It is interesting – I have just finished a month of intense studying and writing to lodge two psychology assignments within the due time. This is why I did not “blog” for the whole month of September. Actually I missed the opportunity of writing my thoughts that some, maybe a few, possibly only one may actually read!! I find writing a good outlet for my frustrations and any tensions.
What is really interesting and what I want to write about is ethics and the pernicious and apparently increasing academic crime of plagiarism. One of my recently completed assignments had to be submitted to the ‘anti-plagiarism’ process using the very useful web site called “Turnitin”. This checks the submitted work against a massive data base of previously published journals and books and tells you how much of the work submitted is original or plagiarised. Anything over 10% plagiarism is not acceptable and must be reworked and resubmitted. Mine rated at 5% without reworking, which I was quite pleased with.
This reworking is actually not that difficult it means that the original work that you have referred to must be reworded, in your own words (with appropriate citation or reference). This is as it should be and shows that you understand the topic sufficiently well to be able to write about it without using the original author’s actual words. Again, this is as it should be. Imagine if you were the original author and you read about your ideas and original work, in your words, but claimed as original by someone else? How would you feel? Very annoyed I suggest. Again, imagine, if you will, the consequences of plagiarism and academic cheating if you were treated by an alleged medical doctor who had fake qualifications? How would you feel? Apart from showing a lack of respect, it is cheating and considered to be intellectual theft and is rightly condemned by all.
What brought about this train of thought was an article on the very subject, in the Friday 8th October edition of the Australian Financial Review (AFR), entitled “China fails to rein in fakes”. This is an interesting article because it highlights what seems to be a growing trend in China, something being encouraged by the government there, the feeling, “I must get ahead at any cost.” This attitude applies to individuals, businesses and the government as well. There is a tragic incident, quoted in the AFR, about Chinese airline pilots who faked their flying hours and experience which resulted in an accident in which 26 people lost their lives. I can understand that the Chinese Government wants to trumpet the greatness of China and believe me somewhere in the vast throng of 1.2 billion people there will be some really great and noble individuals. But they will not become great by cheating.
Then there is the statement made by a masters student from Tsinghua University, Lu Xiaoda, that plagiarism is ok and that it is not that students are incapable of the work – copying someone else’s work saves time!! How does he know they can do the work unless they actually do it? Take also the reported case of Xiao Chuanguo a well known Chinese urologist. He was so incensed that two investigative journalists found out that he had been cheating about his skills that he arranged for them to be savagely attacked and beaten up. When confronted by the police he confessed. His reason for this attack was vengeance for the revelations which blocked his appointment to the prestigious Chinese Academy of Social Science! (What a nice man he must be). Yet his university employer, Huazhong University, has not removed him from his position. This case I find quite astonishing. To me both the man himself and his university are worthless.
With greatness comes power and with power comes responsibility – this is something the Chinese have to learn and learn quickly. Responsibility means owning up to ones obligations, accepting ones faults (no one is without faults!) and dealing fairly with all. This is where ethics comes in. A country, a business or an individual must treat others as they would like to be treated. To do otherwise is to attract consequences that may not be pleasant. It is the same as making a cane for others to use to beat you with. And given the opportunity they will, Oh, they will.
The article in the AFR states quite correctly that unless this practice of plagiarism in China is stamped out, Chinese academics will be marginalised by the rest of the world, and their work considered as worthless because no one will be sure of its accuracy or its true worth. So who suffers? China! Its reputation will be in tatters and its people diminished. That is no way to greatness!!
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Monday, August 30, 2010
The electrical age – no Plan B
It is my view that we should call this “age”, the age we are currently living in, the “electrical age”. Everything that we do today seems to be governed by the use of electricity – from either mains or a battery. Just think how much we rely on electricity - if there was a major power cut or an “outage”- nothing would work. We couldn’t cook; couldn’t read (no lighting); couldn’t use a computer (even lap-tops need to be recharged at some stage); couldn’t travel (electrical suburban trains or trams); couldn’t use telephones (unless it is an old land line handset - which uses the electricity in the line itself) and cell phones need to be recharged; couldn’t use any bank cards.
