← Back to the registerFOLIO 021 / 181 · 4 MIN READ
To be or not to be (Part 2) – Of Good being Bad
First published on the original blog ↗
In the first part of this article I discussed about how any system of governance will always have a mixture of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ use of the system. I have used the word good use and bad use in a figurative way. Good use is when the system is used for the larger good of the humanity and bad use naturally its opposite.
The relative proportion of good and bad in the society is determined primarily by the value system of the majority. The natural tendency of this mix is to gradually degenerate with the proportion of bad getting more and more; the bad drives out the good.
This is similar to the income distribution and its shift in a society. In a society however evenly distributed the wealth is to begin with, eventually the mix becomes skewed with smaller percentage of the society controlling larger part of wealth.
The question is not whether it will degenerate. But how long it will take! Some social shocks and scams may cause periodic correction of this degeneration and eventually the society/ civilization degenerates to its cyclical low. May be the cycle will start all over again.
One of the key contributors of this degeneration is the inaction by the good. As the proverb says; “the best thing that the bad can expect is the good to do nothing”
The greatest tragedy is that the people who want to use the system for their private agenda (let is refer to them loosely as the bad people) have some of the good traits that help them prosper and the people who want to use the system for the larger benefits of the society (let us refer to them as the good people) have some of the worst traits that weaken them. Let us take a deeper look at these qualities.
Co-operation
The bad people are generally too happy to co-operate with anybody so long as that co-operation brings them power or wealth or both.
The good people generally carry a chip of honesty on their shoulder that they seldom co-operate even with people with similar value system. They believe that their goodness is one step higher and they are ready dump and run if the other guy doesn’t play along exactly as he feels is right. In fact they almost make such renunciation a virtue.
Courage
The bad normally has the courage and with impunity cooks the account books /investigation/ assessment or any administrative process for their gain.
The good is often scared to take bold decision and hides behind rules and technicality. The obstructive bureaucracy is often a result of such cowardliness and not just self serving actions of the bad.
Power of Interpretation
The bad will interpret laws and technicality so long it meets its end or favors an ally.
The good often tries to interpret with limited appreciation of what it stands for; by the time they finish splitting the hair it fails to be achieve any good.
Sacrifice
The bad is capable of sacrifice for what it stands for. Sacrifice its principals, society, environment and much more.
Good will hold onto technical correctness, its pride and prejudice even at the cost of its ultimate benefit to the society
Loyalty
The bad often demands and commits substantial loyalty to its partners so long as such loyalty is rewarding. They are willing invest in this loyalty for quite some time.
The good often has little commitment to his partners if it feels that their goodness is not of the same type. They are willing to abandon and run and not pull together.
Risk taking
The bad is willing to take its risk, because they see potential reward in taking risk.
The good is often too risk averse. The potential reward for sticking the neck out could be some brickbats. With no upside benefit for self and downside uncertain and costly, the good normally avoid getting involved.
Now we ask the question “How good is good”. There is a saving in our tongue which translates to “the good often bears the fruits of the bad”
I do agree there are many ‘good’ who are as good as the ‘bad’ and it is through them that we have gained anything.
What we need to do to avoid/delay of decay of our society is to develop a willingness to learn the ‘good’ from the ‘bad’, stick together and support each other for what we stand and not be a utopian island of fruitless good.
Willingness to co-operate, to take risks, to take a position, to believe in the intention of the fellow good, not to be cowed down by oppositions and mild differences in styles and not to run away to our comfort zones is what is needed today.
The relative proportion of good and bad in the society is determined primarily by the value system of the majority. The natural tendency of this mix is to gradually degenerate with the proportion of bad getting more and more; the bad drives out the good.
This is similar to the income distribution and its shift in a society. In a society however evenly distributed the wealth is to begin with, eventually the mix becomes skewed with smaller percentage of the society controlling larger part of wealth.
The question is not whether it will degenerate. But how long it will take! Some social shocks and scams may cause periodic correction of this degeneration and eventually the society/ civilization degenerates to its cyclical low. May be the cycle will start all over again.
One of the key contributors of this degeneration is the inaction by the good. As the proverb says; “the best thing that the bad can expect is the good to do nothing”
The greatest tragedy is that the people who want to use the system for their private agenda (let is refer to them loosely as the bad people) have some of the good traits that help them prosper and the people who want to use the system for the larger benefits of the society (let us refer to them as the good people) have some of the worst traits that weaken them. Let us take a deeper look at these qualities.
Co-operation
The bad people are generally too happy to co-operate with anybody so long as that co-operation brings them power or wealth or both.
The good people generally carry a chip of honesty on their shoulder that they seldom co-operate even with people with similar value system. They believe that their goodness is one step higher and they are ready dump and run if the other guy doesn’t play along exactly as he feels is right. In fact they almost make such renunciation a virtue.
Courage
The bad normally has the courage and with impunity cooks the account books /investigation/ assessment or any administrative process for their gain.
The good is often scared to take bold decision and hides behind rules and technicality. The obstructive bureaucracy is often a result of such cowardliness and not just self serving actions of the bad.
Power of Interpretation
The bad will interpret laws and technicality so long it meets its end or favors an ally.
The good often tries to interpret with limited appreciation of what it stands for; by the time they finish splitting the hair it fails to be achieve any good.
Sacrifice
The bad is capable of sacrifice for what it stands for. Sacrifice its principals, society, environment and much more.
Good will hold onto technical correctness, its pride and prejudice even at the cost of its ultimate benefit to the society
Loyalty
The bad often demands and commits substantial loyalty to its partners so long as such loyalty is rewarding. They are willing invest in this loyalty for quite some time.
The good often has little commitment to his partners if it feels that their goodness is not of the same type. They are willing to abandon and run and not pull together.
Risk taking
The bad is willing to take its risk, because they see potential reward in taking risk.
The good is often too risk averse. The potential reward for sticking the neck out could be some brickbats. With no upside benefit for self and downside uncertain and costly, the good normally avoid getting involved.
Now we ask the question “How good is good”. There is a saving in our tongue which translates to “the good often bears the fruits of the bad”
I do agree there are many ‘good’ who are as good as the ‘bad’ and it is through them that we have gained anything.
What we need to do to avoid/delay of decay of our society is to develop a willingness to learn the ‘good’ from the ‘bad’, stick together and support each other for what we stand and not be a utopian island of fruitless good.
Willingness to co-operate, to take risks, to take a position, to believe in the intention of the fellow good, not to be cowed down by oppositions and mild differences in styles and not to run away to our comfort zones is what is needed today.