Skip to main content
On the Benefit of the Doubt, for Countries and Catholics

For the past 50 years I have given a pass to average citizens when it comes to the actions of their governments.  I will continue to do so for the citizens who live under monarchies or dictatorships, because they have extremely little voice in public policy, and dissent can be very dangerous, if not fatal.  However, citizens of democracies I now hold more accountable.

The events of the past two years have caused me to change my thinking.  During that time when the actions of the Trump campaign and administration were abhorrent, I first blamed them.  Then, gradually I began to give a considerable share of the blame to Republicans in Congress, who have allowed it.

But listening to the comparisons to the Nixon administration gave me additional insight, things I didn't remember or was unaware of dispite living through the Watergate era.  Namely, Republicans then did not act until the polls showed that the disapproval of their constituents threatened their reelection.  That puts the ultimate responsibility on the average citizens.  It's a little cynical to think that politicians will frequently only do the right thing when threatened by removal from office, but, on the other hand, that's exactly what representative democracy is about.

So, we, the people, might consider complaining a bit less, and demonstrating and voting a bit more.

Similarly, I would not hold Catholics accountable for the actions of their priest, bishops, cardinals, and popes in the past, but now I do.  Even though a church is certainly not a democracy, members are not compelled to support any church philosophically or monetarily.  They can vote with their feet and their pocketbooks, but seldom do.  Incidentally, there was reporting in Mother Jones magazine, I believe, of similar sexual abuse and cover-up among the Jehovah's Witnesses, and, I have heard, many other religious groups. 

I appreciate that organizations like Catholic Charities do wonderful work.  But many, many groups do wonderful work in many areas, but do not use that to justify allowing and covering up abuse.

Ultimately, we average citizens are at least partially accountable for ignoring or rationalizing horrid behavior.

- PeteBarkett.blogspot.com
09/02/18

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

John Henry and The Common Good

Well John Henry said to the captain "By   god I ain't no fool Before I die with a hammer in my hand I'm gonna get me a steam drill, too, lord, lord Get me a steam drill, too" - parody by the great Smothers Brothers They had the right idea.   Instead of millions of workers being put out of work by robots, workers should have ownership of the robots that replace them, which they then lease to the companies that they once worked for, giving them a wage, a stake in the success of the company, and the opportunity to do other work as well.   This would be not too dissimilar to the annual dividends that all Alaskans get from the energy companies, although there will need to be an alternative as we move away from fossil fuels.   This would all fall under the broad umbrella of taking care of the common good, a concept that we've too often replaced with individualism.   Entrepreneurial spirit is fine.   I had it when I ran a small business. ...
Post a Comment
Read more
The National Rifle Association-backed gun advocates claim that passing this law or that law wouldn't have prevented this mass shooting or that mass shooting.  It's a completely false argument.  It's like saying that passing this election reform law or that election reform law wouldn't have prevented Donald Trump or Mitch McConnell or Paul Ryan from being elected.  It may be true, but it would be a good start. - Pete Barkett   02/22/18
Post a Comment
Read more

Musings

  Right-To-Lifers Don’t Go Far Enough       I was pro-choice, but I’ve changed my mind.   The problem is not that the State should govern what a woman does with her body, the problem is that the State has not gone far enough.   The argument is that to protect the life of a fetus, the State must overrule a woman’s privacy and bodily autonomy and regulate her body for her.   Fine.   If we want the State to be in the business of protecting life through bodily regulation, then go all in.   Stick to the prime directive.   Protect all life.   The State should govern both men and women to protect life.   The State should tell any healthy person what to do with their body in order to protect life.   So, if someone needs a kidney, liver, or any organ transplant to save their life, the State should find someone and take whatever parts are needed to save that life.   If not, then we are allowing organ-icide.   (...
Post a Comment
Read more