When Not to Obey Orders (2019)

Loyalty, Leaders, and Use of Force at Home

• Several comments argue loyalty should be to country/constitution, not to any leader or party.
• Trump is a central example: some claim he would disobey courts only for what he thinks is “best for the country”; others insist his behavior is purely self‑interested and already includes non‑compliance with court orders and attacks on the judiciary.
• June 2020 protest deployments and threats to invoke the Insurrection Act are cited as a near‑miss for using regular troops against domestic protesters.

Citizenship, Militarization, and Exclusion

• Commenters link post‑9/11 practices (drone strikes, Guantánamo) to normalization of legal gray zones.
• A major fear: ending birthright citizenship or tightening documentation requirements (e.g., HR22) could let an administration strip opponents of citizenship, then deploy force against them as “non‑citizens.”

Oaths, Illegal Orders, and ‘Disciplined Disobedience’

• Discussion contrasts US oaths (to the Constitution; enlisted also mention obeying the President) with historical German oaths (pre‑ and Nazi‑era) and current German practice (loyalty to the republic, legality training, explicit duty to ignore unlawful orders).
• Modern doctrine emphasizes “commander’s intent” and adaptation: officers are expected to deviate from orders when ground reality changes, but also to refuse clearly illegal commands (e.g., firing on civilians), accepting personal risk.

Coups, Free Officers, and Political Valence

• Some suggest a “free officers” movement (like Portugal’s Carnation Revolution or certain Brazilian coups) could check authoritarianism, but others doubt the US officer corps is reliably left‑leaning or anti‑Trump.
• Debate over whether opposing Trump is inherently “left/right” or cross‑ideological; most agree actual support/opposition is heavily polarized.

Obedience Culture: Military, Tech, and Bureaucracy

• Multiple ex‑military voices say US forces actually allow more initiative than many corporations; tech companies (especially fast‑growing ones) are depicted as de facto monarchies where dissent is punished.
• In government, formal avenues for pushback (inspectors general, prosecutors, ethics offices) are being hollowed out via firings, pressure, and retaliation, making principled resistance personally costly.

Vagueness, Gray Areas, and Slippery Slopes

• One thread criticizes vague moral calls to disobey as politically exploitable and dangerous for lower ranks; another replies that reality is too complex for rigid rules.
• Several note that abuses rarely start as blatant crimes; they begin with “small” or ambiguous violations (e.g., trivial rule‑bending, questionable data use), which people justify to avoid conflict, and that’s how lines gradually shift.