Our Linear Society—the Road to Slavery
Our society is progressing (actually deteriorating) towards a completely linear structure. By linear I mean single dimensioned, or all the same. Cars produced on an assembly line receive equal treatment, they are all the same; an imperfection created in one is created in all until the manufacturing error is found. Quality control in the manufacture of automobiles uses a linear approach; all cars of a given model are made the same way.
The linear approach in Western society (which has been promulgated by its ignorance of gender) affects disciplinary measures in organizations, worker conduct, medical practices, criminal justice, and the general conduct of affairs in society. Judgment has been removed. We are all the same (another erroneous concept produced by gender ignorance); therefore, we must all be treated the same.
For the purpose of illustration of this article I will use two examples of the linear approach that are in common usage and are not only not challenged, but are considered examples of fairness. They are the “first come first serve practice” and the “let the punishment fit the crime standard.” Who can challenge those approaches to fairness?
I can, and that is why I am writing this essay.
Let’s take a look at the “first come first serve” practice. I went to an optometry shop because a hinge on one of the temples of my eye glasses needed tightening. When I went to the service person at the store, she informed me that one person was ahead of me, and that it would take an hour to resolve her issue, and then I would be taken care of. Fortunately for me her supervisor whispered to her to fix my glasses. The time of the entire procedure took as long as her walking over to get the screwdriver and tighten the hinge as she was walking back to me. It took less than 60 seconds. The person waiting for an hour was not inconvenienced in any way. The service person’s comment to me as I left was, “the only reason I did this is because my supervisor told me to.” She had no conceptual understanding as to why treating me while the other person was waiting was fair and constituted good customer service. She was already conditioned to not be able to make judgments
Another experience I had with the fallacy of “the first come first serve” principle occurred during my sales-engineering training. I worked for a company that made heat exchangers, and many of the field personnel, especially the agents, were not equipped to do the engineering calculations necessary to quote a job and therefore would forward their requirements to the home office. Some of their requests would take a matter of minutes to fulfill, others hours, and when quoting on a new construction site such as a refinery it could take days.
A home office engineer who I worked with would log in all the requests and then proceed to work on them in the order received. He was very pleased with his policy of first come first served. I used a different approach, looking over the work delegated to me, doing the short projects first, and then working on those that would take extended time. Why hold up every one’s work for three days, when all but one of the jobs could be gotten out in one day? My approach serviced more people and quicker than did the “first come first serve” approach of the staff engineer.
Let’s extend the “first come first serve” philosophy to a hospital emergency room. Certainly no one wants to see favoritism practiced when they are in need of medical attention and therefore would want to be seen in the order in which they arrived; however, a person with a sprained ankle has less urgent medical needs than a person with a crushed ankle from an automobile collision, and it is hoped that the ER staff would treat the latter condition first. “First come first serve” is fair when all things are equal, but when they are not equal (which is frequently the case) judgment is required; unfortunately we live in a society where judgment is not taught, developed, or permitted.
The next example I will address is “let the punishment fit the crime” or “equal justice under the law.” These statements sound noble, but they are unfair. An example of an alternative approach is the procedure used in a village in a Central American country when an adult male was accused of robbing the home of a villager and was brought before its members to be tried. Each villager would recall an instance of the man growing up, what a good student he had been, how he had helped carry the groceries for the elderly, on and on they would go about his good character as they expressed wonder at why he would steal. The man was humbled, humiliated, became tearful and apologized to the village. That was his punishment. He knew he had done wrong and repented. The village accepted his repentance. Let the punishment fit the crime would have resulted in his incarceration. What would time in jail have accomplished?
An extreme in another direction consisted of a young man who after drinking with his buddies desecrated a house of worship. No one was injured and the monetary damage was minimal. This was considered a “hate crime” and the man was put away for ten years. What did that man’s lengthy incarceration accomplish other than to create resentment within himself and his friends and family?
Instead of the “let the punishment fit the crime” standard I propose that “punishment should fit the offender.” Some people who break the law do it in a moment of weakness; others do it as a habitual way of life; punishment should be meted out accordingly. The purpose of punishment is to protect the populace, remind others to not break the law, and provide some form of rehabilitation. Contrary to public opinion, the law should not serve as a vehicle for exacting vengeance.
Our justice system has judges so that judgments can be made, but unfortunately most of the judgments reflect the political beliefs of the judge; those with a liberal bent will offer parole to someone who shot his mother, while those with a conservative bent will send a man away for life under the now defunct “three strikes and you’re out” law when their third offense was spitting on the sidewalk. To minimize the effect of political activist judges, mandatory sentencing guidelines have become more prevalent (they reduce the opportunity for judgment).
Judgment on the bench and in all of society is rapidly giving way to legal and illegal, allowed and not allowed, and to rules and regulations. We are gradually all becoming equal work digits in society with fewer opportunities to make judgments and less ability to make them when given the opportunity. The debacle that occurred during the sinking of the Korean ferry Sewol exemplifies the results of the inability to make judgmental decisions. There will be a probe, and new procedures developed. The trend towards writing procedures for all events is increasing in every segment of society. We are being programmed. Judgment, decision making, and conceptual thinking are disappearing as we march on the road to slavery, where indeed we will all be equal.
E.G.
