Author Topic: The concept of "corruption"  (Read 786 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Synaptic Road

  • Jr. Member
  • Species: A duality: all and none!
  • You see all you know, but don't know all you see!
  • **
  • Male
  • Posts: 57
The concept of "corruption"
« on: June 20, 2015, 11:13:03 am »
This was initially going to be a comment for this thread, but I think it actually belongs here.  The idea of "corruption" is something I've pondered a lot, and though everyone will have their own perception of the concept, I tend to take a more holistic and all-encompassing view about...everything, really.

This is a copy/paste of my comment, in the context of the shooting at the church in Charleston, SC.

Something I've seen a lot of - not just in America, but worldwide - is how far too many people are content to point fingers and blame each other for anything and everything that goes wrong.  I see this a lot on the Internet (social media, anyone?), and though it's easy for anyone to make the argument that "you can't gauge a person's intentions through their text on the Internet," uh...I'm sorry, but I actually can because of how I can connect with the living world on an empathic level.

I've caught quite a few people on the Internet off-guard because of how accurately I can pinpoint their emotional and mental states through their text-based communication alone.  I can also see when people's emotions change, and in some cases can even nail the cause of that change.

The reason this is relevant to the topic is because the Internet is the one place where people express themselves most freely; regarding shootings like this, people aren't shy of expressing themselves - their feelings and perspectives - about it.  A lot of what I see is the perpetuation of negativity - people responding to negative circumstances with the "negative aspects of the human psyche."  It's easy to harbor feelings of hatred, wrath, animosity, disdain, discontent, bitterness, and other negative aspects of the human psyche toward people who, for example, shoot and kill nine people in a church, and I'd be lying if I said "I don't understand why people would feel that way."  Reading that article upset me, as well, and I'm actually an atheist - it's because I care about others that what Dylann Roof did pisses me off.  For me, it doesn't matter what theistic faith (or lack thereof) any of the victims had - from my perspective, this was an act by "someone who is no more or less human that I" taking the lives of "others who are no more or less human than I."

Yet, what is it that drives people to commit these kinds of acts?  I've seen a lot of opinions, and many of them are well-thought out, but I've never seen anyone address "the blindness in much of humanity."  What I've seen in many people, both online and offline, is how they're veiled by the negative aspects of the human psyche - arrogance, greed, spite, hatred, animosity, apathy, ignorance, intolerance, misanthropy, wrath, vengeance, disdain, discontent, and bitterness, to name a few.  These are things all humans have the capacity to feel - I just said that Roof's horrendous act pisses me off, and I've seen much of these same aspects in the rest of your comments here.  On their own, those negative aspects are not an issue and are in fact part of being "human."

The problem is when people are blinded by them, to where their actions, words, perspectives, and honestly, every aspect of their being carry that negative taint; the term for this is "corruption" - something that's taken many more people than just the US Government.  Right now, I'm thinking about all the bitter Americans who are calling for a "revolution" and advocating violence and bloodshed as a means to "take back the country" - yeah, I understand that things are actually pretty cruddy here, but that "revolution" would just perpetuate all that "cruddiness."

So, Roof had said this as his reasoning: "'You've raped our women, and you are taking over the country ... I have to do what I have to do."

Yeah, I have plenty of black friends who aren't going around "raping women" or trying to "take over the country."  Obama may be our president and black, but do his screw-ups speak for all black people?  Nooooooo, I don't think so - hell, I've seen black people objecting to some of the things Obama's doing, too.

Roof had fallen to the negative aspects of the human psyche - he was corrupted by them.

I'm going to expand the scope of this topic, though: I've seen this corruption in various hate groups, like the neo-Nazi groups here in US - some of whom are right here in the Northwest US - and the Westboro Baptist Radicals.  I've seen it in PETA and a lot of other activism/advocacy groups; I've seen it in a lot of the legislation being passed lately, as well as in a lot of people's reactions to said legislation; I've seen it in a number law enforcement endeavors and judicial procedures; I've seen it in practically every aspect of American society.  It's also the drive for terrorist groups, such as the Islamic State, and the reason I see our governments's "war against terror" as an overall perpetuation of negativity.  Disagreements are going to happen within humanity - that's just how it is for us...but what else drives people to warfare and to terrorism than falling to "corruption" by the negative aspects of the human psyche?

