Society in Silent Chaos

Do we care about which laws are passed and how our taxes are spent if we don’t really expect to follow the laws or pay the taxes? Today, there is an under-the-table kind of debate going on in our society: Should we allow non-violent criminals to go unpunished and enforce only “serious” laws or should we enforce the laws as written even if the jails are expensive and recidivism is rampant? Should we enforce immigration laws when millions of illegal/undocumented immigrants are living and working in our neighborhoods? Should we enforce drug laws when 70% of local inmates are in jail for marijuana possession or distribution, and most people don’t think pot is that as bad as alcohol? Should we respect law enforcement when we see a steady stream of stories about corrupt law enforcers?

The media presents a story to its public that goes like this: Leaders and police are not to be trusted; marijuana is not so bad but tobacco cigarettes are evil; illegal immigrants should be given compassion, not a one-way ticket home; and lastly, we should not cut any “essentially helpful” government program, regardless of how ineffective it may be or how much tax money is taken from the rich people to pay for it.

Looking at just these three issues, one might justify an argument that concludes a future collapse of the United States. The United States, it’s Constitution, and its success was based on several ideal premises. It is a “republic” form of government, meaning that people elect other people to represent them to enact and enforce laws. There were ideals put forth by the founders that has strengthened our nation. People were assumed to possess inalienable rights, such as life, liberty (autonomy), and the pursuit of happiness. People were assumed to have equal rights under the law.

People were assumed to be self-sufficient but could not fend off an invading country or be at the voting table making laws when there were crops to tend to. Therefore a government infrastructure must be there to protect people and taxes must be paid to establish an infrastructure for roads, schools, hospitals, etc. Today, many people do not follow nor respect the laws. Stand on any street long enough and you’ll see cars speeding, people littering, pot smoke wafting in the air, and jaywalking.

Personal responsibility is considered a joke. Today, it is typical for a sports-championship city to get trashed by revelers who destroy cars, throw bricks through windows, and burn police vehicles. Today, many people do not pay any taxes to pay for governmental infrastructure programs, yet we expect these people to care about taxes imposed.

Today, people do not consider autonomy as important as they do personal safety, and consider the term “freedom” a codeword for allowing the rich to abuse the poor. The important decisions, such as defense of our borders or foreign wars, are assumed to be made by others. The trivial decisions, like personal appearance or television shows watched, are considered important protected rights. Personal responsibility, as before, is considered someone else’s issue.

Today, people expect free public services, such as education, hospitalization, legal defense, and decent wages. Yet those services are not held accountable for their success, tend to be wasteful and inefficient, and are not free (someone is paying for these unproductive services).

If a society gives everyone the same opportunities, of course the strong and the smart will tend to rise to the top and become the movers and shakers, the land-owners and leaders. But we all know that not everyone starts from the same socio-economic status in society. Some people start life already rich, with parents who already have great educations and jobs. These children will become the leaders of tomorrow. It seems awfully unfair.

The deck is already stacked against most people, some more than others. A 20th-century philosopher named John Rawls proposed a kind of lottery where people draw lots and are randomly assigned stations in life – mayor, garbage collector, rich, poor. He concluded that our station in life determines to a great extent our future success. But what about the grandparents who saved, worked three jobs, and sent their children to college versus the ones who sat around watching reality shows all day?

The children of hard-working, sacrificing people grow up to be successful and established in the elite positions of society and their children will be raised in privileged households. They will go to music and dance classes, golf weekends, robotics and NASA camps.

How can a child from a poor background, with alcoholic or drug-addicted parents, expect to succeed against these other children? There is a way but it will take a complete effort and possibly several generations. Very few people born with “silver spoons” in their mouths become people of great character – unless their parents taught them some of life’s hard lessons.

Studies show that some people succeed regardless their background circumstances. In Transpersonal Psychology, we studied “self-actualizing” people. In other words, people who seemed to transcend themselves, people who seemed to be the happiest and seemed to be more satisfied with their lives than others. They tended to focus on the effort, not the outcome. They set goals then focused on the present moment, doing the best they can, not wishing they were somewhere else, and never regretting their past choices because they knew that they did they best they could at the time. The only choices they regretted were those where they did not think to choose and just blindly did something.

Self-actualizing people think beyond themselves to their entire sphere of influence. They are open-minded but make sound decisions; they learn about diverse topics but develop foundations to stand on; they take calculated risks but accept the inevitable setbacks. They are disciplined but not dogmatic. Why am I mentioning these people? Because when it comes to raising children or developing a society, we should be conscious of how our politics and the media are shaping people. Are we encouraging people to make tough decisions or do we expect others to make tough decisions for us?

Do we expect to be held accountable for our choices or do we expect a pass whenever we make a bad decision so we don’t really think much about it? Whenever a percent of the funding for a governmental program is cut, there is an outcry from the public. “Education cuts? You are hurting our children!” “Medicaid cuts? You are hurting the poor!” “Social Security cuts? You are hurting the elderly!” Yet each of these governmental programs has been thoroughly analyzed and determined to be bloated, inefficient, and generally unsustainable.

How are we so idiotic that we stick our heads in the sand rather than propose serious changes? People exclaim, simplistically, “But we need to educate the children!” “We need to care for the poor!” “We need to care for the elderly who have put into the system all their lives!”

OF COURSE we need to do these things – but do we need to manage them so badly? Because that is what we are doing. These programs are terribly managed and heading for a fall off a steep cliff yet all we do is blame each other, wring our hands, and pass the buck. Big ideas, hard choices, and media responsibility must be part of the equation to save our society.