This subject comes up a lot for me, because I have to face a clash of the so called Catholic ethics, against the Protestant ethics every day, between
my early conditioned values and those of the environment I am currently in.
This does not limit the values and ethics to religious people- these terms are used by sociologists to refer to the ethical principles that were
established long ago by religion, but that stayed with the people long after the rest of the religious practice might be gone. In particular, these
terms are often used in contrasting the most common value systems of the USA (Protestant) and Europe (Catholic).
In our capitalist values, we find Protestantism- in which it was determined that having wealth (which is power) results from the blessing of God- it
is a sign of ones moral rightiousness. It means you worked hard, it means you were fair to others, it means you made the necessary sacrifices.
In the European Catholic based values, the wealthy powerful are looked upon with suspicion and assumed to be corrupt. If they have it, it had to be
come upon by unethical means- they cheated, they stole, or they were just born into a family which selfishly kept power trapped in their own circle.
Even if they didn't, they will , once they have it. A great danger is seen in power, and this is why many people will avoid it, -or hide it.
This was the mentality that threw Nietzsche into fits.
I, being an american, didn't even understand what his problem was as I had never come across this mentality before coming to France. But just
yesterday, I got into a long debate/argument with my husband concerning it.
I have a lot to say on this, and am trying to keep this short. But one thing I can say is that these two extreme views are self fulfilling, in
societies that believe them.
Here, the systems (economic, social...) grow from this premise and guarantee it. So many obstacles are put up to acheiving power, that it becomes
impossible to get there
without "cheating".
And yet, a society needs sources of power, (to have employees, you must have employers, for example) so some have to be "the corrupt" or "bad guys"
for the society to continue.
When I was forming my own business, I was told at the Chamber of Commerce - "You must understand, you are now one of the "bad guys" in this country.
You will have obstacles put up before you, you will be treated with disdain by many people- be prepared and know it."
On the other side, our systems makes it more possible for one to get ahead and be more powerful through moral and ethical means, and does have a way
of culling out those who don't along the way. It is created to do just that. We look with admiration and respect upon the successful and powerful.
Unfortunately we also look upon the less successful and the poor with disdain, and put up obstacles for them, assuming they are morally corrupt. We
have lost our recognition of the value of the employee to the society. A society made up only of bosses eventually makes them dependant upon whatever
other society they hire!
In my own personal view, however, I believe the truth might lie somewhere in between these extremes.
Everywhere, in everything, there are two opposing forces- call them Yin and Yang if you wish, but one draws us forward, one pushes us back. Between
the two, they create stability, or an experience in time and space we can appreciate. Go to fast it is a blur and you'll see nothing, go too slow and
you will begin to deteriorate before you've seen much at all.
Power comes with responsibility. I try to move forward and accept more power only according to the development of my capabilities to handle
responsibility- progressively.
In the long run, (longer than one lifetime) I think the universe just has a natural way of straightening things out. Those who had more power than
they could handle will fall (like Rome), those who limited too severely their power will be forced to suddenly stand one day and accept it. (then you
get your revolutions)
My complaint here, in the country where everyone limits their power in concern for being ethical, is that I find their real motivation is actually to
avoid responsibility. This pisses me off.
edit on 25-2-2013 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)
edit on 25-2-2013 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)