking), thus making any cultural shifts difficult to reduce entirely away (because some measures of culture shifts would upset other groups).

[Vekseid]

Except that, according to the ruling in Heien v North Carolina, police officers are exempt from needing to know the law when it comes to certain circumstances that can include detainment, searches, and arrest.

Except what? Auditors work to educate police. Even if that ruling was as broad as you claim it is, this just shows their net value to society.

At least where I live (in Finland) police force doubles as social workers in the sense that they talk to people more and the default handling of disturbances or conflicts is to talk them over. Also the case of someone being a nuisance and trouble they do arrest but do not put them in a cell (unless violent or seriously drunk/ill) and instead give a drive home if you are able to tell your address (if you're local).

There are movements here to reform police, but the situation is enormously complicated. Right now we have a number of police forces that are straight up being derelict in response to the criticism they have received. After LA replaced their police chief for example, suddenly enforcement actually happened.

In some states, certain cities don't even have control over their own police forces (e.g. Kansas City). These are really more like occupation forces. I think over time, in blue states, we'll start to see a more European model emerge. Some departments are happy to go along with this, others are going to be dragged kicking and screaming.

At least I understand in the US there is no sense of global camaraderie in the US but rather US citizens more identify/care for their sub-culture groups

There is an enormous amount of Russian propaganda pushing bullshit like this. They even make videos of it. ("They beating up every white person!" is a pretty famous one. Note how no such beatings are actually shown, nor any speakers, nor did the local police receive any notice of such assaults). The manspreading video is another. It's all bullshit.

Some of these sovereign citizens and native Americans aside, most of us view ourselves as citizens of the United States first.

[Fox Lokison]

Just as a preface, I'm more of a student of how societies fall apart than anything, so this is going to lean more into the breakdown of the power of authority more than anything.

People obey authority because they feel they have good reason to. The rules keep them safe, keep them happy, and aren't causing them undue harm. We're generally very willing to let someone else take the reins of power so long as our lives aren't disrupted and our immediate needs are cared for.

When authority does not provide those things in people's minds, they grow disinterested. This can range from the cops shooting their children in the streets, to them being asked to pay taxes they think are unjust. They want other options, and they'll prioritize their wants, needs, and communities over that of others, because that's the source of their woe and the reason they feel authority needs reform.

The more authority is challenged publicly - successfully or not - the more emboldened individuals are likely to feel to challenge it themselves.

I wouldn't say these beliefs are all radical - there's a wide range of reasons to resist what you believe is an unjust authority. However, in the case of most, the internet has allowed them to link up across the width of the country and push the same message or goal with greater success. One protest in one city at one time is easier to ignore than 20 protests in 20 cities for the same cause. So we'll see more of this because people can organize in ways they couldn't before, at speeds they couldn't before.

Cory Doctrow is a good read if you're interested in how the internet has enabled resistance of authority to grow powerful seemingly overnight.

As for sovereign citizens, they've had a lot of limelight recently because the internet finds them funny. But they'll take any publicity, good or bad, and even the laugh track reactions still draw a few eyes that go "hey, that makes sense", and those people pool to the online corners where these folks hang out and unify.

However, I'd say the real reason we're seeing a push of anti-authority actions, beliefs, and movements, is simply because the US itself is losing the faith of it's people. Not enough for things like civil war, mass exodus, etc, but enough that the people within are questioning WHY they obey anything, especially when the authority that exists is allowing them to be harmed and killed. I myself am not exactly happy with how many anti trans bills are being practically machinegunned out, and it makes me less inclined to want to obey an authority that is declaring their hostility against me.

The US is a country of disparate groups that have thus far agreed it's better to be together than apart, but now a lot of those people are questioning if that's really true. If that authority really is worth respecting, if those laws are really worth obeying. I wouldn't say we're close to coming apart as a country, but I do think that right now, we're getting uncomfortably close to having more divisions than unity. As Veks said, we view ourselves as citizens of the US first - but we have different perceptions of what that should mean.

Doesn't exactly help that you can't hide things anymore with the internet. Some sovereign citizen getting pulled over wasn't newsworthy and didn't become a rallying cry until he could record it, upload it, and use it as evidence that he and people like him are right and being persecuted. Just like the printing press, the internet has made it easy for just about anyone to disseminate what they want, and reach a wide audience. Things spread like wildfire.

[RedRose]

To me, several ideas
-rise in authoritarianism in some circles
-bad experiences (I've had a terrible experience with my govt claiming masks were useless and then, when they had many of them, imposing them because... what? somehow Palpy returned? BE TRUTHFUL say you wish you had enough but no)
I'm by nature not really a rebel to "making sense" authority. But...

[Oniya]

As for sovereign citizens, they've had a lot of limelight recently because the internet finds them funny. But they'll take any publicity, good or bad, and even the laugh track reactions still draw a few eyes that go "hey, that makes sense", and those people pool to the online corners where these folks hang out and unify.

