9 ms·

Civil disobedience typically involved still getting punished as a matter of protest to change public opinion. If Elon Musk is doing this as civil disobedience,

• mgolawala 6y ago
  Civil disobedience is typically, but not always, punished. We will have to see how this plays out. There is also the question of which branch of government gets to have a say in the enforcement of a law. Consider California's approach to marijuana use vs the Federal government's. Or consider how there are numerous sanctuary cities that are in defiance of Federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement. These things are complicated.
  • deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  • bcrosby95 6y ago
    It's not complicated because there is no conflicting guidance from the federal vs state governments. Once the federal government orders everyone to open up it will be unknown what the right answer is. States that want to continue with the lockdown will likely sue the federal government, or companies that want to open up would sue the state. The courts will weigh in and it will probably go "something something interstate commerce" and the federal government will win, forcing the states to open up. After that it really depends upon how states respond and you could be stuck in a giant game of chicken. This is where it might get complicated and risky - mostly for people trying to abide by the law. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. But in this case, the government wont' really arrest you for not opening your car factory. But the state might arrest you for doing it. In the case of Marijuana, it's really quite simple: everyone in California using marijuana can be arrested by the federal government. They just choose not to, at least usually. ICE is a bit more complicated. They are trying to compel cooporation from local law enforcement, who is not responsible for enforcing immigration law. They aren't asking them to enforce it directly themselves though.
• kelnos 6y ago
  To be fair, Musk's tweet especially says if anyone is to be arrested for this, it should be him. > to make a political statement. I see it as more a business decision, and only secondarily a political statement.
  • justapassenger 6y ago
    “Dear Officer, you cannot arrest me. Did you even check Twitter?”
  • LanceH 6y ago
    He did say he no longer needed a house.
  • atoav 6y ago
    Or terrorism, depending on the perspective.
    • lightgreen 6y ago
      It’s not terrorism by definition of terrorism regardless of perspective. Same as a person is not a nazi just because someone disagrees with them. Same as speech is not violence. Etc etc etc.
      • JabavuAdams 6y ago
        You started off strong, but overreached. If I say to my spouse or child "You fucking stupid cunt, I've told you a thousand times to put the dishes away! You good for nothing piece of shit, you can't even get that right!" That's violence. EDIT> Speech is an act. That act can be violence.
        • AlgorithmicTime 6y ago
          No, no that's not violence. Violence would be if you hit your child or spouse.
        • deleted 6y ago
• LyndsySimon 6y ago
  > the forced compliance of his workers Can you provide a source for this? I have no idea what (if any) compensation Tesla workers receive while not working during the pandemic, nor do I know if those workers will be penalized for not working - particularly for not working while the factory is open in violation of state restrictions.
  • late2part 6y ago
    Firing someone if they don't do something is not forcing them. It shouldn't raise to duress in my opinion.
    • a9entroy 6y ago
      Firing someone because they didnt obey your order to break the law is not duress?
      • late2part 6y ago
        You’re begging the question that there is a law to break.
      • ryanlol 6y ago
        It’s not at all obvious that going to work in a factory that’s operating against a county order is breaking the law.
        • 0xFF0123 6y ago
          It's not at all obvious that it's not, either. At the very least, it's against the spirit of the order.
        • dragonwriter 6y ago
          The county order prohibits both businesses operating and individuals engaging in out-of-home activity except as explicitly permitted by the order, and violating a county public health order is a crime (misdemeanor) punishable by up jail. Automobile manufacturing is not one of the listed exceptions, so it is illegal both to operate (for the owner) and to go to work at (for the employees) such a business.
• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
• Melting_Harps 6y ago
  > Instead, it seems that Musk is doing this just because he thinks he can get away with it, or because he is simply angry with the elected officials of his county. In such a situation, Tesla and Elon Musk should rightfully be punished for their actions. Here is the thing about the Tesla culture, which is like a more subdued one then the one at SpaceX: some people are 'all in' about the cause and are putting their Lives at risk working 10+ hours everyday. One of the reasons I decided to go work for Kimbal instead of Tesla was the mandatory Swing shift for Supply Chain (at the time) ahead of the Model 3 ramp. People were putting in 60+ hours in 4 day schedules. Burn out is not possible, its near exepected. They also offer really amazing Health Packages, like the best any other Multi-national corp ever offered me because they understood it as critical component to success in such an ambitious goal. At Kimbal's place I could do 60+ hours over 6 days, which if you've done either is taxing, but the former wipes you out and messes up your circadian rhythm, which as you get older is harder to re-adjust on the fly. If you honestly think there aren't people waiting to just go back to work at the HQ factory to do what they joined up for int first place then you haven't met many Tesla people, let alone any SpaceX guys. Is this fair? I think if Elon/HR has stipulated there are no consequences for those who can't or won't return, then, yes. The Factory has only just been able to recently turn things around after an amazing Manufacturing feat from the Fremont Team, only to have this stifled by the Local government, who oddly benefit a great deal from the revenue generated from Fremont. If any of you have been to Fremont, you'll know there isn't much Economic activity there, even for the East Bay. Lots of local businesses, little restaurants and some fast food places rely heavily on Tesla employees. This is a lose-lose situation which may be due to political reasons, but if a fine is all the stands in the way of making the deliveries back-log get smaller, then its worth it. (Elon is saying he is willing to get arrested for it?) People have paid in full for a Model Y, which has been refined due to Model 3's hard-earned lessons, the losses and missed opportunity costs are immense. If they have to move production of Y to Shanghai and re-import them to the US then not only is that a supply chain nightmare, but it completely undoes the cost-savings that made Shanghai imperative in the first place. I don't blame him, this has also boosted the stock price above 800 again, too. So the Market agrees with his decision.
  • podgaj 6y ago
    >some people are 'all in' about the cause and are putting their Lives at risk Jesus, the frickin Nazi Youth did the same thing! Why don't people ever see the leader worship and authoritarianism (fascism) in corporations?
• Mountain_Skies 6y ago
  >simply angry with the elected officials of his county Erica Pan received zero votes for her because she has never appeared on the ballot. She's an appointed not an elected official. This is her choice and the public has no possibility of direct electoral response to her decision to forbid Tesla opening.
• growlist 6y ago
  When it comes to a choice between Musk's judgement versus elected officials, I'd suggest the former has a superior track record to the latter. Not to mention, any punishment will blow straight back at them when Musk then moves the Tesla factory. It's quite amusing really.
  • DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
    Even if Musk is right and the county officials are wrong, he still has to follow the law. If he thinks he can get away with breaking the law because he can threaten to move his business, I would support jail time for him. The attitude that having money puts one above the law is not something that should be tolerated.
    • jyrkesh 6y ago
      Do you support throwing non-violent drug offenders in prison too? Or are you in only in favor of jailing rich people who might actually have enough leverage to prove in court that the law is unjust (or better yet, completely unconstitutional)?
      • DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
        I support jailing executives who willfully violate the law, especially if they think that they can get away with it by threatening to move their business elsewhere. We can't live in a society in which money buys you the right to violate the law. You can believe that the county's rules are unwise, but they're in place in order to protect public health. Right or wrong, Musk is violating those rules and thinks he'll get away with it because he runs an important company. There has to be a clear message that he won't get away with it. Fining him won't make a difference. Prison time might.
    • growlist 6y ago
      A public official tweeting 'F*ck Elon Musk' is hardly responsible behaviour either.
• nswest23 6y ago
  civil disobedience may typically involve punishment but it shouldn't be a requirement.