The reason things aren't actually "getting better" in the world is because a lot of humanity is perpetuating negativity with more negativity.  It's certainly much easier said than done, but the only way to bring a positive change is to answer negative circumstances in a  positive manner...but here's the thing: just as one can be blinded by darkness, so too can one be blinded by light.  If everyone "blinds" themselves with the positive aspects of the human psyche, things won't really be any better, as people would technically still be "corrupted."  In fact, that "blinding light" scenario has happened a number of times in humanity's history.

This part is a subjective statement, but...honestly, I gravitate toward the "light" side.  However, I have a "dark side," just as any human does.  Seeing all of this stuff going on in the world has been my incentive to assume control of both sides of my own duality to avoid corruption.  This means that although I'm a kind person by nature, I won't allow people to take advantage of my kindness - more than once, I've effectively told people to "get the hell out" because they tried to exploit it, or believe that they could otherwise walk all over me.

Something I've come to realize is that every human has a duality of light and darkness - it's a balance, but it's different for each and every individual human.  In order to understand one's duality, one must examine not the "light and dark sides," but their personal "scale" and how it's rigged - something that takes a lot of introspection, as well as hard lessons.  Some people's scales are rigged in favor of the "dark" side, but that doesn't automatically make them like Dylann Roof.  I've seen a lot of people who no longer see the "light" side of things, and as much as I wish I could help them...I really can't.  They are the only ones who can manage their individual scales, and I believe that's as it should be.  Everyone here on Furtopia has their own scale, and although some of you may or may not have come to understand how your scales are rigged, the truth is that each of you have the duality of both light and darkness - something that comes as a part of "humanity."

Yet, at the same time, some of you may understand things as I do, but in your own individual ways.  Some of you may have already found your own unique way to keep yourselves from falling to "corruption."  From what I've seen, every human has the potential to be a "corrupt individual," but at the same time, every human has the capacity to prevent corruption from taking hold...something Dylann Roof, as well as many other people in America and the world in general, could not.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2015, 12:15:48 pm by Synaptic Road »

Offline Old Rabbit

  • Species: Rabbit Artist
  • Offical Birthday Wisher.
  • *
  • Male
  • Posts: 14409
    • Art by Oldrabbit
Re: The concept of "corruption"
« Reply #1 on: June 23, 2015, 09:58:19 am »
I have read that even the most caring person can become cruel and uncaring under the right kind of
influence. There are some who just don't have any feelings for others. Good or bad. If you convince
someone like that to think that killing or hurting is a good thing they will have no problem killing people
in a church. school, theater or where ever it's handy.

During wartime some people were trained to get information from captured spys and or
soldiers.  In the process of treating others with torture, even mild torture they can loose
their humanity so to speak. They can grow to think what they are doing is a good thing. They
become a weopon of the state or whoever controls them.

The human mind can become accustomed to things, even bad things under certain conditions.
I am sure those working at a slauterhouse found it a little hard at first, but after a few
months they probably don't give it a second thought. They may even grow to enjoy it.

Some people never would accept doing harsh things and likely become sick even if they tried.
But many can adjust easier than we might think.

We have to be careful listening to those who have extreeme ideas. The people who wish to
rid the country of those they consider undesirable know how to influence people, some can
fall under their spell especially if they feel unwanted or stepped on by society.

I have always felt that someone who is cruel to animals has the potential to do the same to
his fellows, and should seek therapy. That's just my opinion though.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2015, 10:14:35 am by Old Rabbit »
oldrabbit.com
Avatar drawn by me.

Offline Synaptic Road

  • Jr. Member
  • Species: A duality: all and none!
  • You see all you know, but don't know all you see!
  • **
  • Male
  • Posts: 57
Re: The concept of "corruption"
« Reply #2 on: June 25, 2015, 12:48:58 am »
Your comment actually makes me think of a placebo effect, and for many of the people you refer to, the placebo is self-induced.  People come to believe in the good of doing something that is in fact very detrimental, both for themselves and others.  However, the reverse happens as well.  Placebos are most often associated with the medical field, but in truth, a placebo can involve anything at all.  However...

Quote from: Old Rabbit
We have to be careful listening to those who have extreeme ideas. The people who wish to
rid the country of those they consider undesirable know how to influence people, some can
fall under their spell especially if they feel unwanted or stepped on by society.

This part of your comment stands out most to me, as I've seen this for myself.  The hard truth about society (speaking specifically about American society in this instance because I don't have enough experience with societies in other countries to be able to talk about them this way), is that there are a lot of people who are "unwanted" or "stepped on" by the society in this country - a society that effectively works to quash individuality through various means.  There are countless shallow stereotypes and pre-ordained roles, and those who don't conform to them for whatever reason are the ones who are considered "social deviants" - something that carries a very negative connotation.  Not all of those who are oppressed by society take the path Dylann did, but the effects of that oppression are noticeable even so...at least to me.  I have many friends who struggle with this "social oppression," but what bothers me most about that is how their suffering is overlooked, disregarded, or even made light of by many in society...even their own families in some cases.

However, something about "society" is that it's not the root cause of all these negative circumstances, despite what many people like to believe.  On its own, "society" is just a conglomeration of innumerable ideas, lifestyles, laws, standards, customs, and so on, and is neither "good" nor "bad."  People constantly address various issues in "society" (and a lot of that is nothing more than incessant complaining), but what I've noticed is that nearly everyone is looking in the wrong place for the root cause, and therefore the solution as well.  Instead, people are content to point fingers left and right without any consideration that they themselves might possibly be at fault for anything.  Social media is a great place to observe people this way, and though I've decided to drop it permanently, it's still invaluable for observing my fellow humans on a more empathic level.  Considering that the Internet is the one place much of humanity expresses themselves most freely, well...let's just say that my observation has, overall, been pretty grim.

Something to think about is this: who is responsible for conceiving the idea of a "society" in the first place?  Who is responsible for establishing and perpetuating various ideas, laws, policies, taboos, and so on as "standard," and who is responsible for reacting to said "standards?"  Who is responsible for making contributions to "society" be they positive or negative, and who is responsible for the overall state of society?  The answer is the same all throughout: humanity - and contrary to what many humans now believe, it's not just "those in power" who dictate what happens with "society."  From the topmost levels of the government to the absolute bottom rungs, all members of society contribute, whether they realize it or not.  There are exceptions, of course, but what I've seen is that far too many people are making a very negative contribution to society, and in many cases they don't even realize it or truthfully believe that they are making a "positive" contribution, as Dylann did.

This country is the "United States of America" in name only - the states may be united, but the American population is actually horribly fragmented; there are huge divides between various "categories" of people, but the truth is that those rifts shouldn't even exist in the first place because of the common ground called "humanity."

One thing that was brought up in that topic was "gun control."  You can ban all the guns you want, but that isn't the main issue in a lot of gunshot murder cases.  The gun itself is harmless until it's in the hands of someone who uses it as a method to harm others, and though accidents can happen, the importance of understanding how easily one can kill another human with a gun should be foremost in any type of firearms training, self-taught or not.  If you're around other people and you're screwing around with a gun, you're liable to kill someone with your irresponsibility; though the danger level might be lower if you're using, say...a skateboard, a metal pole, a rock, or a number of other objects, people who seek to harm others for whatever reason can and will find a way to do so, even without guns.

"Guns don't kill people - people kill people," as they say, but no matter what object you substitute in place of a "gun," the truth that "people kill people" remains unchanged.  Hell, people can kill each other with their bare hands, so taking away people's guns wouldn't really make a difference in the end.

Speaking only for myself, I'd rather not kill anyone...but at the same time, if I, for example, happen to be present when someone pulls a gun on a crowd of random passersby and is without question intending to fire on them, I would take the offender's life if it meant protecting the lives of the innocents.  This is something I would only do if the offender is far beyond the deep end and would make subsequent attempts to kill innocents if they had the opportunity; if someone is just "really pissed off" and attempting murder as a means to vent, then I'd prefer to incapacitate them and let police handle the rest, because look down on "overkill."

Offline Old Rabbit

  • Species: Rabbit Artist
  • Offical Birthday Wisher.
  • *
  • Male
  • Posts: 14409
    • Art by Oldrabbit
Re: The concept of "corruption"
« Reply #3 on: June 25, 2015, 09:56:46 am »
"Society" We call the association of a group of individuals one. Even animals and insects
have them. Down through history various people have tried to create them for better or
worse. Unfortuantly some have made them for their own benifit. I imagine in most cases
they accually believed they were doing it for some common good.

The trouble I see with society is the individual themself. We are not perfect, even animals who
operate mostly on instinct arn't perfect either. In the animal or insect world the non conformist
is expelled or killed. We usually don't go quite that far with those in our society but those who deviate
from the rules can cause it to break it down if they arn't delt with. Every one is responsible to make
a good society. Those who don't contribute can be just as bad as those who break the rules. Politicians
create laws and rules based on the needs of society. If we don't vote they have to make assumptions
on what we need or want. This leaves them open to influence by others who may not have the
common good in mind.

I feel education of the masses is very important for society to have any chance to work. The ignorant
man is likely to run on emotion, and can cause more distruction than good to himself or others.
Society can't work by accident, it needs planning, and crafting with educated people.

Many people are looking ror some kind of an Utopia. The problem is the needs of the many often
out weigh the needs of the few. So there will always be conflict somewhere. This leads to violence.
Of course the leaders could always give everyone a lobotomy. But who wants to be a machine without
imagination or inspiration. I fear there will never be a true utopia as we would likely not want one with
everyone being like zombies.

The problem with guns over other weopons is the fact it can kill with ease. The holder can by accident
fire it. Even an animal could accidently trigger one. I heard on the news that a womans baby accidently
triggered a gun that was in her purse that killed the woman. So just owning and handling them should
require much training. An explosive device is about the only equivalent weopon. Put someone with hate
in their heart or mentally deficient with a gun, and you have problems. We should at least have good
background checks, and training. At least it might reduce some gun related deaths.

To kill there are dozens of ways, so if someone really wants to kill someone they don't need a gun. Even
to do it anonymously.
 

« Last Edit: June 25, 2015, 10:03:30 am by Old Rabbit »
oldrabbit.com
Avatar drawn by me.

Offline Synaptic Road

  • Jr. Member
  • Species: A duality: all and none!
  • You see all you know, but don't know all you see!
  • **
  • Male
  • Posts: 57
Re: The concept of "corruption"
« Reply #4 on: June 25, 2015, 10:18:50 pm »
Quote from: Old Rabbit
The trouble I see with society is the individual themself. We are not perfect, even animals who
operate mostly on instinct arn't perfect either. In the animal or insect world the non conformist
is expelled or killed. We usually don't go quite that far with those in our society but those who deviate
from the rules can cause it to break it down if they arn't delt with. Every one is responsible to make
a good society. Those who don't contribute can be just as bad as those who break the rules. Politicians
create laws and rules based on the needs of society. If we don't vote they have to make assumptions
on what we need or want. This leaves them open to influence by others who may not have the
common good in mind.[/]

I can certainly agree with the truth of "imperfection" - it's something I make a part of my own strength, in fact.  Relevant to what you said about the "individual being the trouble with society from your perspective," there are too many people who held the delusional belief that they're "perfect," when in truth, "perfection" is illusory and unattainable.  That delusion in turn bars the individuals in question from self-awareness and self-improvement, and many of them fall to a level where, for example, you wouldn't want them to be holding a gun.  Though it's true that politicians are the ones in charge of legislation and policy-making, a lot of the recent legislation, as I said before, is being made in favor of certain "categories" of people in society while denying other "categories" then same benefits.  This has led to some incredibly uneven ground all throughout American society, and to the "fragmented" population.  It's allowed corruption to become horribly pervasive and widespread here - many politicians are making their corruption apparent through their legislation.  This is the reason I do understand the purpose of "voting," but do not vote myself - mind you, it's not because I "don't care," but because hold dear the importance of "getting off one's butt, going out and making a positive impact."  I used to whine a lot about things that go on in America, but was never inclined to act on all that whining; I'd by lying if I said "I never have times when I need to vent," but not only have I been able to tone that down a LOT, I've also been taking the initiative in practically every instance - this involves turning negativity into something positive for myself and others, which is a core aspect of my own lifestyle choice.

Put simply, I don't "vote" for politicians to pass laws to make a better change; instead, I take the "if you want something done right, you gotta do it yourself" route; volunteer work, random acts of kindness, and a respect for the world and all things that share it with me are a few aspects of my way.  The conduct of many politicians and other "higher-ups" in American society bothers me so much that I make it part of my drive to do things my way, for the sake of making a positive impact.  When you leave all the decision-making to politicians, you effectively give them nigh-absolute power.  A lot of other people are upset at the abuse of power going on, but I've seen mostly negative responses, like protesting, rioting, talks of radical anarchy, violent revolutions, and so on.

