Misguided Resistance

Petty theft undermines personal integrity and harms community trust

Stealing small items from a supermarket is sometimes seen as a way to challenge big corporations and fight against an unfair system. However, this mindset reflects a misalignment in psychology and philosophy. While the individual may present this as an act of rebellion and a small victory against large corporations, this justification hides an ethical problem.

Literature emphasises the importance of individual responsibility and authenticity. When individuals choose to steal, they assert a freedom that disregards their responsibility towards others and the society they inhabit. Instead of authentically confronting and addressing the more significant systemic issues, theft is a superficial response that undermines personal and societal integrity. This behaviour taps into the concept of cognitive dissonance. The individual convinces themselves that their actions are justified because they target a large, impersonal entity rather than an individual. This rationalisation reduces the psychological discomfort of acting against their moral beliefs. However, this dissonance resolution does not change the fact that the behaviour is fundamentally unethical. It creates a slippery slope where the boundary between right and wrong becomes increasingly blurred. Over time, these small acts of rebellion erode the individual’s moral compass and thus lead to more significant ethical lapses.

Moreover, shoplifting impacts not just the individual but the community. It perpetuates a cycle of mistrust and loss. Supermarkets, though large, still rely on the honesty of their customers to operate efficiently and keep prices fair. When theft becomes normalised, it will lead to higher prices and increased security measures, which in turn will indirectly affect those in the community who are already vulnerable. Therefore, what might seem like a personal victory against corporate greed becomes a collective loss for society.

Concluding, shoplifting under the pretext of challenging big corporations does not align with authentic, ethical resistance. Instead, it reveals a deeper capitulation to convenience and self-justification.