Seriously if there was NO electricity then we would be in real trouble. What drew this to my attention is the fact that my employer banks with one of the four major banks in Australia and this afternoon, “all the lines are down” to that bank. Meaning we could not process any payments using a card. So any customer had to pay cash or there was no sale! But then if they used the particular bank concerned they could still not withdraw any cash because “all the lines are down”.
If there was a major catastrophe, God forbid, a major earthquake or something that affected the entire nation and ALL electricity was cut off or all generating capacity had to be shut down, what would happen? While fuel in vehicle tanks or immediate storage tanks remained then some movement or some power could be generated for emergencies – hospitals and the like. But as soon as that fuel ran out they could not be refilled – no electricity at the service stations to pump fuel. All refining capacity would be reduced to zero – again no electricity to run equipment. There would be no water – no refining and no pumping to give pressure. Abattoirs and dairies would cease operating – no refrigeration and no power to run equipment. Even gas needs electricity to pressurise and pump it.
When you think about it, our total reliance on electricity is a major weakness in our society. We have no “Plan B” to fall back on if anything happened. I am not sure what can be done about it except build as many safeguards and duplicate “fail safe” systems into the electrical grids as possible. The internet is a weakness - all the “fire walls” built into the system will not stop a determined person (or persons) with malicious intent from causing serious delays and damage by feeding virus’ into the electrical process.
Our only real fall back, Plan B, is to revert to a manual system using minimal electricity but I cannot imagine that anyone would choose this course of action – unless we were forced to.
Seriously if there was NO electricity then we would be in real trouble. What drew this to my attention is the fact that my employer banks with one of the four major banks in Australia and this afternoon, “all the lines are down” to that bank. Meaning we could not process any payments using a card. So any customer had to pay cash or there was no sale! But then if they used the particular bank concerned they could still not withdraw any cash because “all the lines are down”.
If there was a major catastrophe, God forbid, a major earthquake or something that affected the entire nation and ALL electricity was cut off or all generating capacity had to be shut down, what would happen? While fuel in vehicle tanks or immediate storage tanks remained then some movement or some power could be generated for emergencies – hospitals and the like. But as soon as that fuel ran out they could not be refilled – no electricity at the service stations to pump fuel. All refining capacity would be reduced to zero – again no electricity to run equipment. There would be no water – no refining and no pumping to give pressure. Abattoirs and dairies would cease operating – no refrigeration and no power to run equipment. Even gas needs electricity to pressurise and pump it.
When you think about it, our total reliance on electricity is a major weakness in our society. We have no “Plan B” to fall back on if anything happened. I am not sure what can be done about it except build as many safeguards and duplicate “fail safe” systems into the electrical grids as possible. The internet is a weakness - all the “fire walls” built into the system will not stop a determined person (or persons) with malicious intent from causing serious delays and damage by feeding virus’ into the electrical process.
Our only real fall back, Plan B, is to revert to a manual system using minimal electricity but I cannot imagine that anyone would choose this course of action – unless we were forced to.
Monday, August 23, 2010
More on whistleblowers!
You may have read about the latest twist in the WikiLeaks saga. Julian Assange (the WikiLeaks founder and principle operator) had been accused by someone, unnamed, of rape, in Sweden. Swedish prosecutors have now said that Julian Assange was not suspected of rape in Sweden and was no longer wanted for questioning.
It seems a bit of a co-incidence that this charge should suddenly appear at the same time the American’s are very anxious to shut down the WikiLeaks site as it is drawing unwelcome attention, shall we say, to a few moral shortcomings in the American intelligence and armed forces. I wonder which CIA backroom boy thought up this latest ploy?
The American’s cannot say, from any moral “high ground”, that Wikileaks disclosures may possibly cause the loss of life of supporters of the USA when, because of the invasion of Iraq, and the subsequent breakdown of law and order, an unknown number (but believed to be greater than 600 000) people, many innocent, have been killed in factional fighting and suicide bomb blasts. Similarly in Afghanistan, where a desperately dysfunctional and possibly corrupt government is in “control” and where many thousand s of people, (many innocent) have been killed.
