- Religion and Philosophy»
- New Religions & Cults
Black is the New White Regarding Right and Wrong
Black is the New White - When is Wrong Right?
The Philosophy of Good and Evil
We see it in the tiny faces of infants when suddenly their expressions speak volumes of their feelings. Sudden loud noises they have never experienced before change a happy little smile to a flash of anger, followed by loud screams. This, perhaps, is the essence of innocence deviating into unknown, frightening territory that inexperience forces instantaneous judgments to take over. Humanity has always fluctuated between extremities of judgment of right and wrong, good and evil and darkness and light. Children's books of yore all portrayed right and wrong in a black or white light. How then did humanity arrive at the massive grey areas today?
The Desire for Sympathy
Right and wrong were fairly cut and dry in Neanderthal Man's day. Right was as simple as avoiding becoming a feast for T-Rex. Wrong was mixing it up in caves with an opponent seeking equal authority. Even Mrs. Neanderthal knew right from wrong. Hers was to stay center of battles between a mate and his enemies and to fit into the lifestyle of cave living.
As time passed, an odd thing happened. Humans stepped outside the caves. Dinosaurs disappeared and a whole new breed of carnivores emerged: plunderers and pillagers who not only knew right from wrong; but, much preferred wrong to right. This phase of humanity lived in the "Dark Ages" where under the cover of darkness whole villages could be burned and looted and its occupants turned into slaves. Right and wrong equaled superiority and subordination. The black of night was the preferred cover under which superior warriors could increase their power and might. Unwittingly, they created the need for civilization's first "victims." In victimhood, there is mass sympathy to be gleaned. In modern vernacular, everyone becomes a victim deserving of sympathy. Which came first? The victim or sympathy?
Legal Convolution of Right and Wrong
In basic terms, there are human rights, civil rights and in some countries of the world, Constitutional rights. How often are these rights convoluted by legal minds? When, precisely, did right and wrong suddenly become so pervasively open to interpretation by the great unwashed masses? The answer lies with how justice is viewed by the world's best legal minds. A mass murderer can extract sympathy for the injustice he perpetrated upon others by simplying tying his lack of bonding to parents or some other early childhood deprivation. Does this really change the blackness of the crime to a whiter light? Should it? These interpretive attitudes engender the need to express black as the new white. It can't be wrong if there's a reason? Like ripples in a stream, from the moment this philosophy of applied reasoning to that which is blatantly wrong, the ability to exonerate wrong and demonize right widens vastly.
I'm Not Okay - You're Not Okay
During the New Age Era of Enlightment, the mantra, "I'm okay. You're okay," opened a door to a phase that was to spawn an era that finds wrong can easily be "okay" so long as it has a basis in fact. Like the fall of dominoes in succession, absolution of wrong with little consequence has proven most difficult to reverse. Neutralizing accountability allows wrong to be viewed as a simple "mistake" no matter how adversely the world is affected. Wrongs are thrown out the window and are replaced by "mistakes" or "misjudgments" or even, "missspeaking" as applied to deliberate transformations of facts and truths.
Viewed under the microscope of right and wrong, the ripple effect of "mis" as opposed to "wrong" allows a greater avenue of continuance of behaviors that negatively affect society and civilization as a whole.
The greatest nations of the world know an all out nuclear war will never happen. They know their futility of an existence in a world demolished by radiation and chemicals. The lust for power and control is better accomplished by a world always at war, even when military logistics have gone hi-tech and are following a path to a Star Wars type battle for supremacy.
In contemporary vernacular, I'm NOT okay and You're Not Okay. International and domestic morale has sunk to new lows and a pervasive black pall hangs over those who instinctively sense discontent with disunity, division among fellow citizens and a general malaise of leadership to provide clear direction without personal interpretation. The end result of which is "WE" are NOT okay. We are, in fact, lunging toward a cliff into a deep well of misery and pain where no happiness, joy or peace can survive. How did this happen?
When Black and White No Longer Exist
It is highly probable that allowing a personal interpretation of law and justice has created an abominable level of destruction of black and white facts and intent. The Bible? It's up to your personal interpretation. The Constitution? Personal interpretation. Law? Personal interpretation. Justice? Personal Interpretation. Millions upon millions of individual interpretations. Not as dissimilar as being in a roomful of kindergarten students and throwing thirty different choices at them and then asking them to choose just one. Such diversity of interpretation not only neutralizes the original intent of these sources of guidance; but, creates a massive hodge podge of disunity in world civilizations.
Entitlement Philosophy on Steroids
There are those who deliberately contort the intent of laws and justice. If, for example, a law clearly states that no one may falsely yell "Fire!" in a movie theater, should an attitude of entitlement to break that law be considered right or reduced to "okay?"
Entitlement philosophy is a strange anomaly relegated primarily to egos far too bloated for simple reasoning or common courtesy and common decency to prevail. Societies born of such individualistic entitlements are heading in the same directions as the ancient, now extinct civilizations. Whether self-destruction is a natural emanation of humanity is debatable in light of continuous human survival since the dawn of man. Just as steroids often pump greater levels of muscle into athletes, so too does an entitlement philosophy pump massive ego into certain humans. For them, it is never, "WE" and only "I." This is the line in the sand that's the breaking point of unity. Entitlement philosophies include the delusionary autonomous power over others and a procedural platform that builds only ego and not a better world for future generations.
Teach Your Children Well
The basic parental concern of parents has always been to create a better world for our children. Does endless for profit war do that? Does constant division and greed do that? What subliminal message are our children receiving from interminable confrontations with violence and lawlessness? Worse, what subliminal message do children absorb from parents who consistently provide "Grey Area" guidance?
Oddly throughout world history, patience and tolerance for accepting wrong as a "grey area" has had the opposite effect on young people. Somewhere in DNA lies a truth that right and wrong must be as clear and without influence as black and white. When black is the new white and right is as muddled as wrong, how can youth know what path to take? We do ourselves know favors by soft selling right and wrong.
The most adversarial and contrarian among us may argue that "hard lines" scare children. So, do grey areas that teach such mass flexibility of laws and justice as to create a society lacking in the ability to maintain order without chaos. It is always ours to stabilize the direction our youth takes. Hard lines may seem harsh to those who prefer grey to black and white, right and wrong clarity.
Must we await deathbed confessions before adults learn that they can be failures and err without always being on the side of caution? Or, can we tighten our grip on reality to the extent that we can confess our errors and move on, secure in the knowledge we gave credence to the stark division between right and wrong?