Blessings Steemians!

It's time for another @EcoTrain Question of the Week, brought to us by @Eco-Alex. I have to say that I am REALLY enjoying the prompts coming out of this particular project, both for their depth and for the wide variety of topics covered.

Here are my previous EcoTrain QOTW responses:

What rituals do you have, and why are they important to you?
Who are the best people to lead or guide our world... Politicians, Parents, Academics, Philosophers, High Tech.. Or someone else?
What was one of the happiest times in your life and what made it special?
Bearing in mind the health and state of our western culture and society today, do you think we have too much freedom?

This week is one that opens a LOT of cans of worms, and anyone who knows me already knows which direction I'm going to go when answering:

Who are more culpable for inequality and injustice, the people who make rules and laws or the people who follow and enforce them? Is the notion "I'm just doing my job" ethical?

Image Source

The short answer

To give a TL;DR, I think that the answer to this question is that both are extremely culpable. If I had to choose one group who is more culpable, I would absolutely say that the order followers come out ahead there. If a couple hundred "politicians" decide to commit mass murder (generally using the euphemism of "declaring war"), and there was nobody willing to go do things that are unquestionably wrong simply because of orders...

The order givers are the ones creating the opportunity for evil to occur, but if it wasn't for the fact that the order followers acted on those orders, nobody would be harmed. The order givers aren't the ones dropping bombs, they're not the ones kicking in doors, they're not the ones building prisons, they're not the ones hand-cuffing people...

Image Source

The Nuremberg Defense

The defense of "I was just following orders" has been used MANY times by those attempting to avoid responsibility for their actions. Most notably, many Nazis attempted to use this argument as a defense during the Nuremberg Trials.

The Nuremberg Principles were created by the International Law Commission, launched by the UN General Assembly leading up to those trials. Principle IV clearly states:

The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.

For that matter, Principle III addresses the order-givers:

The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.

Adolf Eichmann, a Nazi SS lieutenant colonel, was personally responsible for helping organize the round-up, deportation, and execution of Jews, including giving operational instructions to Auschwitz. Eichmann was tried, found guilty, and executed, but had this to say in his final plea:

I have heard the Court’s severe verdict of guilty. I see myself disappointed in my hopes for justice. I cannot recognize the verdict of guilty. I understand the demand for atonement for the crimes which were perpetrated against the Jews. The witnesses’ statements here in the Court made my limbs go numb once again, just as they went numb when once, acting on orders, I had to look at the atrocities. It was my misfortune to become entangled in these atrocities. But these misdeeds did not happen according to my wishes. It was not my wish to slay people. The guilt for the mass murder is solely that of the political leaders.

Image Source

Cultural conditioning & direct indoctrination

There is a foundational level of conditioning behind the behaviors of all of those involved in these acts of immorality, be they order-givers or order-followers. I often find myself coming back to the fact that most politicians come from families of politicians, bankers, and lawyers. Their families have servants, they go to schools with other kids from the same kinds of families, the news they get is targeted at these audiences, etc. This is the same for military families, for kids whose father/brothers are gang-bangers, white supremacists, any religion, etc. This is not to say that these folks lose any culpability, but simply to show the cause & effect of the environment in which you are born.

The more disgusting factor (because it is intentional) is the indoctrination, the downright brain-washing of the masses by corporate media and violently-enforced mandatory schooling. Even children born to peaceful, moral families are bombarded with nationalist, pro-government, pro-war, anti-freedom media daily, as well as ~25,000 hours of "schooling".

I know my high school had military recruiters in the cafeteria every day at lunch, most every history class I ever took was simply the history of government & military, and in political science & ethics classes the idea that violent control is moral was the foundational assumption.

Many older folks here in America (my father for example), remember a time when the police (in general) were on the job to prevent & solve crimes, to be of service, and to generally help people. This is not to say that there weren't violent, authoritarian, controlling officers at that time, especially in certain places. Two things have changed in the last few decades: first, the primary role of most police has been generating income through "tickets". Second, the creation of the Department of Homeland Security and the militarization of America's police has changed the general sense of that job from one of "peace officer" to one of effectively prison guards in an open-air prison with a population of ~300 million.

This music video (made up of real-life footage), by my friend Rob Hustle addresses this issue in a powerful way:

Conclusion

The simple fact is that each and every one of us is absolutely responsible for every action we take. Whether we're looking at it from a metaphysical, spiritual perspective (karma & such) or from simply the physical perspective, we each have agency. I am the one choosing to type this article, I am the one who chooses to press the "post" button.

The only time I would say there is any argument for someone not being fully responsible for their actions is when they are being violently coerced. If someone is holding a gun to your head and saying "You must do ________ or I will kill you", then obviously things are a little different. At the same time, if someone is holding a gun to your head and telling you to kill someone else... you've made the unilateral decision that other person's life is worth less than yours, which you have no right to do.

Through the course of writing this article, I had 3 songs come to mind that address this from different angles: