Imminent Corrpution...?
The drama in the Hollywood tabloids gushes each day from the tips of greedy magazine moguls to millions of readers who feast on the corruption. Tonight's local 6 o'clock news whether it is in Greenville, SC or New York City is sure to be dominated by coverage of death, theft, and the latest mega corporate scandal. Scene change to college campuses, high school hallways, and to the minds of our middle schoolers. The picture looks different, but deep at its roots this lust for corruption is just digging in and planting its roots. It's not quite so explicit, but the childish games we play as youngsters to get back at the kid who is dating the girl we "love", are every bit as loathesome as the magical accounting practices of Arthur Anderson. The ever more frightening reality is that the same attitude of spite and trickery we attempt to employ as a 3rd grader to gain advantage in the playground game of soccer, also causes corporate moguls to destroy the lives and fortunes of millions of people. I don't think they necessarily intend or even desire to harm so many people, yet their insatiable thirst for power and prestige drives them to knowingly dangle thousands from a thread of silk.
Are we a hopeless band of humans who cannot hope to escape the perverse attraction to power? Is there some arcane magic attached to success that mandates corruption? Can good people do great things?
Thankfully the view from the top does not have to be shrouded in drakness. It is difficult and requires self denial and disgression, but reaching the pinnacle of your world can be achieved through honest hardwork and dedication. I am not naive. I understand that it is absolutely necessary at some point for the the average Joe to catch a break, for someone to give him acess to the door of opportunity. But I truly believe that if you work hard and have the skill in your trade to excel that eventually your break will come. It is hard to pour your life into work if you don't ever get a pat on the back or an "at-a-boy" from your peers and more importantly your superiors. But which is more noble, to labor tirelessly, without the expressed gratitude of others, or to give everything you got while the rewards and accolades roll in? Obviously the answer to that question is simple. Perks and recognition make work easier, but is that all we labor for? Do we work for a raise, for a trophy, or a title? There is certainltly nothing wrong with reward and it has its right place, but if that is our goal, all the sudden it's so easy to see why corruption is rampant not only in the lives of the rich and famous, but also in the lives of the class of 2012. After all if achievement is the absolute measure of worth then why wouldn't I cook the books to tack another 50 million onto the bottom line? Why shouldn't I smear my opponent with lies to gain political office? Why shouldn't I lie and cheat to win the competition? It seems like corruption is imminent. We seal our own fate by the things we deem most valuable....We want stuff...and lots of it.
So I suppose that's it. Hope this doesn't depress you too much, and good luck not getting swindled by your next door neighbor who is trying to meet expectations....
Thankfully, the dots don't end there. There are generous (and wealthy) gurus. They don't get the press, because alturism and charity don't sell except on the Disney Channel and in Hallmark stores. They don't sell because we demand to hear about the tragedy and corruption of others. We thrive in hearing about "dirty" people so we can justify our own sick selves. Love and genuine concern for helping others often is subtely expressed through small acts that garner no reward other than the knowledge of a job well done and the aid given to someone in need. Yet the small town high school teacher who has poured his heart and soul into his students for 30 years and has little to show for it himself, can be utterly satisfied that his life has counted for something lasting. His young students now populate the globe influencing others. Some are famous, some are themselves teaching for little pay in a small school, where the principal doubles as the janitor.
We can change the culture. If we open the door for someone, and they race through it to a world of success, pat them on the back and say good job. Don't clamor to steal from their success. May we strive to give to others, whether it's a cup of cold water or just asking somebody how they are doing. Understand that achievements are fleeting and individual fame is temporal, but genuine concern and investment in the lives of others will grow and be passed from generation to generation.
I'm not advocating that you boycott the news and business magazines. Just take the time to say thanks and recognize others who have helped you out, even in small ways. If your the one helping don't lust for the success you may have opened the door to. After all you didn't achieve it yourself. Be proud and excited for people who catch the break instead of jealous of them. Cheer them on whole heartedly, and watch your investment grow. Sure it may not have your label or name on it, but after all who cares, because isn't it the product inside the wrapper (that you have had a hand in creating) that truly counts?
Are we a hopeless band of humans who cannot hope to escape the perverse attraction to power? Is there some arcane magic attached to success that mandates corruption? Can good people do great things?
