Unwritten Rules

During the 1998 Lewinski hysteria, the editors of Salon were attacked for violating “unspoken rules” of media conduct.

My response to that is that if something is not honest enough to be spoken is not honest enough to be followed, and that creating these kinds of unspoken rules creates a de facto totalitarianism in a country that is intended to be free.

I see every reason to follow actual law. Actual law has been voted upon by people's representatives, and it is therefore legitimate. The same is not the case with unspoken rules. What we see there is unelected, unofficial, unchecked, unbalanced and unaccountable organs of usurpation of power seeking to force themselves upon the population. And that means, de facto totalitarianism.

Really, where do I cast my vote for or against these rules and these entities? Where do I cast my vote for or against these usurpers? Nowhere in the Constitution does it state that I must follow the dictates of such entities. And supporting these entities results in nothing less than betrayal of the Constitutional order.

You want to force these rules? Fine, make it official. Make it the law that a woman cannot sleep with more than one man, or that a man has to be a corporate drone. Only do not go on claiming that you speak for any kind of liberty. Say that you are a Nazi, and that your demands are a function of your being a Nazi.

Unwritten rules are a way to sneak in tyranny in a nation that is intended to be free. As such, they are a violation of the constitutional order. Confronting such things is an act not of sociopathy but of righteousness. And the more people do that, the better the society becomes.