The last five years has seen an increasing global trend on what I can only describe as a near-complete breakdown of civility and respectable behavior. Sure, I am an old man but I have seen and lived through much more than half a century of human behavior and it is different this time.
“We can agree to disagree.” Ok, that is a silly idea in the beginning and is something that I would only say as I am getting ready to push the big red button that will launch the nuclear-weaponed missiles. However, within a society—or neighborhood as the case may be—there has to be a strong element of “go along to get along.” Otherwise, everyone burns. But we have also seen that many people do not care as long as their viewpoint comes out on top regardless of the collateral damage. This is exceedingly dangerous.
Also exceedingly dangerous is the person or group that has nothing to lose. The political opposition in nations around the globe both advanced and “basket-case” has become exceedingly comfortable using the vilest language and the strongest possible political obstructionism to gain their ends.
The American political left is outraged and having fainting spells at the “F*** Joe Biden” (now “Let’s Go Brandon”) being chanted at sporting events and rallies around the country. Yet in 2018 they cheered with a standing ovation and newspaper editorials calling actor Robert de Niro “brave and honest” when he said “I’m gonna say one thing. F*** Trump” at the internationally televised broadcast of the Tony Awards.
In my opinion there is nothing wrong with either thought as along as you are willing to go all the way to completely destroy your political opponents. That might bring up images of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, the Korean Kims, and Pol Pot. But then again, if you are not willing to kill at least a few hundred thousand if not millions, are you genuinely committed to a particular political view?
The problem is that once you eliminate any respect for your “opponent,” going scorched earth is the only sensible tactic to gain the strategic goal of “winning.”
But it is not just people vs people. Is it not “scorched earth” when governments are willing to withhold basic financial safety nets for the poorer economic groups to force vaccinations? Is it “civilized” for the government to seize a person’s property to pay a fine for not wearing a mask? But it is for the public welfare, right?
In 2013 then-Senator Chiz Escudero said this: “The cedula was first implemented as a 19th century tax reform in the Philippines during the Spanish rule.” “Tax reform” is certainly for the public good and welfare. President Diosdado Macapagal said in a speech in 1962 echoing Andres Bonifacio, “The piece of paper that Bonifacio tore to pieces was not just an ordinary document. It was a cedula, which symbolized the chain that shackled Filipinos to a life of subjection.”
Here is the thing though. As we have allowed more and more “subjection” by governments in the name of the “public good,” the more bitter and acrimonious has become the fight for who controls the government. Iconic 18th-century English jurist and judge Sir William Blackstone wrote, “The public good is in nothing more essentially interested, than in the protection of every individual’s private rights.” Note, “individual’s” rights; not collective rights.
Everyone has a sensible and worthy argument on both sides of most issues. But in general, I fear the situation is going to get worse before it gets at all better.
E-mail me at mangun@gmail.com. Follow me on Twitter @mangunonmarkets. PSE stock-market information and technical analysis provided by AAA Southeast Equities Inc.