In the United States, we speak of liberty and freedom. We have this statue given to us. We also celebrate a day of independence. Yet, I am free for those other 364 days of the year. When I think about my daily life, I can’t truly believe that I am free when I am essentially forced to follow rules I never agreed to.

Hear me out. Some of the rules are beneficial to my well-being and much needed, but many are rules that allow those in power to flex their power. I’m forced to follow the rules under the pretense of a “social contract,” stating that if I am to belong in this community, I must follow the rules of the community. That’s very easy when you can opt out of the community, but what if I don’t have a choice? What if these rules were only created to limit my autonomy and compel compliance?

What is a Social Contract?

Let’s explore this social contract more deeply. The social contract implies that people implicitly agree to give up freedom in exchange for protection. This idea legitimized the government we have today. However, there’s one issue. Just because I was born in the United States does not mean I have to abide by its rules. I never gave my consent; it was just expected of me. To call it an agreement would be misleading. Leaving the country for a community with more aligned rules would be difficult, so where was my choice?

Rules, for the most part, are not negotiated but imposed. I’ve never been a part of anything where I had the chance to negotiate the rules I had to follow. I was never at the negotiation table with my parents, teachers, or employer. Even worse, these authority figures can continue to create rules on the fly, and I’d have no power to refuse them without consequences. This creates an unequal power dynamic, even in communities that value “equality,” such as the United States. Power dynamics that favors a group of people but marginalize another.

Unequal Power Dynamics at Work

This power dynamic is inescapable in our society. As I’ve noted, I’ve been under authority since childhood. It’s no different as an adult with workplace situations. The first thing that comes to mind is that salaried employees can be fired at will. This means a company can fire an employee at any time with no consequence, which means the employee has to adhere to strict rules or risk losing their job. I can’t simply quit because if I do, I’d be perceived as undesirable by other companies, especially if I have only been employed for a few months. It only gets worse if I can’t find a place where they feel free and are labeled as a “job hopper” when trying to find a community that aligns with who I am. Yet, a corporation that lays off thousands of people feels no real detriment in perception.

The idea of salary work is a power struggle in itself. To work hourly means you don’t have many benefits and must work to get paid. It also means that overtime is paid if one works longer than required. When one becomes salaried, it is seen as a step up because of the benefits, but it also means that working extra hours is not compensated. This includes working extra hours, answering emails, and attending “voluntary” events outside of working hours. Sure, they say attendance is “encouraged,” but that only means we will negatively perceive you if you don’t attend. The “choice” of attending is an illusion because many employees will attend these encouraged events or be available at all times of the day only due to fear of consequence, whether professionally or socially.

What Am I Getting Into?

Job descriptions and roles can be vague, allowing a company to add responsibilities never discussed or agreed upon. This can happen at any time without notice. It happens all the time in marketing. A person can be hired to do social media. Still, when they start, they realize that they are not only doing their job but also the job of a content creator, copywriter, data analyst, influencer manager, and paid media manager. There have been plenty of times in my career when I was doing the job of 5 people with few opportunities to change the situation. It’s the sneaky “any other duties required” at the end of the job description that can easily be manipulated. Most employees have no choice but to comply even if they don’t agree.

Do I Really Have a Choice?

True freedom is the ability to make a choice without coercion. Rules don’t equate to freedom because breaking them results in consequences. Sure, I can choose not to follow the rules, but doing so would result in suffering, such as incarceration, job loss, or ostracization from the group. In both cases, I suffer, so it only makes sense to suffer under the case that offers security. So, if there is a case where I don’t agree with a rule, my only choice is pain or security.

Don’t believe me? Take a look at the Civil Rights Movement for an example. Contrast the lives of those who marched to those who stayed in the house. Not only does breaking the rules bring consequences, but following the rules is promoted. There are cases where the leaders of an organization aren’t the ones who do the best at their job but are the ones who comply best with the rules of the organization.

The Need for Change

Is it possible to change systems that force compliance? Is it possible to respect the autonomy of each individual by defining cooperation and not coercion? To do this, we need more transparency. People do need to know what they agree to. I’ve found it acceptable to not read the contracts and just hit the accept button, but in most cases, no contract can be found. Not only should I have the freedom of choice, but I should also have the freedom to renegotiate when I believe the terms have become unfair.

In the case where I feel injustice, I need true alternatives. Quitting a toxic job isn’t an alternative because jobs are dependent on one’s survival. If I want to eat, I need a job. In this society, it’s expected of us to deal with toxicity because trying to find a place that aligns with who I am is perceived as a lack of fortitude. The job market is not the greatest right now, so it’s even more of a reason for people to risk their mental health to pay the bills. It’s also very weird that unemployment is only offered when someone is fired, but no money is guaranteed if one decides to quit.

Inclusion Creates Fair Rules

Every decision should involve all the stakeholders who are affected by it. When it comes to authority, someone makes this decision for others. Typically, this decision benefits the one in authority, while those below are burdened by someone else’s perspective. Majority rule isn’t true democracy. Even when the majority gets what they want, a group of people always see the decision as a detriment. There will always be a marginalized group.

Those who make decisions need to be accountable for their decisions. This is normally not the case. A rule goes into place, and there’s typically nothing wrong with the rule but with the people who have to follow the rule. Upper management usually doesn’t receive reviews from their subordinates like dictators don’t have to answer to anyone. Institutions can easily get away with unjust rules without transparency or checks and balances between authorities.

Conclusion

Rules are needed to provide order in a world seemingly filled with chaos. Yet, this need for order and stability becomes a breeding ground for manipulation where coercion is disguised as cooperation. I’d like to believe I’m free, but this freedom comes with conditions and restraints in the form of rules I’ve never agreed to. I’ve realized that I don’t need to follow these rules, and I’m on a mission to reclaim my autonomy. This also means writing essays like this that advocate for fair power distribution, explicit consent, and genuine choice.

Questions and Responses