Go back a few years – who financed, trained and armed the Taliban? The Americans in the guise of the CIA. I know that the American’s chose to do this to cause maximum problems for the Soviets who were then trying to occupy and subdue Afghanistan. In this they succeeded but at what cost?? Did anyone think the whole thing through to any possible end-game? The Afghani are a tough and resilient people. They resent and have fought off ALL invaders – from Alexander the Great to the Russians. What did the American’s expect, an open arm welcome? Why should the Afghani react any differently now?
Historically many (if not all) wars have been determined to be nothing but pointless exercises in self aggrandisement of some leader somewhere and at sometime. No one “wins” a war – all participants are “losers”. Everyone suffers and humanity is diminished in the prosecution of the war. Any exposure of illegal, immoral and exploitative behaviour needs to be supported and encouraged. Such activities can never be justified. They are always wrong.
Think of any war you care to name, led by any general or national leader you can think of –First World War or the Second World War; and the wars in Korea: Vietnam; India and Pakistan; Israel and the Arab countries in the Middle East; Iraq’s invasion of Iran; the invasion of Iraq; and then some of the famous/infamous people who initiated conflicts - Alexander the Great; Napoleon; Hitler; Tojo (Japan) – is the world better off and a safer place because these people, as leaders of the various countries, engaged in war? I don’t think so. So why fight at all?
What makes the current situation ethically more problematical, in Afghanistan, is the American’s widespread use of what they call “private contractors”. I would call them mercenaries, or in old fashioned terms “soldiers of fortune”. They are not accountable to anyone. Remember the Blackwater fiasco in Iraq when a number of these “private contractors” shot and killed innocent civilians? As far as I can establish none of those involved was ever brought to justice.
A war cannot be fought in secret. A war affects millions of people and those people have a right to know, and the governments concerned an obligation to explain, what they are doing and why. Trying to avoid the issue or to lie about what is going only causes confusion and distrust. This is why we need whistleblowers and why I believe that those sources of information, such as Wikileaks, and others, are essential if the world is not to descend into anarchy. People, leaders, must be made accountable for their actions. If they will not come clean about what they are doing and why, then exposure through whistle blowing is the only way.
The trouble is leaders (and people in general) do not like being exposed and shown, for all to see, what they have been up to. This is why whistleblowers are condemned by governments and big business rather than supported. The condemnation of whistleblowers may take the form of the false accusations that lead this article. This may quite easily lead to the bizarre situation where we would need a whistleblower to expose the government that is accusing whistleblowers of making false accusations!! But if whistleblowers did not exist how would we find out what the issues are that affect us all (as in a global sense) and what we should do about them?
It would be much better for all concerned if people and governments just told the truth!
It seems a bit of a co-incidence that this charge should suddenly appear at the same time the American’s are very anxious to shut down the WikiLeaks site as it is drawing unwelcome attention, shall we say, to a few moral shortcomings in the American intelligence and armed forces. I wonder which CIA backroom boy thought up this latest ploy?
The American’s cannot say, from any moral “high ground”, that Wikileaks disclosures may possibly cause the loss of life of supporters of the USA when, because of the invasion of Iraq, and the subsequent breakdown of law and order, an unknown number (but believed to be greater than 600 000) people, many innocent, have been killed in factional fighting and suicide bomb blasts. Similarly in Afghanistan, where a desperately dysfunctional and possibly corrupt government is in “control” and where many thousand s of people, (many innocent) have been killed.
Go back a few years – who financed, trained and armed the Taliban? The Americans in the guise of the CIA. I know that the American’s chose to do this to cause maximum problems for the Soviets who were then trying to occupy and subdue Afghanistan. In this they succeeded but at what cost?? Did anyone think the whole thing through to any possible end-game? The Afghani are a tough and resilient people. They resent and have fought off ALL invaders – from Alexander the Great to the Russians. What did the American’s expect, an open arm welcome? Why should the Afghani react any differently now?