Thankfully the view from the top does not have to be shrouded in drakness. It is difficult and requires self denial and disgression, but reaching the pinnacle of your world can be achieved through honest hardwork and dedication. I am not naive. I understand that it is absolutely necessary at some point for the the average Joe to catch a break, for someone to give him acess to the door of opportunity. But I truly believe that if you work hard and have the skill in your trade to excel that eventually your break will come. It is hard to pour your life into work if you don't ever get a pat on the back or an "at-a-boy" from your peers and more importantly your superiors. But which is more noble, to labor tirelessly, without the expressed gratitude of others, or to give everything you got while the rewards and accolades roll in? Obviously the answer to that question is simple. Perks and recognition make work easier, but is that all we labor for? Do we work for a raise, for a trophy, or a title? There is certainltly nothing wrong with reward and it has its right place, but if that is our goal, all the sudden it's so easy to see why corruption is rampant not only in the lives of the rich and famous, but also in the lives of the class of 2012. After all if achievement is the absolute measure of worth then why wouldn't I cook the books to tack another 50 million onto the bottom line? Why shouldn't I smear my opponent with lies to gain political office? Why shouldn't I lie and cheat to win the competition? It seems like corruption is imminent. We seal our own fate by the things we deem most valuable....We want stuff...and lots of it.
So I suppose that's it. Hope this doesn't depress you too much, and good luck not getting swindled by your next door neighbor who is trying to meet expectations....
Thankfully, the dots don't end there. There are generous (and wealthy) gurus. They don't get the press, because alturism and charity don't sell except on the Disney Channel and in Hallmark stores. They don't sell because we demand to hear about the tragedy and corruption of others. We thrive in hearing about "dirty" people so we can justify our own sick selves. Love and genuine concern for helping others often is subtely expressed through small acts that garner no reward other than the knowledge of a job well done and the aid given to someone in need. Yet the small town high school teacher who has poured his heart and soul into his students for 30 years and has little to show for it himself, can be utterly satisfied that his life has counted for something lasting. His young students now populate the globe influencing others. Some are famous, some are themselves teaching for little pay in a small school, where the principal doubles as the janitor.
We can change the culture. If we open the door for someone, and they race through it to a world of success, pat them on the back and say good job. Don't clamor to steal from their success. May we strive to give to others, whether it's a cup of cold water or just asking somebody how they are doing. Understand that achievements are fleeting and individual fame is temporal, but genuine concern and investment in the lives of others will grow and be passed from generation to generation.
I'm not advocating that you boycott the news and business magazines. Just take the time to say thanks and recognize others who have helped you out, even in small ways. If your the one helping don't lust for the success you may have opened the door to. After all you didn't achieve it yourself. Be proud and excited for people who catch the break instead of jealous of them. Cheer them on whole heartedly, and watch your investment grow. Sure it may not have your label or name on it, but after all who cares, because isn't it the product inside the wrapper (that you have had a hand in creating) that truly counts?
posted by Mr. "J" | 8:58 AM
5 Comments:
how true. it's the little things, when added up that really can make a difference in ones life. one choice can make or break, help or sway someone to do good to others. not to endorse the Karma effect; but, i think if you do good to others, if you don't reep good, someone in that persons path will.
Wow, Joe! I'm very impressed. This is a different person from the one I remember from just a few years ago. I think Paul understood best what you are talking about when he told his fellow brethren "that I would most gladly spend and be spent for your souls; though the more abundantly I love you, the less I am loved." True, genuine love for others anticipates no reward because the act of love is itself the reward. Unfortunately, the media and secularism have clouded Christian circles in a haze of selfishness, superiority, and rights. You are correct, we have the power to change, and it is our own choice. It is a conscious, consistent choice to put the rights, needs, and interests of others above our own, and it is hard. I know a certain couple that did that for many students, and the beneficiaries are spread across the world. I just hope that more of us take from them their loving and giving spirit rather than just their knowledge. Learning to love is a hard lesson and for some of us it comes late, but the rewards and anonymity are sweet. "Spend and be spent."
This intriguing entry considers important issues from fields as diverse as managerial psychology and critical sociology. Initially, you analyze the thirst for power and its detriments. I'd like to read your opinion about the differences (if in fact there are any) between selfishness (broadly defined) and powerlust (as you discussed). At this point, I'm not sure I understand exactly how you're using the terms. It seems to me that either you're using a definition that is so facially negative that you claim a normative truism or you use such a broad definition that you cannot make any claim at all. In other words, if we assume selfishness to be inherently bad, we claim the obvious when we identify it as such; on the other hand, if we assume selfishness to mean self-interest, it's impossible (I think) to uniformly reject it.
