We make choices everyday. Sometimes those are bad choices and sometimes those are good choices. The problem is when good choices are bad choices and bad choices are good choices. What I mean by that is this hypothetical example for learning purposes only of hate, people utilized rumors and clan based social structures (..including those impacting justice) in order to avoid responsibility (Its not about getting in trouble is is about doing the right thing.). In the process of violating numerous laws and human/civil rights a much larger network of corruption was discovered and there was an attempt to intimidate multiple poeple who came forward to express concerns. (i.e. an official complaint results in a quick retaliation by those who were supposed to be protecting people.)
In this sort of silly and ludicrous example let us pretend that all of the complaints by the whistleblower (s) who was/were trying to protect their community came true. It was a reasonable complaint based on facts, some unsubstantiated rumors, observation, and eye witness accounts. Others unconnected to the situation have argued that local justice is based on clan heirarchy and there are all types of conflicts of interests when deciding affairs and justice. A number of people came forward and pushed a reluctant investigation that ended up justifying their concerns.
The primary reason why hate, extremism, and corruption existed in the same sphere was because the goal has been to protect the clan over fulfiling one's roles and obligations (i.e. good old boy networks which we believe are more or less fantasy because they could not happen in modern logic or times.) This example highlights the difference between good officials and people not qualified for their roles.
Much of this is done through the hate rumor network of a social group connected to each other. Let me give you an example of how this works. Your minding your own business, enjoying your evening and you notice someone staring you down and scowling. A few minutes later they are making negative comments that you can overhear. You never met the person but you find out they are connected to the same hate group that caused all the problems. The use of rumors and bullying is so common that it has been normalized and legalized. People you never met are creating issues and being aggressive based on the false rumors spread by hate network members. These rumors were started to ensure certain clan members were rewarded financially through exploiting hate (We have seen this with Native Americans, we have seen this with African Americans, but here it doesn't exists. Its just for illustrative exploration. Could never happen.).
What might we learn? First, keep in mind that the end result is different then what is proposed here because one has to flip the pages of this book called life. As a rational optimist most things get better based on necessity; even when morality and commitment to a bigger purpose is lagging.
1.) Clannism is a good old boy network.
2.) Racial and religious bigotries exist within the clan and that impacts justice. Rumors and bullying are the methods by which they cleans their community and promote their clan networks.
3.) Communities are aware of the bad behaviors but there are no checks and balances and those who reported crimes are quickly threatened and silenced (...except those who believe their oaths are more important then their safety. Try and find people like that in modern society and politics. They are rare. Leadership and Moral Integrity)
4.) The initial perpetrators that enriched off of hate rumors, aggression, manipulation (especially of the vulnerable) for money, and other bad behaviors were rewarded for their crimes. They were coached by corrupted officials and knew they were and are immune (This is based on racial, religious and clan affiliation. Research on lying and gain.).
5.) There are no corrections where there are no checks and balances. The higher moral purpose of the law isn't encouraged as much as it should. If it was people would have corrected right away.
6.) Good officials must suffer when clan officials warp institutions. When poor behaviors make their way into good systems it can have a corrosive effect.
7.) The higher moral order of the law and the swearing of oaths is less important when compared to extremism, clannism, corruption and hate. (Most of us swore oaths but those that keep them even when putting themselves in danger are a little different. Oaths and Office).
9.) At present in this example the purpose of the law is subjugated by its technicalities (An audit of all clan affiliated official's behaviors where conflicts of interest are present could come to interesting results. One might use local/not local, religion, race, friend networks, etc. to just see if there are statistical differences. ).
10.) Dehumanization is a social affair but once you understand it, its power begins to wain. Positive, peaceful, polite, truthful, engaging, and thoughtfulness is in a direct moral battle with hate, aggression, dishonesty, criminality, and corruption. So far the later has been more supported then the former.
We all then make a choice? Would you choose a world of striving for a better world or a world of a sliding democracy? What does it mean to be an American? What does it mean to be unAmerican? Are we more focused on nationalism or patriotism? Is the Constitution or clan laws more important? You can sort of ask a lot of questions and where their is unclear answers, there is room for improvement and commitment to a higher ideal.
You sort of get the split in two logics of which one seeks the highest state of development and the other seeks to crumble what generations of people have created. It is one moral line of argument. There are other moral lines. The only thing I can say is that intent and integrity sort of mitigate whether good or bad will be the result. It is encourage for the youth to learn about our laws and encourage officials to accept the diversity of our nation and minimize the negative influence of hate networks.
*This is a hypothetical learning example on dehumanization and its impact. It is a philosophical and theoretical discussion so take with a grain of salt. If is ok if you come to a different conclusion. The key point is to help learn about a deeper moral conscious and enlightened behaviors that lead to stronger communities.
No comments:
Post a Comment