We are taught from the earliest age that obedience is a virtue. As small children the cognitive and communication abilities one has are somewhat limited so parents will often resort to telling children what to do with little to no explanation.
Many times "because I said so, and I'm the adult here" are the closest things a child will get to an actual explanation when asking "why." Whether explicit or implied, obedience or followimg orders is seen as a good thing, a virtuous thing.
This is then carried over into institutions like schools, jobs, etc. While going along with those "in charge" might make things run slightly smoother, this in and of itself is by no means a virtue. Being virtuous and moral is a virtue.
It could only be such if those giving the orders were always virtuous and right. This is not true now and never has been.
Any moral sentient being should be discerning. Putting all things to the test. The golden rule is a great foundational and simple start.
The belief that one can abdicate their personal responsibilities to somebody with a uniform or title is pure fantasy and the mark of an immoral, irresponsible person.
"Just following orders" wasn't acceptable at the Nuremberg trials nor is it an acceptable excuse now, nor will it ever be.
We can and should as parents teach our children from the earliest age to question and reason all things, and see if they can be reconciled with fact, virtue, and morality.
As inconvenient as this may seem, to do otherwise does our future generations a great disservice by producing an offspring of dupes and order followers who could very well be the next SS.
Selah
For more on this subject. Watch Stanley Milgram experiment in the video below.