This is directly relevant when move to your advocacy that people should strive to help others. If one enjoys helping others (and most, I suspect, do), isn't that selfish in effect if not intent?
Because of the difficulty in both defining and assessing intention, I believe that for our purposes we should be content to settle for an evaluation of effect. Why I do "x" matters not at all when compared to what "x" actually produces/creates/does. And if I do "x" for selfish, power-hungry reasons, why is that a bad thing if it results in a net benefit? Similarly, if I do "x" for positive reasons but doing so results in a net detriment, my intention doesn't much matter, I suspect. While we can (and should!) rightfully believe that he was ghastly wrong, we have to assume that Hitler believed that Europe would be better without its Jewish citizens. His positive motivation matters not a whit when we look at the result of that motivation.
In short, I defend selfishness (defined broadly). Even in cases of widespread corporate scandals (i.e. Enron), that certain individuals (namely Ken Lay) selfishly sought profit maximization...even using illegal means...resulted in a net benefit to society. Plenty of people were harmed as a result of creative accounting methods but many, many more were given jobs and opportunities that they otherwise wouldn't have had. People like Ken Lay raise the proverbial tides...and a rising tide elevates all boats.
Fascinating, provocative read.
I don't see how there are differences between selfishness and powerlust. They are both branches of the same root - pride. Therefore, they both carry negative connotations.
It seems to me that to view actions by their ends and not by their means allows one the ability to divorce morality from actions. Sure, we can choose to justify our actions by focusing on the means, but we are merely fooling ourselves. You cannot divorce the selfishness and powerlust from Ken Lay's actions. Regardless of what the end was, his primary motivation was himself. He made his choices in a vacuum that was devoid of concern for others. Perhaps a few profited for a time, but the result was chaos because selfishness and powerlust produces chaos. Look again at Nazi Germany and the chaos Hitler's selfishness produced. In China, Chairman Mao Tse Tung believed that morality consisted of one core, the self, "I" above everything else. He said, "I do not agree with the view that to be moral, the motive of one's actions has to be benefiting others. Morality does not have to be defined in relation to others. People like me want to satisfy our hearts to the full." He went on to say that the people and objects that existed in the world were merely there for his use. Contrary to his statements, he lacked all sense of true morality. Look at the basic definition: "The quality of being in accord with standards of right or good conduct." What use would we have for standards of right or good conduct if we were merely considering ourselves? The answer is simple and the result is dictatorial chaos as demonstrated by Mao. Hundreds of thousands lost their lives under his rule so that he could "satisfy his heart to the full."
I think (and you can correct me if I'm wrong) Joe is alluding to Matthew's statement. "When we are unselfish and kind to others . . . a cup of cold water given in the name of a disciple is more valuable in God's sight than a cup of gold for selfish purposes (Gurnall)." Striving to help others can be selfish, if done for selfish purposes. However, true love is genuine concern for the other and is therefore unselfish. As Joe stated, these actions may often go unnoticed. Agape love is the motivation behind those actions. The question then becomes, what is our primary motivation? If we learn to live life questioning our motivations, then we will always find a positive and expected end.
In terms of selfishness I mean concerned with one's self. This could be a focus on one's own motives or one's own ends. I believe people ought not to be treated as a means to an ends or as ends in and of themselves. What that means is that if you create something you believe to be good but are deceptive and underhanded in doing so than you are immoral. Or if you use a procedurally just method, but create an end that harms people you are immoral in your action. Ken Lay was still immoral in that even though some benefits were reaped from his actions he also destroyed some people's lives. The basis for this is that individuals have rights claims against all other humans and at the same time have claims against them by all other humans. We all are at the same time rights holders and duty bearers in regards to people's rights. Therefore I argue that based on this principle to violate another persons rights SOLELY for selfish end is unjust and immoral.
IN regards to helping people because you enjoy it. It is fine to gain satisfaction from helping people, but the key here is that by helping them you are placing their interest above your own. In so far as you provide aid to them in order to benefit your own self-interest above their own then you are still immoral. In other words I believe you are immoral to help someone build a business solely because you think their business will contribute money to your political campaign. However, if you help them build their business for their own ends of being successful and providing for their needs, and you get the benefit of later political donations than great. The delineation occurs because in the former you will only help people that will benefit you and in helping people you are still prejuidicial and discriminatory (which is immoral), whereas in the latter you will help all people because the hierarchy of needs places their ends above your own.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home