It is said that
history repeats itself, but it is also known that history does not do so in the
exact same manner each time. Moreover, it is said that we should learn from
history before charting a course into the future to be certain that we'll be
taking the correct course. But the future is so filled with random events; we
can never plan for the unexpected with any kind of certainty. As to the
present, no one understands it well enough to be considered a living icon of
wisdom.
Well then, if we are
ignorant of past, present and future unfolding of events, can we be certain
that we have the ability to organize for and live the moral life? Maybe not.
But philosophers have lived among us who said we do not need that ability to be
a moral person. We only need to know that moral life can be attained by
resolving to treat others the way we want them to treat us. In fact, no matter
the formulation – and there have been several versions – that articulation is
referred to as the Golden Rule.
Well, it is easy for
a philosopher to speak in those terms when addressing individuals because each
of us is responsible for the self, expecting to reap the reward or the
punishment that may result from the decisions we take. But what about the
people who govern an institution or a nation? They are responsible for the
welfare of a multitude of people, and their mandate is to maximize the benefit
that accrues to all the constituents. Fair or not, these people are expected to
constantly seek to realize maximum benefit even if it should come at the
expense of the multitudes populating the other jurisdictions.
This is a problem.
To try resolving it, we must abandon the world of the abstract and enter the
world of the practical. Whereas morality that is practiced at the personal
level has a positive root in the sense that we feel good about ourselves when
we do a good deed, morality that is practiced at the institutional or
international levels has a negative root. In fact, institutions and nations
treat each other according to set rules – whether or not they were codified as
laws – to avoid retaliation by the other side. In other words, negative
morality is generated because the response is one of fear.
This brings us to an
interesting article that came under the title: “When sanctions work – and why
they fail,” written by Ralph Peters and published on March 24, 2017 in the New
York Post. The author discusses the situation with regard to three nations: North Korea , Iran
and Russia .
He says that America
applied sanctions against them with the result that some sanctions yielded the
desired effect but others did not.
Be that as it may,
the question that should be of interest to us is that of morality. Some people
will argue that positive morality is involved in this question because these
are evil regimes, and anything we do to curb their excesses should make us feel
good. No. This is a self-defeating argument because a judgment of the self is
always self-serving and always void. We can only be judged by a third party or
by history. Until this happens, institutions and nations are motivated to
respond in such a way as to maximize the benefit that may accrue to their
constituents, and minimize the damage that may result from a clash with another
jurisdiction.
This obligates us to
question the wisdom of those who pilot the American ship of state. Few people
if any will fault America
for taking on the role of policeman of the world in the aftermath of the Second
World War. But this tendency should have been quashed after Vietnam . It was
not. And the consequence has been that displaying America 's
military might nowadays elicits a response which says: We dare you to come and
get us, America !
It is what Afghanistan , Iran and North Korea have said.
The truth is that America no
longer gets the respect it used to get. In addition, logic and experience say
that the trend which started after Vietnam
will only grow till it reaches a point when those whom America has humiliated, will soon
have the means and the will to return the favor. What America is
doing – applying sanctions left and right – is dig its own grave. Its captains
will be hard pressed to show the wisdom in what they are doing.
Besides seeing
itself supreme militarily after defeating the forces of the Axis, America was
also ahead of the world economically and culturally. But the world economic map
has changed so dramatically that China
has set-up the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, an institution that
promises to do away with the World Bank and the IMF, heretofore dominated by America . And
the nations of the world – big and small – are flocking to it.
As to culture,
things have so deteriorated in America ;
it is no exaggeration to say that no one will take the American political or
educational systems even if they are paid.