Prager U, perhaps unintentionally, sparked a debate online by posting a Tweet about compliance with the Federal Government. The tweet says “You cannot comply your way out of government tyranny”. Left-leaning Twitter users immediately accused the conservative group of being hypocritical due to something else they posted just a few hours before. The other tweet spoke about the importance of compliance when it comes to law enforcement to prevent a negative outcome. Both tweets may feature the word “comply” but they refer to completely different situations.
Conservatives have long said cited the Second Amendment as being a barrier between the common man and a tyrannical government. Australia is currently dealing with what many people view as an overreaching, if not tyrannical, government. Lockdowns and mask mandates are sometimes being enforced in a brutal fashion. This is not necessarily the fault of the police, it is the fault of Australia’s state (sometimes local) government. Another example is Cuba. They are protesting in the streets for the simple idea of freedom from their oppressive Communist government.
The common denominator shared between Cuba and Australia is a lack of a Second Amendment. There is no right to bear arms in either country. As a matter of fact, one of Castro’s first “accomplishments” was to register all guns and ammunition in the country. Castro then went on to have officials knock on every door in the registry and confiscate their weapons. The only people left with arms at this point are the army and possibly local law enforcement. This is why the Cuban people are oppressed with not much ability to fight back.
So it is not a new or “woke” take for conservatives to resist tyrannical government. It has long been the basis of pro-Second Amendment and anti-Communism arguments. Left-leaning people intend to hijack this long-standing belief of the right and convert it into their overall rejection of authority. These people want to label the deaths of people like George Floyd and Rayshard Brooks as examples of a tyrannical Government where compliance is not an option. This is obviously not true.
There aren’t many people who would make arguments in favor of breaking the law and disregarding social norms. Generally, laws are laws for good reasons. People of a society come together and agree upon how civil society must operate. A prime example of this is when laws are put on the books to prevent public intoxication or public defecation. These things should not even have to be laws. Laws like this exist because some people don’t understand how or simply refuse to behave properly. If a teacher lights up a crack pipe in the middle of their fifth-grade math class, who is going to shed a tear for that person when they resist arrest and get beat up? Nobody is going to say that their in-class crack smoke is warranted and a law against it is unjust.
Those who cannot behave properly may face the penalty of law enforcement. Sometimes this is not a “go-to-jail” type of thing and sometimes it is. But if a person is a proven criminal who endangers the balance of society, then that person’s actions are not comparable to simply refusing to participate with fast-and-loose mandates. Mandates that may endanger one’s own safety and the balance of society.
The blowback from the Prager U tweet underlines the importance of singular culture in America. This is not an indictment on non-American cultures. It is, however, a statement of fact when it comes to the cohesion of a place. When different groups of people all have different cultures and they occupy the same immediate space, conflict will happen. It is inevitable. The Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution so all persons born in the country would be held to the same standard. America’s core values, both written and unwritten, shape the culture of the country. Anti-American culture being pushed forward simply erodes away at this great society. And that can’t happen.