Historically many (if not all) wars have been determined to be nothing but pointless exercises in self aggrandisement of some leader somewhere and at sometime. No one “wins” a war – all participants are “losers”. Everyone suffers and humanity is diminished in the prosecution of the war. Any exposure of illegal, immoral and exploitative behaviour needs to be supported and encouraged. Such activities can never be justified. They are always wrong.
Think of any war you care to name, led by any general or national leader you can think of –First World War or the Second World War; and the wars in Korea: Vietnam; India and Pakistan; Israel and the Arab countries in the Middle East; Iraq’s invasion of Iran; the invasion of Iraq; and then some of the famous/infamous people who initiated conflicts - Alexander the Great; Napoleon; Hitler; Tojo (Japan) – is the world better off and a safer place because these people, as leaders of the various countries, engaged in war? I don’t think so. So why fight at all?
What makes the current situation ethically more problematical, in Afghanistan, is the American’s widespread use of what they call “private contractors”. I would call them mercenaries, or in old fashioned terms “soldiers of fortune”. They are not accountable to anyone. Remember the Blackwater fiasco in Iraq when a number of these “private contractors” shot and killed innocent civilians? As far as I can establish none of those involved was ever brought to justice.
A war cannot be fought in secret. A war affects millions of people and those people have a right to know, and the governments concerned an obligation to explain, what they are doing and why. Trying to avoid the issue or to lie about what is going only causes confusion and distrust. This is why we need whistleblowers and why I believe that those sources of information, such as Wikileaks, and others, are essential if the world is not to descend into anarchy. People, leaders, must be made accountable for their actions. If they will not come clean about what they are doing and why, then exposure through whistle blowing is the only way.
The trouble is leaders (and people in general) do not like being exposed and shown, for all to see, what they have been up to. This is why whistleblowers are condemned by governments and big business rather than supported. The condemnation of whistleblowers may take the form of the false accusations that lead this article. This may quite easily lead to the bizarre situation where we would need a whistleblower to expose the government that is accusing whistleblowers of making false accusations!! But if whistleblowers did not exist how would we find out what the issues are that affect us all (as in a global sense) and what we should do about them?
It would be much better for all concerned if people and governments just told the truth!
Friday, August 20, 2010
Israel’s “Moral” Army – again!!
I was as shocked as many were by the actions of a former Israeli female soldier when she published photographs (on 18th August 2010) of her posing in front of a group of bound and blindfold Palestinian prisoners.
This is the latest manifestation of a culture which treats “others” as inferior and not worthy of any humanitarian consideration and compassion. The ‘culture’ seems to believe that because these people are not Jews they are therefore not human. To compound the issue the woman concerned, Eden Abargil, denies she has done anything wrong. She says there is no “violence” in the photographs and that she is surprised at the world wide reaction of outrage. What she fails to accept is that there is something beyond physical violence which offends and diminishes people - that is to treat them as of no account and less than human.
Earlier this year (in February) I published an article about the morals of Israel’s attack on the people in Gaza and another in May about Israeli commandos attacking an aid convoy of ships with food and supplies for Gaza. The Israeli’s continue to boast that their Army is the most “ethical” army in the world. What they forget or ignore is that an organisation, such as an army, cannot be ethical or moral. Only individuals are ethical or moral. Unless those at the top – the Commander in Chief and the Generals are moral and ethically upright people then they cannot hope to inculcate an ethical culture in those they command.
This latest episode goes to show that the Israeli’s army is still an arrogant army – and this sticks in the craw of many. They lack humility. They have no grounds on which to tell others how to treat them (the Jews) when they have done and are doing things which, if perpetrated against them (the Jews), would raise howls of anger and accusations of being anti-Jewish.
The woman concerned needs to reflect on a reverse situation and she was a prisoner, bound and blindfold, how would she feel - diminished and humiliated? I am sure she would. Certainly the publication of the photographs and the former soldier’s comments will do nothing to lessen the tensions in the Middle East and will do nothing to further Israel’s desire for a peaceful existence.
