I don't subscribe to the "privilege" paradigm because it just feels like an emotional appeal for attacking anyone that has some modicum of resources or power, a

I don't subscribe to the "privilege" paradigm because it just feels like an emotional appeal for attacking anyone that has some modicum of resources or power, and that feels exactly what your first sentence is doing. I agree with where you're coming from about congress and the executive. The difference is analogous to punching down vs punching up. If the system wants buy in (ie a mandate) from individuals, then it's the responsibility of the system (ie the politicians) to make a sensible set of rules. Take a look at drug criminalization - it's only the very myopic complaining about things like individuals not following nonsensical drug laws. A multinational corporation obviously sits somewhere in the middle, which requires applying equitable judgement (hence why I called out the "privilege" label as a toxic paradigm). It sure feels like this is the government crushing what is otherwise mostly desirable behavior, behavior directly in line with the current administration's purported overall goals. And at any rate, the situation certainly could have been treated with a much lighter touch.