As a high school student in the late 1960’s, I was exposed to the ‘new’ drug culture. But it was nothing like it would soon be. And it has only gotten worse. Living in the Midwest, we heard of only the occasional overdose and very little of the crime that plays such as large role in the drug culture of today. So when we heard our parents tell us how ‘wrong’ it is to do drugs while we were clearly not experiencing any of the ‘bad’ side effects that were preached to us, how could we possible believe them?
When Nancy Reagan pushed her famous ‘Just Say No’ spiel, we basically laughed at her for being a relic of that generation that only sought to control our lives.
The use of illegal drugs has indeed screwed up countless lives and has affected our society in ways that will never be fully understood.
Kids today who experiment with drugs and feel only the good side effects are just as unlikely to listen when adults extol only the bad that can come from drug use. All the while these same adults are getting through their days on sleeping aids, diet pills, alcohol and caffeine.
The most serious ‘drugs’ of course are the psychoactive class of drugs. These drugs alters brain function, resulting in temporary changes in perception, mood, consciousness and behavior. There are of course many reasons why people subject themselves to an altered state of reality, the most often reason cited is ‘because it makes me feel good’. It is quite literally escaping from reality and responsibility. Okay, there are drug users who can still function but these are only temporary situations and they are fooling only themselves by thinking they will not ‘lose it’ someday and destroy the lives of everyone who loves them and themselves.
The biggest threat is becoming physically addicted to them. This is where the damage to society at large really becomes clear. Criminal activity associated with getting the money to support the habit, because maintaining a steady legal income has become out of question, breaks down a society’s foundation in terms of productivity and healthy social interaction. More and more you find yourself doing things you have never before considered just for your own high. Theft and murder goes with the territory, and exacts an extremely heavy toll on society through taxpayer support of law enforcement, prison facilities and personnel, social services to families torn apart, etc.
The government tries to play their part in combating this evil scourge, but they never seem to gain any ground. You hear of the ‘major’ drug bust on some interstate freeway and while everyone pats themselves on the back you just can’t help but know this is only barely scratching the surface of what is still out there undetected. That ‘major’ bust may have been a sacrificial lure to distract police attention away from a much larger load driving right past them as they sit on the side of the road gloating and shaking their head.
Their approach to their ‘Drug War’ is based on the empty and quite foolish presumption that if they keep filling our prisons long enough and often enough with drug users then society will suddenly see the error of their ways and give up using illegal drugs. The futility of this endeavor is so stunningly obvious. If you do what you have always done, you will get what you always got. Perhaps a trite observation for such a serious problem, but truly, their method is not working.
Further proof that the War on Drugs is doomed to fail is our continuing love affair with legal drugs. Americans have become addicted to the idea that all cures for our aches, illnesses, diseases, sleep troubles and unhappiness can be had in the form of a pill. From the seemingly innocent taking of too much ibuprofen or acetaminophen, or even aspirin, to the continued use of sleep and diet aids despite written warnings to take a break from them periodically, to the drinking of alcohol to the point that the abuse of it is a contributing factor in the death of thousands of unsuspecting drivers on our nations roads. Is this Big Pharma’s fault alone?
They have undeniably done their very best to take advantage of this human weakness to want to find a quick cure for their maladies. Pharmaceutical companies have saturated doctors offices with free drug samples and urge doctors to push them off onto their patients. Big Pharma has become a ‘legally recognized drug pusher’. They advertise freely the idea that they are our best friends in their quest to get every American addicted to their latest and greatest breakthrough in medical science. They then bilk the insurance companies dry through their exorbitant prices.
Over the past decade or so Americans have been willing participants in fulfilling Big Pharma’s desire to addict every man, woman and child by sedating children who have behaved as children have behaved throughout time. They cherish their role as saviors to parents desperate for a quick and easy answer as to why their child ‘acts out’ in class, or seems hyperactive at home. They see that in order to mold future generations of drug addicts, they need to start with children. Just as illegal drug pushers do.
The drug addict is exactly the personality-type that Big Pharma covets. And parents too often eagerly accept the medical professions diagnosis that little Johnnie and Samantha have ADHD, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. I submit that the real problem is the parents lack of patience and understanding in the root causes of their child’s behavior and their lack of effective parenting skills to correct that behavior. Unfortunately, there is no pill to overcome these deficiencies.
These children are most likely demanding more attention from their parents by using the only method they know. And I am not talking about the kind of attention that demands they open their mouths and swallow their pills or else.
Claims of ADHD are greatly exaggerated, having very little, if any, basis in reality. The unfortunate side effects of this miracle cure is brain shrinkage and hallucinations.
It is well documented that the amphetamine component of drugs like Ritalin cause stunted grown and reduced brain size.
A Cult of Pharmacology exists where all drugs are considered good and necessary, regardless of the mountain of evidence showing them to be either dangerous or medically useless.
This country’s health would be greatly improved by shunning the pharmaceutical industry and following the two simplest and most important things you can do for yourself. The two things that have been repeated many times. Exercise and eat right.
The Drug War is destined to fail because too many adults want it to. They don’t want to have to work at happiness. They want a little pill that will force them to feel better about themselves, if only for a little while.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Showing Our Young How to Behave
We have had a recent ‘problem’ here in Utah revolving around underage students sending nude photos of themselves or others to other high school students. Is this problem as serious as adults say it is? Should they be punished as sex offenders and be classified as sexual deviants? Shouldn’t our attitudes toward sex lighten up just a bit?
The legislature is working on lessening the penalties that can be brought against these teens for fear that students are not being turned in due to the severity of those penalties. Many think the guilty students should go through the court system in order to ‘get help’ with their behavior.
This is all so medieval. Why should they be punished? Why should they have to go through the court system? They could be possibly counseled for their actions but to give them a criminal record is preposterous. Our attitudes toward sex in this country is positively antiquated. The actions these adults are taking in pushing for obtuse penalties for doing what they themselves did as teenagers is nothing short of hypocrisy.
Utah is not alone, Pennsylvania students were charged last week with manufacturing, disseminating or possessing child pornography. Three high school boys found with the photos on their cell phones are charged with possession of child pornography. In Texas, a 13-year-old boy was arrested on child pornography charges in October after he received a nude photo of a student on his cell phone.
Gone are the days when a photo of a young girl conjured up images of an older male coercing the innocent young girl into something she doesn’t want to co. Authorities are learning more often that the photo is being taken by the girl herself.
Is it degrading to our value system to allow our children to share nude photos of themselves? In light of the lapses in ethical judgment our politicians and civic leaders commit everyday, the answer is no. Taken in conjunction with the number of crimes against humanity anyone can easily witness on the evening news and main-stream media every day of the year, the answer is no. If you want to hold our young to moral standards that we as adults can’t or will not subject ourselves to, then you can say yes but you would be blatantly and transparently hypocritical. And then how can you possibly expect our young to look up to us as the guiding principle of how they should live their lives?
They should be chastised for their moments of bad judgment instead of having to register as sex offenders.
The legislature is working on lessening the penalties that can be brought against these teens for fear that students are not being turned in due to the severity of those penalties. Many think the guilty students should go through the court system in order to ‘get help’ with their behavior.
This is all so medieval. Why should they be punished? Why should they have to go through the court system? They could be possibly counseled for their actions but to give them a criminal record is preposterous. Our attitudes toward sex in this country is positively antiquated. The actions these adults are taking in pushing for obtuse penalties for doing what they themselves did as teenagers is nothing short of hypocrisy.
Utah is not alone, Pennsylvania students were charged last week with manufacturing, disseminating or possessing child pornography. Three high school boys found with the photos on their cell phones are charged with possession of child pornography. In Texas, a 13-year-old boy was arrested on child pornography charges in October after he received a nude photo of a student on his cell phone.
Gone are the days when a photo of a young girl conjured up images of an older male coercing the innocent young girl into something she doesn’t want to co. Authorities are learning more often that the photo is being taken by the girl herself.
Is it degrading to our value system to allow our children to share nude photos of themselves? In light of the lapses in ethical judgment our politicians and civic leaders commit everyday, the answer is no. Taken in conjunction with the number of crimes against humanity anyone can easily witness on the evening news and main-stream media every day of the year, the answer is no. If you want to hold our young to moral standards that we as adults can’t or will not subject ourselves to, then you can say yes but you would be blatantly and transparently hypocritical. And then how can you possibly expect our young to look up to us as the guiding principle of how they should live their lives?
They should be chastised for their moments of bad judgment instead of having to register as sex offenders.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Is the Future of a Free Press in Doubt
Unless you have been sequestered from all sources of news during the past year, you know that America’s newspapers are in trouble. The New York Times was recently given a hand up by Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim Helu but everyone agrees its future is in doubt.
Tribune Co. is in bankruptcy, Sun-Times Media Group is going under, and Knight-Ridder has already sold its holdings.
It won’t be long before America’s daily newspapers will be liquidated. How will this affect how we get our news? How will we hold governments and corporations to account? TV and radio will of course survive but they are devolving into entertainment sound bites to allow for more advertising space. Bloggers are doing their part but they will not likely gain the credibility or expertise that newspaper and other media have enjoyed.
I suspect that those ‘newspapers’ that do survive will find new life on Web pages, RSS feeds, e-mails delivering customized news and advertising, and on mobile phones. But, they are already spending less on journalism and trying to reach a future, younger demographic by shifting the mix of their stories towards entertainment, lifestyle and subjects that may seem more relevant to people's daily lives than international affairs and politics. This is more of a testament to their desire to survive than to their commitment to reporting hard news which used to be why people would pick up a newspaper. A sign of the changing times, you might say.
This business of surviving our economic times is pressing many papers large and small to sack some of their most talented, experienced and higher-paid journalists. Will they find a forum in cyberspace? Probably. New tools that are convenient for the new century’s news consumers, such as iPods, cell phones, etc will most likely get their news from web-based services and this is where journalists will find a new outlet for their talents.
But local newspaper journalism is more likely to survive because people want community news such as events from the city council meeting. Just as likely though, major newspapers could tailor their news reporting to social-networking sites, for college students, mothers, and other groups.
The bottom line is that the closed world of professional editors and journalists has opened up. While bloggers can be subject to bias and slander, as a group, bloggers offer truth and transparency that cannot be imparted by newspapers obligated to deadlines or to those who pay them. People don’t want crap journalism and any blogger or professional journalist, for that matter, who partakes in passing it off as real will soon be left without a following.
News will always find a way reach those who want it. How we choose to get it will depend on our tolerance for having to wade through advertising, entertaining presentations and BS.
Tribune Co. is in bankruptcy, Sun-Times Media Group is going under, and Knight-Ridder has already sold its holdings.
It won’t be long before America’s daily newspapers will be liquidated. How will this affect how we get our news? How will we hold governments and corporations to account? TV and radio will of course survive but they are devolving into entertainment sound bites to allow for more advertising space. Bloggers are doing their part but they will not likely gain the credibility or expertise that newspaper and other media have enjoyed.
I suspect that those ‘newspapers’ that do survive will find new life on Web pages, RSS feeds, e-mails delivering customized news and advertising, and on mobile phones. But, they are already spending less on journalism and trying to reach a future, younger demographic by shifting the mix of their stories towards entertainment, lifestyle and subjects that may seem more relevant to people's daily lives than international affairs and politics. This is more of a testament to their desire to survive than to their commitment to reporting hard news which used to be why people would pick up a newspaper. A sign of the changing times, you might say.
This business of surviving our economic times is pressing many papers large and small to sack some of their most talented, experienced and higher-paid journalists. Will they find a forum in cyberspace? Probably. New tools that are convenient for the new century’s news consumers, such as iPods, cell phones, etc will most likely get their news from web-based services and this is where journalists will find a new outlet for their talents.
But local newspaper journalism is more likely to survive because people want community news such as events from the city council meeting. Just as likely though, major newspapers could tailor their news reporting to social-networking sites, for college students, mothers, and other groups.
The bottom line is that the closed world of professional editors and journalists has opened up. While bloggers can be subject to bias and slander, as a group, bloggers offer truth and transparency that cannot be imparted by newspapers obligated to deadlines or to those who pay them. People don’t want crap journalism and any blogger or professional journalist, for that matter, who partakes in passing it off as real will soon be left without a following.
News will always find a way reach those who want it. How we choose to get it will depend on our tolerance for having to wade through advertising, entertaining presentations and BS.
Close Guantanamo, Yes. Prosecute the Detainees, Absolutely
President Obama has ordered the U.S. government to suspend prosecutions of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay for 120 days “in the interest of justice”.
I am all for “justice”. I am for justice for the loss of life of over 3,000 Americans on September 11, 2001. I am all for justice for the countless lives lost in Iraq (members of our armed forces as well as Iraqi citizens). I am all for justice for the lives lost as the result of terrorists who maniacally take other peoples lives for their own glory.
This military prison, set up by the Bush administration in 2002, has become a major issue because critics argue it has become a symbol of mismanagement and overreach in the war on terror.
Don’t let this ‘symbol of mismanagement and overreach’ become the making of another symbol. That being that in the rush to cleanse ourselves of the atrocities of the Bush administration we allow terrorists to go free.
Jamil Dakwar, a representative for the American Civil Liberties Union at the base, said the ACLU believes all charges against the prisoners should be dropped.
Jamil Dakwar is a moron.
Among those facing trial at Guantanamo Bay is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the confessed organizer of the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington.
Why should this man go free after his responsibility in killing over 3,000 Americans?
This is the major problem I have with the ACLU. They would rather Americans ‘forgive’ him his murderous actions by turning the other cheek, to allow him and terrorists like him to strike that cheek as well.
Haven’t these bleeding hearts learned anything from the past? Love does not conquer all. Society cannot allow murders and sociopaths to walk free among the very people they feel compelled to kill.
I am a compassionate person. I believe in live and let live. But I also understand the fatalistic flaw of that philosophy. If this world consisted only of people who practiced this philosophy humans rights groups such as the ACLU and Human Rights Watch would not be necessary. Unfortunately, this is not reality. We don’t live in a perfect world where violence is not considered a viable answer.
The true reality is that we are forced to deal with murderous self-interests who are out to eradicate anyone who does not believe as they do. It is our duty, to ourselves, to our future, and to all of the murdered victims, to correctly identify those self-interests and remove them from our society.
The ACLU needs to balance its pursuit of the protection of human rights for the living with demanding justice for the victims of people like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
I am all for “justice”. I am for justice for the loss of life of over 3,000 Americans on September 11, 2001. I am all for justice for the countless lives lost in Iraq (members of our armed forces as well as Iraqi citizens). I am all for justice for the lives lost as the result of terrorists who maniacally take other peoples lives for their own glory.
This military prison, set up by the Bush administration in 2002, has become a major issue because critics argue it has become a symbol of mismanagement and overreach in the war on terror.
Don’t let this ‘symbol of mismanagement and overreach’ become the making of another symbol. That being that in the rush to cleanse ourselves of the atrocities of the Bush administration we allow terrorists to go free.
Jamil Dakwar, a representative for the American Civil Liberties Union at the base, said the ACLU believes all charges against the prisoners should be dropped.
Jamil Dakwar is a moron.
Among those facing trial at Guantanamo Bay is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the confessed organizer of the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington.
Why should this man go free after his responsibility in killing over 3,000 Americans?
This is the major problem I have with the ACLU. They would rather Americans ‘forgive’ him his murderous actions by turning the other cheek, to allow him and terrorists like him to strike that cheek as well.
Haven’t these bleeding hearts learned anything from the past? Love does not conquer all. Society cannot allow murders and sociopaths to walk free among the very people they feel compelled to kill.
I am a compassionate person. I believe in live and let live. But I also understand the fatalistic flaw of that philosophy. If this world consisted only of people who practiced this philosophy humans rights groups such as the ACLU and Human Rights Watch would not be necessary. Unfortunately, this is not reality. We don’t live in a perfect world where violence is not considered a viable answer.
The true reality is that we are forced to deal with murderous self-interests who are out to eradicate anyone who does not believe as they do. It is our duty, to ourselves, to our future, and to all of the murdered victims, to correctly identify those self-interests and remove them from our society.
The ACLU needs to balance its pursuit of the protection of human rights for the living with demanding justice for the victims of people like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
Sunday, January 18, 2009
So, What Did Israel ‘Win’ in This War?
I call it a war, in keeping with everyone else’s description, but really it was a tantrum, plain and simple. And who can blame Israel? Hamas are like gnats at a picnic that constantly pester you until you finally have enough and have to do something about it. And who can blame Hamas for their part? Israel acts as a feudal lord trying to keep his subjects under his thumb by sparingly allotting food, supplies and territory to them.
Will they now peaceably co-exist as neighbors?
Do they now have Hamas assurances that they will not call for Israel’s total destruction?
Did they win over Palestinian ‘respect’ through their display of overwhelming military might?
Only time will reveal the answers to these questions.
Any ‘benefits’ that may have been ‘won’ from this war will, at best, be felt only temporarily. While Hamas crawls back into their mosques to lick their wounds and bury their dead, their collective ego and pride will not mend so easily.
Bullying may get immediate results but it tends to have the nasty side effect of creating more enemies. And let’s understand first and foremost that whatever animosity these two held towards each other before this conflict began, this war did nothing but create even more. The Israelis cannot force acceptance from Hamas just because the Israeli militarily outclasses them.
Both sides are to blame for the continuation of hostilities towards each other. Neither wants to give up an inch of territory. Neither wants to give one bit of concession to the other. Neither wants the other to live in peace.
Did Israel ‘win’ peace for their efforts?
Aristotle once said “We make war that we may live in peace.” If that was true, our problems would have stopped millennia ago.
Will they now peaceably co-exist as neighbors?
Do they now have Hamas assurances that they will not call for Israel’s total destruction?
Did they win over Palestinian ‘respect’ through their display of overwhelming military might?
Only time will reveal the answers to these questions.
Any ‘benefits’ that may have been ‘won’ from this war will, at best, be felt only temporarily. While Hamas crawls back into their mosques to lick their wounds and bury their dead, their collective ego and pride will not mend so easily.
Bullying may get immediate results but it tends to have the nasty side effect of creating more enemies. And let’s understand first and foremost that whatever animosity these two held towards each other before this conflict began, this war did nothing but create even more. The Israelis cannot force acceptance from Hamas just because the Israeli militarily outclasses them.
Both sides are to blame for the continuation of hostilities towards each other. Neither wants to give up an inch of territory. Neither wants to give one bit of concession to the other. Neither wants the other to live in peace.
Did Israel ‘win’ peace for their efforts?
Aristotle once said “We make war that we may live in peace.” If that was true, our problems would have stopped millennia ago.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Hamas War Crimes: the CNN Strategy
Alan Dershowitz, Harvard law professor, posted a comment in the National Post on Wednesday Jan 7, 2009 that brings up some very interesting points.
He begins by reminding us that Israel is protecting its citizens from deadly Hamas rockets, (rockets that lack any guidance system which leaves them randomly effective with results so ‘deadly’ that out of the estimated 1,750 launches since their introduction in 2001 have killed 13 Israelis and 2 Palestinians).
He later informs us that the number of genuinely innocent civilians killed by the Israeli Air Force in Gaza is lower than the collateral deaths caused by any nation in a comparable situation. With this statement, he is setting the stage for his coming remarks by reminding us that civilian deaths are inevitable during war and that the number of ‘genuinely innocent civilian’ deaths falls within acceptable limits. I don’t agree with the notion of an ‘acceptable’ innocent civilian death rate.
He points out that there is more protest directed against Israel when it inadvertently kills approximately 100 civilians in a just war of self-defense than against Arab and Muslim nations and groups that deliberately kill far more civilians for no legitimate reason through the use of suicide attacks. He backs this up by saying more Arabs and Muslim civilians are killed every day in Africa and the Middle East by Arab and Muslim governments and groups with little or no protests.
He claims bias when he mentions there has been no protests against the cold-blooded murders by Hamas and its supporters of dozens of Palestinian civilians who allegedly "collaborated" with Israel. Indeed, Hamas and Fatah have killed far more Palestinian civilians over the past several years than have the Israelis, but you wouldn't know that from the media, the United Nations or protesters who focus selectively on only those deaths caused by Israeli military actions.
Hamas is playing Russian roulette with its children. Their use of human shields, in the way Hamas uses the civilian population of Gaza, is a war crime. No question about it. They are committing other crimes against humanity as well, such as: firing rockets at kindergartens, playgrounds and hospitals; hiding behind its own civilians when firing at Israeli civilians; refusing to build bunkers for its own civilians. Every human shield that is killed by Israeli self-defense measures is the responsibility of Hamas, but you wouldn't know that from watching the media coverage.
The media is being manipulated. They set up TV cameras to transmit every image of dead Palestinians, especially children and exaggerate the number of civilians killed by including as "children" Hamas fighters who are 16 or 17 years old and as "women," female terrorists.
Hamas declared war on Israel, long before this latest conflict, calling for its complete destruction and is now interpreting current world-wide protest against Israel as pro-Palestinian and therefore are emboldened to continue fighting using any despicable and unconscionable means at its disposal to bring down the Israeli nation.
Dershowitz is decidedly pro-Israel, but the fact remains that Israel is using their technologically advanced military against what amounts to sticks and stones, by comparison. This current conflict is the result of Israel forcing Palestinians to live in a cramped strip of land and blockading food and medical supplies into the area. When Hamas fired their unsophisticated rockets at Israel as protest, Israel fought back with a lopsided and heavy-handed offense. This is what the world is protesting against.
He begins by reminding us that Israel is protecting its citizens from deadly Hamas rockets, (rockets that lack any guidance system which leaves them randomly effective with results so ‘deadly’ that out of the estimated 1,750 launches since their introduction in 2001 have killed 13 Israelis and 2 Palestinians).
He later informs us that the number of genuinely innocent civilians killed by the Israeli Air Force in Gaza is lower than the collateral deaths caused by any nation in a comparable situation. With this statement, he is setting the stage for his coming remarks by reminding us that civilian deaths are inevitable during war and that the number of ‘genuinely innocent civilian’ deaths falls within acceptable limits. I don’t agree with the notion of an ‘acceptable’ innocent civilian death rate.
He points out that there is more protest directed against Israel when it inadvertently kills approximately 100 civilians in a just war of self-defense than against Arab and Muslim nations and groups that deliberately kill far more civilians for no legitimate reason through the use of suicide attacks. He backs this up by saying more Arabs and Muslim civilians are killed every day in Africa and the Middle East by Arab and Muslim governments and groups with little or no protests.
He claims bias when he mentions there has been no protests against the cold-blooded murders by Hamas and its supporters of dozens of Palestinian civilians who allegedly "collaborated" with Israel. Indeed, Hamas and Fatah have killed far more Palestinian civilians over the past several years than have the Israelis, but you wouldn't know that from the media, the United Nations or protesters who focus selectively on only those deaths caused by Israeli military actions.
Hamas is playing Russian roulette with its children. Their use of human shields, in the way Hamas uses the civilian population of Gaza, is a war crime. No question about it. They are committing other crimes against humanity as well, such as: firing rockets at kindergartens, playgrounds and hospitals; hiding behind its own civilians when firing at Israeli civilians; refusing to build bunkers for its own civilians. Every human shield that is killed by Israeli self-defense measures is the responsibility of Hamas, but you wouldn't know that from watching the media coverage.
The media is being manipulated. They set up TV cameras to transmit every image of dead Palestinians, especially children and exaggerate the number of civilians killed by including as "children" Hamas fighters who are 16 or 17 years old and as "women," female terrorists.
Hamas declared war on Israel, long before this latest conflict, calling for its complete destruction and is now interpreting current world-wide protest against Israel as pro-Palestinian and therefore are emboldened to continue fighting using any despicable and unconscionable means at its disposal to bring down the Israeli nation.
Dershowitz is decidedly pro-Israel, but the fact remains that Israel is using their technologically advanced military against what amounts to sticks and stones, by comparison. This current conflict is the result of Israel forcing Palestinians to live in a cramped strip of land and blockading food and medical supplies into the area. When Hamas fired their unsophisticated rockets at Israel as protest, Israel fought back with a lopsided and heavy-handed offense. This is what the world is protesting against.
Friday, January 9, 2009
Unethical and Immoral Behavior Hurts Us All
The most persistent and egregious problem we face today, actually, we have always faced it, is unethical and immoral behavior. The distrust and fear it breeds cripples and severely stifles production and efficiency in every facet of every society.
Every individual will publicly say that they abhor unethical and immoral behavior from our business and political leaders. These same individuals will tell you that those who abuse our trust in them should be removed from their position and punished.
We will all, at some point in our lives, find ourselves in a situation where our moral and ethical character is tested. I have met and spoken with thousands of people in my short life on this planet, and I can tell you that the vast majority of them are down to earth, good hearted people who would not think to screw over a friend. A few others, not so much. I can’t speak for how they will treat someone they don’t know but I have read many accounts where people have screwed over someone (or even committed murder) and then their friends say they can’t believe their friend would do this. So, what are we left to believe? Some people may pass a test of their moral character but succumb to constant and repeated tests. Very few will pass every time. So prevalent is this unethical and immoral behavior that we all know of some untrustworthy person.
If we are truly honest with ourselves we will recognize that the potential to be immoral or unethical is present in all of us. Such is the nature of the human being.
To protect ourselves from being taken advantage of, whether by politicians, business people, or friends, some of us never put ourselves in a position to trust them. Unfortunately, we cannot go through life without trusting at least one or some of these people. So, to keep an eye on our politicians and business executives we hire other people to oversee them, supposedly to prevent them from committing, or at least, getting away with committing, unethical and immoral behavior.
When these people who are being scrutinized commit unethical and immoral behavior, as they seemingly always eventually do, and then get caught we call for some sort of punishment for their wrongdoing that should also serve as a deterrent against future ethical and moral breeches from others. Yet invariably the punishment is toned down by the very people we hire to carry out the punish which results in leniency for committing what cripples us the most. The end result is that there is no real deterrent therefore the unethical and immoral behavior continues.
The root of this behavior, the driving force, always centers around money and power.
These two goals: to have more money than you can possibly spend, and to be the most powerful (whether it be over other people or over property), are the two most corruptible forces we will ever be faced with. We don’t possess the ability to obtain power and money, it possesses us.
Why do we continue to play the game of pretending to be ethical and moral to get ourselves into a position where we will be caught abusing ethics and moral standards? Simply put, because we are all we have. Sad to say, there is no methodology or deterrent that will prevent greed from rearing its ugly head and taking down another seemingly once moral and ethical person.
Why do we allow our principles to be compromised so easily? Why do we bow down to these masters? Any explanation we can come up with will only serve to become a rationalization which will further allow this behavior to continue. Each of us needs to constantly remind ourselves that empathy in relation to others peoples’ trust and money must be the rule for our conduct. We need to ask ourselves, if this was my money and someone else stole it from me how would I feel, instead of thinking how can I take this money without getting caught.
The motto “do unto others before they do unto you” has replaced “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”. Why? I don’t know. But stealing from someone because a third party stole from you does not balance anything. That behavior simply feeds an evil society that no one can possibly live in peace with.
We sell our souls to have more than what we have worked for. This moral dilemma can only be addressed at the individual level. And therein lies the problem. So far, we are doing a pretty miserable job at policing ourselves. The recent default of the economic situation plus the last eight years of the Bush administrations’ wholesale sell-off of corporate America and invading a sovereign nation based on lies, as well as a whole host of other atrocities and attacks on our personal freedoms should serve as enough proof.
If the predictions are correct, our economy is going to get worse before it gets better. This is going to create more pressure on us to be on guard against unscrupulous individuals who would rather steal from us than try to get by on what they have worked for. In the meantime, please remember that we are all suffering. Don’t make it worse on someone else just improve your position. You will only be breeding more hate and fear.
Every individual will publicly say that they abhor unethical and immoral behavior from our business and political leaders. These same individuals will tell you that those who abuse our trust in them should be removed from their position and punished.
We will all, at some point in our lives, find ourselves in a situation where our moral and ethical character is tested. I have met and spoken with thousands of people in my short life on this planet, and I can tell you that the vast majority of them are down to earth, good hearted people who would not think to screw over a friend. A few others, not so much. I can’t speak for how they will treat someone they don’t know but I have read many accounts where people have screwed over someone (or even committed murder) and then their friends say they can’t believe their friend would do this. So, what are we left to believe? Some people may pass a test of their moral character but succumb to constant and repeated tests. Very few will pass every time. So prevalent is this unethical and immoral behavior that we all know of some untrustworthy person.
If we are truly honest with ourselves we will recognize that the potential to be immoral or unethical is present in all of us. Such is the nature of the human being.
To protect ourselves from being taken advantage of, whether by politicians, business people, or friends, some of us never put ourselves in a position to trust them. Unfortunately, we cannot go through life without trusting at least one or some of these people. So, to keep an eye on our politicians and business executives we hire other people to oversee them, supposedly to prevent them from committing, or at least, getting away with committing, unethical and immoral behavior.
When these people who are being scrutinized commit unethical and immoral behavior, as they seemingly always eventually do, and then get caught we call for some sort of punishment for their wrongdoing that should also serve as a deterrent against future ethical and moral breeches from others. Yet invariably the punishment is toned down by the very people we hire to carry out the punish which results in leniency for committing what cripples us the most. The end result is that there is no real deterrent therefore the unethical and immoral behavior continues.
The root of this behavior, the driving force, always centers around money and power.
These two goals: to have more money than you can possibly spend, and to be the most powerful (whether it be over other people or over property), are the two most corruptible forces we will ever be faced with. We don’t possess the ability to obtain power and money, it possesses us.
Why do we continue to play the game of pretending to be ethical and moral to get ourselves into a position where we will be caught abusing ethics and moral standards? Simply put, because we are all we have. Sad to say, there is no methodology or deterrent that will prevent greed from rearing its ugly head and taking down another seemingly once moral and ethical person.
Why do we allow our principles to be compromised so easily? Why do we bow down to these masters? Any explanation we can come up with will only serve to become a rationalization which will further allow this behavior to continue. Each of us needs to constantly remind ourselves that empathy in relation to others peoples’ trust and money must be the rule for our conduct. We need to ask ourselves, if this was my money and someone else stole it from me how would I feel, instead of thinking how can I take this money without getting caught.
The motto “do unto others before they do unto you” has replaced “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”. Why? I don’t know. But stealing from someone because a third party stole from you does not balance anything. That behavior simply feeds an evil society that no one can possibly live in peace with.
We sell our souls to have more than what we have worked for. This moral dilemma can only be addressed at the individual level. And therein lies the problem. So far, we are doing a pretty miserable job at policing ourselves. The recent default of the economic situation plus the last eight years of the Bush administrations’ wholesale sell-off of corporate America and invading a sovereign nation based on lies, as well as a whole host of other atrocities and attacks on our personal freedoms should serve as enough proof.
If the predictions are correct, our economy is going to get worse before it gets better. This is going to create more pressure on us to be on guard against unscrupulous individuals who would rather steal from us than try to get by on what they have worked for. In the meantime, please remember that we are all suffering. Don’t make it worse on someone else just improve your position. You will only be breeding more hate and fear.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)