This is the latest manifestation of a culture which treats “others” as inferior and not worthy of any humanitarian consideration and compassion. The ‘culture’ seems to believe that because these people are not Jews they are therefore not human. To compound the issue the woman concerned, Eden Abargil, denies she has done anything wrong. She says there is no “violence” in the photographs and that she is surprised at the world wide reaction of outrage. What she fails to accept is that there is something beyond physical violence which offends and diminishes people - that is to treat them as of no account and less than human.
Earlier this year (in February) I published an article about the morals of Israel’s attack on the people in Gaza and another in May about Israeli commandos attacking an aid convoy of ships with food and supplies for Gaza. The Israeli’s continue to boast that their Army is the most “ethical” army in the world. What they forget or ignore is that an organisation, such as an army, cannot be ethical or moral. Only individuals are ethical or moral. Unless those at the top – the Commander in Chief and the Generals are moral and ethically upright people then they cannot hope to inculcate an ethical culture in those they command.
This latest episode goes to show that the Israeli’s army is still an arrogant army – and this sticks in the craw of many. They lack humility. They have no grounds on which to tell others how to treat them (the Jews) when they have done and are doing things which, if perpetrated against them (the Jews), would raise howls of anger and accusations of being anti-Jewish.
The woman concerned needs to reflect on a reverse situation and she was a prisoner, bound and blindfold, how would she feel - diminished and humiliated? I am sure she would. Certainly the publication of the photographs and the former soldier’s comments will do nothing to lessen the tensions in the Middle East and will do nothing to further Israel’s desire for a peaceful existence.
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Taliban - Death by stoning!
The Taliban recently (Sunday 15th August 2010) killed two young people (a 23 year old girl and a 28 year old boy) by stoning them to death because they “had an affair”. What do the Taliban think they are doing? How unjust; how primitive; how tribal; how barbaric!! This just shows the mentality of the Taliban ‘leaders’. I have said it before, and I will say it again, that violence is the last resort of the morally bankrupt. In this case it is certainly true.
I cannot remember where in the Bible, which chapter or verse, but somewhere Jesus said, “Let he who has not sinned – let him cast the first stone.” This is so true. No one has the right to assume that they are guiltless, ‘immune’ and above the law. We have all ‘sinned’ in one way or another at some time.
Is anyone naive enough to believe that the Taliban followers are all guiltless people? Are we to believe that none of them ever had an affair? Are we to believe that none of them has ever been involved in the murder and rape of innocent people, and committed these crimes (real crimes) simply because the victims opposed the policies of the Taliban?
Not only are the Taliban a bunch of fanatical criminals but they are also hypocrites. They tell people what to do without doing it themselves. For instance, they do not allow the populous to watch TV and yet the Taliban leaders themselves watch TV, and so it goes on. I know why they commit these horrendous acts – it is just to cause fear and to show that they are in charge and the force to be reckoned with. Causing fear and injustice, however, are not good indicators of an ability to run a country – which is presumably what they hope to achieve. Fortunately there is a “Law” which is above manipulation by humans and it is inescapable. It is the law of Cause and Effect. The Taliban have committed shocking acts of brutality and cruelty on innocent people – that is the Cause. Now the Effect has yet to play out, but play out it will and the reckoning may not be what the Taliban hoped for – it may be unpleasant.
May God (Allah) rest the souls of those two young innocent persons. Justice will prevail in the end – it always does.
I cannot remember where in the Bible, which chapter or verse, but somewhere Jesus said, “Let he who has not sinned – let him cast the first stone.” This is so true. No one has the right to assume that they are guiltless, ‘immune’ and above the law. We have all ‘sinned’ in one way or another at some time.
Is anyone naive enough to believe that the Taliban followers are all guiltless people? Are we to believe that none of them ever had an affair? Are we to believe that none of them has ever been involved in the murder and rape of innocent people, and committed these crimes (real crimes) simply because the victims opposed the policies of the Taliban?
