Sorry MT for the plagiarism but your wisdom is too sublime to avoid. Besides, according to one of your colleagues, “Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery,” and my rhetorical reconstruction is intended as flattery. Yes, I know you employed the word “Age” rather than “Misery” but the switch fits the point of my post: happiness and misery, the summation being—You can’t build happiness on the back of someone else’s misery.
In today’s conventional wisdom, that notion is contradicted with clichés like Makers and Takers, or more aptly Winners and Losers. Both of these expressions assume that happiness does indeed come about when built on the backs of those denied. But that illogic overlooks the integral union of necessity pointed out by Martin Luther King, Jr., “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere,” or to reconstruct his notion: Winners/Makers must be the force that leads to justice for all, and if not then chaos will prevail.
This latter point should be apparent but alas it’s not. Instead the cliché prevails that somehow, unexplainable, the fortunate can deny those who enabled their fortune and live happily ever after. Or to use your vernacular: It just ain’t so. Not only do the fortunate have an obligation to share the fruits of labor, there is a necessity to do so, and the proof is bursting in evidence throughout the world. Makers and Takers implies an untruth: that those who enable fortune are unnecessary. Without one, the other ceases to exist and to deny this rather obvious point, misery of the denied will, and does, lead to misery of all.
No comments:
Post a Comment