The Situational Legitimacy Of Treason

No president, king, queen, or other kind of political leader deserves allegiance that depends on anything other than the leader's intellectual and moral competence.  These twin characteristics are minimum requirements for sound leadership rather than secondary add-ons.  As such, they are requirements for any political follower to be justified in backing a given candidate or figure.  The "crime" of treason, which refers to a betrayal of one's country or ruler/national leader, is therefore far from immoral when a leader loses their way or does not deserve one's loyalty to begin with.

It is reason and justice that deserve allegiance, not people who deviate from them.  A ruler who forsakes reason has no basis for philosophically defending himself or herself; a ruler who forsakes justice cannot soundly claim that it is unjust for others to oppose them.  Only the things for which a just ruler stands deserve the unconditional loyalty of the citizens they preside over.  Power and concealment cannot absolve someone of whatever tyranny or neglect of duty they may be guilty of.

If a murderous, predatory, sexist, or racist official holds power, it is not only nonsinful to oppose him or her, but obligatory, even if that opposition is only in thought and word.  Treason is a charge empty of all moral significance unless the victim of treason is a just person or unless the treason plot involves immoral methods (like murdering random civilians or torturing someone).  Those who defy reason and morality deserve hostility and contempt.

Moreover, those who condemn treason often do so selectively at best, arbitrarily attacking whoever mocks or criticizes political figures they subjectively like and ignoring criticism of other political leaders.  Of course, hypocrisy only proves that some people are inconsistent, but this particular kind of hypocrisy establishes that treason is not usually seen as a truly universal evil.  This much is true, but, even in a situation where it is wrong, treason is never immoral because a political leader's followers are emotionally upset by it.

Treason is not an inherent violation of one's moral obligations.  By necessity, backstabbing or otherwise working to overthrow an incompetent or unjust leader is morally commendable, given that no one, not even the tyrant, is mistreated in the process.  Only just actions are valid even when deposing a tyrant.  However, treason itself has no inherent injustice: sometimes it is the only just course of action a person can take.