This article is kind of a trainwreck, but I want to say that generally I'm glad when this kind of rhetoric is coming up. There are a few caveats though which I

This article is kind of a trainwreck, but I want to say that generally I'm glad when this kind of rhetoric is coming up. There are a few caveats though which I want to address first: The word "duty" is a human invention, and as such has only meaning in human societies. Depending on the particular society, it may in fact be your duty to do one or the other thing. Ironically the word "duty" and these conclusions imply exactly that which torrentfreak argues against: Blind obedience. Now, as politely as possible, I want to point out that this is the kind of rhetoric useful for discourse with stupid people. It's a somewhat good sign actually, because invariably stupid people have to be the target of discourse, maybe even the main target. Surprisingly I'm glad whenever I read about these kinds of arguments, because it means that the discussion has finally landed 'in the trenches', where the actual battle will be lost or won. Similarly I was glad to hear people in the U.S starting to call healthcare a "right". The same caveats as before apply here. It's not a right unless society starts to define it as such inside its body of laws. Philosophically I'm opposed to the direction in this article/blogpost, even though it may be necessary for stupid people. Really we have way too few laws and the only reason we are experiencing problems is exactly because of things torrentfreak tries to advocate for: Personal responsibility. Police officers acting out of hand, politicians not being of integrity...all this can be amended by laws that are fair and which are executed to the letter with zero room for personal interpretation. Let's not go the religious route and start calling laws in general "open for interpretation". That'd just open a whole new can of horrors. We are not perfect, but laws are what holds us together. To say it as unequivocally as possible: The goal should be to have laws that can be followed as blindly as possible and which are executed as mercilessly as possible. Until then, let's not destroy the fabric of trust that our society is built upon and name the real problem. Imperfect laws, not laws in general.