Not only are the Taliban a bunch of fanatical criminals but they are also hypocrites. They tell people what to do without doing it themselves. For instance, they do not allow the populous to watch TV and yet the Taliban leaders themselves watch TV, and so it goes on. I know why they commit these horrendous acts – it is just to cause fear and to show that they are in charge and the force to be reckoned with. Causing fear and injustice, however, are not good indicators of an ability to run a country – which is presumably what they hope to achieve. Fortunately there is a “Law” which is above manipulation by humans and it is inescapable. It is the law of Cause and Effect. The Taliban have committed shocking acts of brutality and cruelty on innocent people – that is the Cause. Now the Effect has yet to play out, but play out it will and the reckoning may not be what the Taliban hoped for – it may be unpleasant.
May God (Allah) rest the souls of those two young innocent persons. Justice will prevail in the end – it always does.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Chinese (In)justice
The following quote from an article on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s website today, 5th August 2010, concerns me greatly. This sort of secret justice is not justice; it is not even a parody of justice; it is plain simple injustice. What have the Chinese officials got to hide? Why the secrecy? Why can’t Chinese citizens and others for that matter, read or hear what was said by whom and what the people concerned actually did and why and how it harmed the Chinese people – if it harmed them at all? I am particularly concerned about the last sentence with the Court official requesting anonymity. Poor man – he must be terrified but of what? Being attacked by family members, or by the companies concerned?
“By ABC China correspondent Stephen McDonell
Chinese steel company executives have been jailed for leaking sensitive information to Stern Hu and other Rio Tinto staff. Hu and three other Rio Tinto executives were given hefty jail sentences earlier this year in part for bribing local steel company officials.
In return the Chinese executives handed Rio Tinto sensitive information said to have given the mining company an unfair advantage in price negotiations. Tan Yixin from Shougang has received a three-and-a-half-year sentence for leaking secrets to Rio Tinto.
Wang Hongjiu from Laiwu Steel was given four years. Both men were also hit with large fines.
Their hearings were held in secret and an official from Shanghai No 1 Intermediate People's Court passed on the sentencing information to news agencies, requesting anonymity.”
If this is the “justice” that I could expect in China why would I want to deal with anyone in China? If I was a visitor to China and something happened which involved the police, how would I expect to be treated – in secret? Would I be able to argue my case in court and be heard by an impartial judge whose only concern is the rule of law? Or would the court proceedings be a political charade purporting to be justice? Would there be any possibility of an appeal to determine if a miscarriage of justice had occurred?
The Chinese authorities must determine what system of ‘Justice’ they wish to impose. To me justice is justice. There cannot be a Chinese Justice and an Australian Justice and an American Justice and some other country’s determination of justice. Surely anywhere in the world “right’ is “right” and “wrong” is “wrong”?. Or is Chinese ‘right” better than English “right”?
The great English jurist Justice William Blackstone (1723 – 1780) who wrote the famous ‘Commentaries on the Laws of England’, said, “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than one innocent suffers.”
I wonder if anyone would, today, write a ‘Commentary of the Laws of China’ and say the same thing?
“By ABC China correspondent Stephen McDonell
Chinese steel company executives have been jailed for leaking sensitive information to Stern Hu and other Rio Tinto staff. Hu and three other Rio Tinto executives were given hefty jail sentences earlier this year in part for bribing local steel company officials.
In return the Chinese executives handed Rio Tinto sensitive information said to have given the mining company an unfair advantage in price negotiations. Tan Yixin from Shougang has received a three-and-a-half-year sentence for leaking secrets to Rio Tinto.
Wang Hongjiu from Laiwu Steel was given four years. Both men were also hit with large fines.
Their hearings were held in secret and an official from Shanghai No 1 Intermediate People's Court passed on the sentencing information to news agencies, requesting anonymity.”
If this is the “justice” that I could expect in China why would I want to deal with anyone in China? If I was a visitor to China and something happened which involved the police, how would I expect to be treated – in secret? Would I be able to argue my case in court and be heard by an impartial judge whose only concern is the rule of law? Or would the court proceedings be a political charade purporting to be justice? Would there be any possibility of an appeal to determine if a miscarriage of justice had occurred?
