The Alarm System
Johnson has one additional point to make regarding the management of polarities. He identifies the value inherent in setting up an alarm system as a safeguard against overshooting either side of the polarity. It would be prudent to build in an alarm system that warns us when we may be trying to maximize one side and are on the verge of triggering negative reactions. The alarm signal for those advocating personal rights might be a growing abuse of unregulated personal power. And infringement on the rights of those without power. How do we know if abuse and/or infringement are occurring?
The Alarms of Personal Rights: What is the metric for measuring abuse? This is not easily measured. We have the newspaper (and now Internet accounts) of this abuse, but these reports are inevitably biased and truth “isn’t what it used to be” (if it ever was). An imprecise measure is the number of lawsuits being enacted against those with wealth and power—and the percentage of these lawsuits that are settled in favor of the plaintiff (when compared to percentages when the defendant is not wealthy or powerful). There is also the more indirect measure centering on the actual taxes being paid by those at various economic levels. We might declare it abuse and infringement if the wealthy are paying much less in taxes than the middle class. If nothing else, an alarm should be ready-and-waiting if there are many accounts being offered from many different constituencies regarding abuse.
A somewhat easier and more creditable metric can be used when considering accumulation of individual wealth. One need only look at the income gap. If it is widening, then there is cause for concern. The term “accumulation” is particularly important here. It is not just a matter of income gap. It is also a matter of a very small number of people holding great wealth. The super-wealthy possess power as well as wealth. They signal the flaw in any consideration of personal rights as being a recipe for the “democratization” of wealth. When wealth is centralized, then power is centralized.
There is another signal which is most elusive and perhaps ultimately of greatest importance. The signal might be apparent at a deep, psychological level. There would be a growing sense of helplessness and hopelessness—resulting from (and contributing to) an isolationist stance regarding societal welfare. Do many members of a society lose any sense of caring for other members of their society. Is it inevitable that tribalism is afoot in the land when the rights perspective prevails? Do people lose their capacity (or motivation) to care about the welfare of those less fortunate than themselves if individual rights are emphasized? Is “trickle-down” economics nothing more than an occasional drip from the accumulated largess of those sitting in the corporate towers? How do we know that a decline regarding concern for other people is occurring? At some level we all “know” when inequity and indifference is abundant. Do we really need a financial signal or tangible signs of social discontent (such as demonstrations or increases in violent crime) to know that an exclusive focus on personal rights isn’t working? Does this shift in attitude need to be measurable?
The Alarms of Collective Responsibility: The alarm system for safeguards against collective responsibility run amuck is to be found, as I have already mentioned, in the abuse of overwhelming collective power (using assigned to the state) and infringement on the creativity and initiative of individual citizens. As in the case of the signals for those advocating personal rights, the responsibility signals are not easily measured and are often misunderstood or ignored. We can look at such inadequate measures as the number of new laws and regulations that have been passed during the past year restricting citizen behavior, as well as the number of patents being offered for new inventions. If the rules are growing and the patents are declining, then the alarm might be triggered.
Download Article 1K Club