I can understand those responses, because a lot of what's going on here upsets me, too...but when you answer negativity with more negativity, it only serves to perpetuate said negativity.

Quote
I feel education of the masses is very important for society to have any chance to work. The ignorant
man is likely to run on emotion, and can cause more distruction than good to himself or others.
Society can't work by accident, it needs planning, and crafting with educated people.

Education is important, but of perhaps greater importance is the understanding that everyone has a method of learning that's uniquely effective for them - something that is not well-respected in the American education system.  For some people, a "standard academic pursuit" is just fine; for others, like me, being stuck in a standardized learning environment with practically no room for negotiation is one of the absolute worst ways to learn.  I have quite a few underage friends (and "age' is another thing people are judged shallowly for in this society), and they actually suffer from being stuck in school; this is exacerbated by apathetic faculty and students alike - people who in the end make school absolute torture for a number of people.  I've suffered this, as well, and from what my friends have told me and what I've observed in people talking about "school" it really hasn't gotten any better.

Yes, education is important, but if in the process of educating people you're quashing their individuality, "indoctrinating" them on "how things are and should be" while punishing them for questioning, thinking outside the box, or simply taking a different approach or perspective, and making them loathe school with a  passion - as many of my friends and others I've talked to do - you're not exactly "educating" them, are you?  This is actually part of the reason for "society" being in such a dysfunctional and dilapidated state now, and also the reason many people are voting, but things aren't exactly getting "better."  People are often voting without very little understanding of their respective candidate, and without really thinking.

Quote
Many people are looking ror some kind of an Utopia. The problem is the needs of the many often
out weigh the needs of the few. So there will always be conflict somewhere. This leads to violence.
Of course the leaders could always give everyone a lobotomy. But who wants to be a machine without
imagination or inspiration. I fear there will never be a true utopia as we would likely not want one with
everyone being like zombies.

The idea of "absolute world peace" is impossible unless you either make all humans into zombified machines or "make everyone the same individual."  Either way, you effectively destroy the common ground called "humanity" because a fundamental part of humanity is individuality; as per "individuality," humans will always have disagreements with each other - no getting around that.  The problem I see is that there's practically no foundation of "individual respect" in humanity at this point.  From my perspective, a "utopia" would be where each and every human retains their individuality, but without disrespecting each other's individuality or their own.  Arguments would still happen, but they'd never degenerate into riots or all-out war because instead of trying to control others, each human would take the route of self-control.  Instead of setting their differences aside, people would put their heads and their individual differences together to the sake of "the world and all things that share it with humanity."

This utopia wouldn't be maintained by "absolute peace," but "harmonious coexistence."

Quote
The problem with guns over other weopons is the fact it can kill with ease. The holder can by accident
fire it. Even an animal could accidently trigger one. I heard on the news that a womans baby accidently
triggered a gun that was in her purse that killed the woman. So just owning and handling them should
require much training. An explosive device is about the only equivalent weopon. Put someone with hate
in their heart or mentally deficient with a gun, and you have problems. We should at least have good
background checks, and training. At least it might reduce some gun related deaths.

This is why gun laws are strict, but again...it all depends on who's holding the gun.  Unfortunately, "training" is just one of many facets in the issue - there's also the fact that individuals can receive a gun from another individual who is willing to teach them, but is unaware of their malicious intent.  It could be as simple as "a father giving his son or daughter" a gun.  Police training involves firearms training, and...well, I'm sure you've heard plenty about "police violence in America."  Sadly, there are police officers who are in complete control over their actions and have a lot of integrity, yet still suffer the "law enforcement stigma," but that's a different topic.  Also, much of the reason for opposition to a ban on guns is that people feel the need to protect themselves, but as you've said, it's very easy for someone to kill an unarmed offender in "self-defense" - when people are scared or their adrenaline is pumping, it's easier to lose control and kill someone needlessly.

If "training" was the only thing people needed, I think we'd have resolved the fight for gun control (and drastically reduced or even altogether eliminated) long ago.