The Chinese authorities must determine what system of ‘Justice’ they wish to impose. To me justice is justice. There cannot be a Chinese Justice and an Australian Justice and an American Justice and some other country’s determination of justice. Surely anywhere in the world “right’ is “right” and “wrong” is “wrong”?. Or is Chinese ‘right” better than English “right”?
The great English jurist Justice William Blackstone (1723 – 1780) who wrote the famous ‘Commentaries on the Laws of England’, said, “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than one innocent suffers.”
I wonder if anyone would, today, write a ‘Commentary of the Laws of China’ and say the same thing?
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Injustice is always wrong
I have written about this before – and I do so to relieve my own anger and frustration with those who exploit others for their own (usually financial) benefit. This exploitation and injustice is widespread – it happens everywhere. This apparent universality does not detract from the fact that any and all injustice is wrong. In fact I would go so far as to say that injustice is the cause of most of the social ills that beset the world today.
Injustice is everywhere, in Brazil with the Indians living in the Amazon rain forest; in Australia regarding the plight of the Aboriginals; in the USA and Canada regarding the North American Indians and the Inuit (Eskimos); the Israelis demolishing ‘illegal’ housing and regarding the expropriation of Palestine with no compensation paid to the Palestinians. Then there is the injustice prevalent in China. It seems that property developers are trying to take advantage of the current housing boom in much of China, by forcing out those in poorer areas by bulldozing their houses and claiming the land, while providing no compensation.
Nothing, but nothing irritates, annoys, infuriates and aggravates people as much as injustice. Victims of injustice have a very long memory and can recall in great detail the cause and effect of any injustice they have ever experienced. Right from early childhood a person knows if something is “fair” or not. I am a grandfather and my grandchildren know when something is unfair and tell me “That is not fair.” They are always right. When that “fairness” is breached or overturned, trouble brews. It festers like an infected wound, in the mind, and will burst out in an unexpected way at some indeterminate time in the future.
Unless institutionalised unfairness is acknowledged and clearly and openly corrected it builds up until enough individuals are so upset that a ‘tipping point’ is reached and by some strange telepathy they band together and openly defy the authorities and demand justice. That is what the law is about – justice must not only be done but be seen to be done.
I suggest that the Chinese authorities are creating a great well of discontent by not having an open and fair judicial system where individual grievances can be openly discussed by both parties to any dispute and corrected in a ‘just’ manner. Trying to hide these matters will not make them go away – they are still there festering away and making a great many people unhappy.
Injustice is everywhere, in Brazil with the Indians living in the Amazon rain forest; in Australia regarding the plight of the Aboriginals; in the USA and Canada regarding the North American Indians and the Inuit (Eskimos); the Israelis demolishing ‘illegal’ housing and regarding the expropriation of Palestine with no compensation paid to the Palestinians. Then there is the injustice prevalent in China. It seems that property developers are trying to take advantage of the current housing boom in much of China, by forcing out those in poorer areas by bulldozing their houses and claiming the land, while providing no compensation.
Nothing, but nothing irritates, annoys, infuriates and aggravates people as much as injustice. Victims of injustice have a very long memory and can recall in great detail the cause and effect of any injustice they have ever experienced. Right from early childhood a person knows if something is “fair” or not. I am a grandfather and my grandchildren know when something is unfair and tell me “That is not fair.” They are always right. When that “fairness” is breached or overturned, trouble brews. It festers like an infected wound, in the mind, and will burst out in an unexpected way at some indeterminate time in the future.
Unless institutionalised unfairness is acknowledged and clearly and openly corrected it builds up until enough individuals are so upset that a ‘tipping point’ is reached and by some strange telepathy they band together and openly defy the authorities and demand justice. That is what the law is about – justice must not only be done but be seen to be done.
I suggest that the Chinese authorities are creating a great well of discontent by not having an open and fair judicial system where individual grievances can be openly discussed by both parties to any dispute and corrected in a ‘just’ manner. Trying to hide these matters will not make them go away – they are still there festering away and making a great many people unhappy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)