It also doesn't help that the search algorithms will pick up that you're 'interested' in sovereign citizens (maybe through those laugh-track videos) and then starts recommending other videos (that aren't laugh-tracks) about sovereign citizens.

[Fox Lokison]

It also doesn't help that the search algorithms will pick up that you're 'interested' in sovereign citizens (maybe through those laugh-track videos) and then starts recommending other videos (that aren't laugh-tracks) about sovereign citizens.

It's scarily fast. A few people have done experiments on how quickly you can fall down those pipelines, and it can take less than an hour to get you into them, at least on TikTok and YouTube.

[Oniya]

I occasionally binge-watch physics videos, and usually end up with some kind of aliens/multiverse/other pseudoscience 'recommendations'.  Little Oni watches a lot of educational docs and has had to repeatedly tell YouTube that 'Prager U' is not a channel she's interested in.

[Fox Lokison]

I occasionally binge-watch physics videos, and usually end up with some kind of aliens/multiverse/other pseudoscience 'recommendations'.  Little Oni watches a lot of educational docs and has had to repeatedly tell YouTube that 'Prager U' is not a channel she's interested in.

No matter how many times you do, they just keep coming back, too.



This passed my news feed today and I think it's a good example of why authority is being rejected - teens accused of jaywalking in their residential neighborhood, 12 officers including an ATF agent show up. The officers claimed they talked to the kids - but they came from the opposite direction and were nowhere near them, grew very aggressive with the mother, called in multiple cars and officers, ignored two girls jaywalking in the middle of them...

These are the reasons why people are less likely to talk to or work with the cops. These are intimidation tactics. Authority is more likely to be obeyed when it's respected and trusted - no one trusts cops who do this. A 12 person standoff to get her to hand over three minors for jaywalking? In their own residential neighborhood?

It's ridiculous and does not inspire respect or compliance. It practically BEGS defiance and hostility, and breeds a lack of trust.

[Zaer Darkwail]

It's ridiculous and does not inspire respect or compliance. It practically BEGS defiance and hostility, and breeds a lack of trust.

Which then is an indication either the police force lack of proper training or simply that the police force lacks recruits and takes anybody to fill numbers. The military has a big problem already finding physically properly fit recruits, also compared to earlier years mental illnesses are on spike rise as well. But I agree police force with that sort of 'bully and intimidation' attitude sparks only rebellion and people who already hold distrust get that belief reinforced and double down to it.

[Fox Lokison]

The difficult part is that these acts inspire disobedience and distrust in one singular instance, and it takes many episodes of repair for trust to be rebuilt. So it's easy for it to be lost, hard for it to be gained, and the end result is more fracturing rather than repair.

[Keelan]

This passed my news feed today and I think it's a good example of why authority is being rejected - teens accused of jaywalking in their residential neighborhood, 12 officers including an ATF agent show up. The officers claimed they talked to the kids - but they came from the opposite direction and were nowhere near them, grew very aggressive with the mother, called in multiple cars and officers, ignored two girls jaywalking in the middle of them...

These are the reasons why people are less likely to talk to or work with the cops. These are intimidation tactics. Authority is more likely to be obeyed when it's respected and trusted - no one trusts cops who do this. A 12 person standoff to get her to hand over three minors for jaywalking? In their own residential neighborhood?

It's ridiculous and does not inspire respect or compliance. It practically BEGS defiance and hostility, and breeds a lack of trust.

A slight clarification; an ATF Agent initiated this with a local PD, and 10 local PDs show up.

For those outside the US: ATF is Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, & Explosives. They are Federal-level, and a LOT of people don't like them. They've had a couple of pretty significant incidents - Waco and Ruby Ridge, which were actually cited as justification by the Oklahoma City bomber - and were key for the "Fast and Furious" operation that sold firearms to Mexican cartels intentionally to trace them or some shit, which were then being used in criminal activity in the US.

The short is: the ATF has a tendency to be a shitshow, so I'm not surprised they were the ones initiating this.

[TheGlyphstone]

The difficult part is that these acts inspire disobedience and distrust in one singular instance, and it takes many episodes of repair for trust to be rebuilt. So it's easy for it to be lost, hard for it to be gained, and the end result is more fracturing rather than repair.

And its a downward spiral too. Cops are trained to regard hostility or fear with suspicion - if you're nervous or uncooperative around a cop, in their eyes that means you're more likely to be up to no good. Which makes it more likely that even an honest cop (not the place/time for an ACAB debate) will end up doing something that further erodes trust, and it gets even worse.

[CopperLily]

In addition to the other aspects, I think so of this comes from a loss of faith that the government represents them - at least in the U.S.

On the liberal side of things, seeing state legislatures push fairly radical anti-choice or anti-LGBT legislation despite the majority of voters in those areas not supporting it. A congress where a fairly landslide election lands things at "I guess a practical stalemate is alright?". One party having only one the popular vote for president once in 35 years.

On the conservative side of things, a major media channel that is devoted to telling them that isn't true. An economy that, genuinely, is failing rural America. I disagree with their *solutions* to those problems, but they very much are there.