CHAPTER I
BEWARE OF UNIVERSAL ETHICS
ETHICS
Why does the public believe that there is one ‘universal ethics’ for everyone? Clearly, all attempts in history failed utterly: The ‘Ten Commandments’ of the Bible are one of the most devious listicles ever conceived; bordering on cult experience: “Thou shalt have no other gods before me!” – Really? “Thou shalt not commit adultery!” – That practically never happens, why even mentioning it? The so-called ‘Golden Rule’, too, is ludicrous, defying every day’s life experiences.
TRUST
As to the much celebrated formula ