So far as human behaviour is concerned, I have long held the view that there are only two things people do which are deemed to be generally, or sometimes criminally, offensive in any society. They steal and they hit. The one involves dishonesty and the other violence. Quite often, the two acts go together, they are performed at the same time.
There are many kinds of dishonesty, from simple theft to elaborate forms off chicanery such as Ponzi schemes, which are defined by law and enacted in most countries’ legislation, along with the accompanying punishment deemed to be appropriate for the particular type of theft. Indeed there was a time when theft was punishable by death or the cutting off of hands.
There are also many forms of violence, from a simple threat of physical harm to killing. These acts are also defined in law and enacted in legislation with the relevant punishments attached to the particular act of violence.
Coming to grips with these various forms of behaviour is what has occupied the minds of humans to enable a more peaceful and productive interaction between individuals, groups, societies and nations. So it has been for centuries. In dealing with these ‘behaviours’, we humans have made decisions as to what can be tolerated and excused, and what is so offensive as to require retribution and punishment. These decisions are made collectively by nations’ governmental elected representatives, just as they are made individually, everyday, by members in one’s own family. A code of conduct has evolved in order for societies to survive. The same principles apply. Indeed, our governments are elected and expected to represent the highest principles of our society, that is, to find ways and ensure that we do not do harm to one another in any way, and are allowed to enjoy ‘life, liberty and pursuit of happiness’.
Whilst the aspirations are quite simple, the doing is more problematic. It is all dependent on determination and restraint; determination to be honest and restraint to be non-violent. Human beings are a tricky lot. The variations between us are staggering. Individual ambitions are diverse in the extreme. There is, sadly, less evidence of integrity in public life and more evidence of duplicity as well as violence around the globe. These aspects are not helped, specifically by the tolerance afforded to certain individuals who have obtained notoriety, influence, wealth and power. Very few are actually role models. Most are charlatans. At least that is what appears to be in the 21st century. The go to response and attitude is now narcissism, arrogance and colossal mendacity.
It has not always been so, and still, in certain areas it is not so. When it comes to actual thoughtful legislation and rule of law great strides have been made. Matters of tolerance and degrees of responsibility for human behaviours have been examined and put into effect since the 13th Century and re-enforced since then. The concepts of mens rea, intent, soundness of mind and ability to comprehend have tempered our views of transgressions. There are matters of the human mind that require acceptance and understanding, just as there are matters that defy such comprehension and should be dealt with accordingly.
There is the recognition that responsibility for one’s actions is dependent on age, experience, education and mental ability. Children who are classified as minors, and individuals with cognitive impairments, or other mental disorders, are sometimes not considered responsible for their actions. As a result they are not held liable for their actions, although sometimes their behaviour is not entirely excused, depending on the severity of the behaviour. Preventative action can be taken.
Nonetheless, there is a moment when young humans are considered to have developed into what is classified as ‘adult’ and become fully responsible for their actions. Most societies have an age limit, arrived at by a form of consensus and enacted into law, at which an individual is considered to be an adult. Indeed, some religions and societies have rituals to mark or celebrate the coming of age of individuals. It is what is classified in the animal kingdom as being weaned, free from dependence and able to ‘fend’ for oneself.
For human beings, it is during the lead up to that moment of the coming of responsibility that one learns just what is expected of an adult. No matter what society, the education and learning acquired during this pre-adult stage will determine how individuals will accept and react to the basic principles their family and society have already established. Honesty, integrity, respect and empathy are key to the continuing survival of any society. What political or religious persuasion an individual may have should not be, in any way, a barrier to those qualities. In fact, those qualities should be part of one’s political or religious beliefs.
Whether one chooses to worship a God is an entirely private and personal matter. Attempts to convert or persuade goes beyond that choice. There is nothing wrong with assisting, advising or attending those who have made the choice to believe in the same God. Forcing one’s religious beliefs on others is fundamentally wrong and lacking in integrity or respect. To be on the left or right of politics is perfectly acceptable. Politics is, in effect, merely a mater of organising how the state chooses to deal with the health, security, education and employment of its citizens; in other words their ability to have a life, in freedom and the ability to pursue whatever makes them happy.
Although these fundamentals are simple and not difficult to understand, the mind of man is a complex and difficult mechanism. It can function on a myriad of different levels. It is constantly evolving and many are prone to unfortunate trains of thought which lead to unfortunate actions. Religious and political dogmatism tends to cloud what should be simple solutions to problems. Also the economics of politics have created hierarchies, which have resulted in enormous gaps and divisions between individuals in the same society, or nation. There is an unhealthy imbalance. Many of those individuals at the top of the hierarchy do not see or comprehend the imbalance. There is a blindness there. Equity and empathy are in short supply. Misdeeds and prejudices abound. Respect and integrity somehow are in free fall. What happens next? How does one resolve the situation?
Economic groups and political parties are formed. Certain individuals gather influence and put themselves forward as leaders. Some are genuinely keen to find an equitable balance. Others merely wish to maintain a status quo and not give up their positions. Then, there are others who seek to gain power and authority over others and rule from the top. These individuals are generally supported by those who wish to keep the status quo and who will often join the leader in promoting their mutually beneficial agenda.
This perplexity of solutions has swung back and forth like a pendulum, between the genuinely keen and the maintainers of hierarchy. We are unfortunately in an era where the pendulum swings in a very erratic manner. The maintainers are clearly a sham. They have somehow usurped the leadership of nations that have seemingly the most to offer. They have lied and bamboozled their way into control but are completely out of their depth. They have abandoned all decency, honesty, integrity or empathy to maintain their positions. Their actions are terrifying and on the brink of total destruction of a civilised society some of us were under the impression had evolved. The chance of recovery is not quite lost so long as those western European leaders and some remaining democratic North American leaders, come together to forcefully oppose the likes of Trump and Putin, and their enablers, who seem so keen to carve up the globe in their favour. I fear we may be running out of time.
