Hacker News Reader

Comment by sevenless | Hacker News Reader

We're ruled by politicians, bankers and corporations who lie, cheat, bribe, tax-dodge, and break the law with impunity. Why shouldn't the rest of us?

View on HN

That's a great point. It was educational to read an article from one of those high-brow economics or policy journals after the housing crisis warning about regular citizens noticing that banks and other institutions are happily using bankruptcy as a strategic option. The fear was that people with underwater properties will stop feeling guilty about bankruptcies and will walk away from their mortgages. Basically making the same calculated business decision that bankers make. Paraphrased the message was "careful, or the plebeians will start doing what we are doing"

Guilt is the fuel for the machine. Without it, we might be so much happier as an economy, and no one wants that. https://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/202207935/Alan-Watts-Money...

That's an entirely separate issue. Exercising your contractual right to default on a mortgage is not corruption or cheating. It's all out in the open and recorded in public records.

> Exercising your contractual right to default on a mortgage is not corruption or cheating

But most American believe it wrong and there is a mixup between what is wrong and what is legal. Keeping it that way is a very profitable thing for financial institutions.

GP post brought banks as an example of corruption. And many would agree. However it can still be legal. At that level, those player are basically writing their own laws and regulations.

No, they do not all do that, and not even most of them do it, or yes the sky would fall. We wouldn't, in fact, have the civilization we have. The choice is to have strong anti-fraud funding to find, catch, and prosecute most of these sorts of things; or to go back to feudalism/law of the jungle/might makes right.

Because two wrongs don't make a right. If you believe cheating is wrong, start by not doing it. There's no path to eliminating this behavior that does not start with people saying it's wrong and backing it up with an alternative example.

You not cheating will not lead to the powerful being less corrupt. It will actually reward them for being corrupt. In a prisoners' dilemma, they are constantly defecting without cost, and you are refusing to defect on principle. That makes you a sucker.

The way to eliminate corruption is to overthrow those who are corrupt.

If you believe in western civilizations' principles, there's two ways to handle corruption. The day to day type of corruption is usually treated as a crime, it requires laws, and funding investigations and prosecutors and courts, etc. Some corruptions of civil officers are so bad they qualify for impeachment, one important consequence of which is being barred from holding any elected or appointed office again. So there is a mechanism, if you think civility is busted then a.) help work to fix it, b.) be prepared for violence. Because the only antidote for violence we've come up with so far is civility.

Violence isn't inherently wrong. Nonviolence is less important than ending injustice and continuing to innovate, such as building megaprojects, forming new states or restructuring existing political systems. Those who say otherwise are conservatives or benefit from continued injustice.

This seems to assume a binary choice between non-violence and violence. As noted in the parent there is a range of effective responses to cheating in particular and corruption in general.

Also, violence does not necessarily lead to less injustice. The French Revolution (and countless others) provide rich counterexamples.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d8/Tianasquare.j...

Because then we end up with a broken third world society.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com