Is “Civil"-"isation” in jeopardy?

At this time of year when we wish for “Peace on Earth and goodwill to all”, I ask the question, “Is civilization as we know it in jeopardy?”

Today, December 23, 2018, trust is “missing in action”. Trust has been absent without leave – AWOL - for quite a while and trust is desperately needed. Right now. And trust is such a subjective, fragile thing. It cannot be bought or sold. It has to be earned.

Trust in governments; government trust in the electorate; trust in parliaments; trust in politicians; trust in financial organisations; trust in big business; trust in religious institutions; trust in all these, so vital for the smooth running of societies is no longer there. In consequence no one is considered trustworthy.

Trust evaporates when secrecy prevails, with closed meetings, and when cameras are banned from recording; trust evaporates when money takes precedent over humanity; trust evaporates when greed takes precedent over compassion; trust evaporates when veniality is condoned or simply ignored; trust evaporates when those in positions of power tell lies; trust evaporates when meaningless words -“spin”- take the place of policy action; trust evaporates when there is an attempt to indoctrinate with lifeless words.

People – the populous – citizens (the “civitas”) are not stupid. For any leader to consider them as such is a massive mistake. For any leader, anywhere to ignore the will of the people is to do so at their peril. The old saying, “even the worm turns” is very true.

The answer, in my view, is very simple – just treat people, others, the way you would like to be treated. It is an ethical thing.  That is what a “civil” society is based on. That is what “civilisation” is based on. Being “civil” to each other. No matter what colour or creed the “other” may be. All are Human Beings.  That is why it's called the "Golden Rule". 

Is that so difficult?

Oh! And Merry Christmas.

Duty

There are few things that get up my nose more than injustice and cruelty. These two words (and the activities they refer to) will overlap to a greater or lesser degree and in some instances they may equate to the same thing. A cruel act will almost certainly be unjust and in many instances an injustice may be cruel. And then there are the overriding aspects of morality and ethics. Of a certainty, whatever activity or behaviour is unjust or cruel cannot be either moral or ethical.

The other day Archie asked for my comments on activities which are often disguised as, or confounded with, “Duty”, but are really cruel and/or unjust.

Now ‘duty’ is an old word, certainly going back to Anglo-Norman times. But it is unfortunately, often misunderstood. I know “duty” gets mixed up with obeying orders (in the military or paramilitary forces and in judicial or extra-judicial matters). It also gets a bad rap from the appalling revelations about the actions of totalitarian or quasi-totalitarian governments, and unfortunately some “democratic” governments such as  “renditions” when Americans sent (send?) suspected terrorists to countries that are prepared to sanction torture to extract information – “I was just obeying orders”. In my lexicon, however, “duty” has an ethical basis. It has a basis in an action for the benefit of others; a duty of care – almost an obligation. My old stand-by the Oxford English Dictionary defines duty as, “That which is owed; a debt of money, goods or service; the action or behaviour due by moral or legal obligation; action required by one’s business, occupation or function.”

But and it is a big but, as has been said before by others, “duty is not only about doing things right, it is about doing the right thing.” Typically, the demands of justice, honour, and reputation are “imbedded” with duty.

Of course, historically, as mentioned above, totalitarian regimes – and it is a depressingly long list, all, under the guise of “keeping public order” and therefore their “duty”, maintain(ed) an appalling level of control and vicious retaliation against any dissent. Religious persecution also has a large part to play in this – excommunications; witch hunts; death by stoning for blasphemy and such other extremes.   

It is a proven fact that when the conditions are appropriate (if that is the correct word) we are all capable of involvement in such extreme activities - all of us – individuals, governments, corporations and businesses included. We all need “over sight” to ensure that we do not lose our sense of proportion; do not lose our humanity. Without a “duty of care” civilisation would not be what it is. Not everyone agrees, which is why we have laws, rules and regulations.

Free speech is the basic tenet of democracy – all other “rights” stand or fall on this one fundamental, (the freedom to worship and freedom to meet and congregate with whomsoever). The exceptions (there are always exceptions) are that child pornography, engaging in or depicting sexual violence, inciting criminal activity, defamation or slander or engaging in the persecution of any ethnic group are generally strictly forbidden and legislated against. Similarly activities that engage in or encourage corruption, malpractice or fraudulent behaviour are legislated as crimes.

Obeying orders and doing one’s Duty is no excuse for harming another person.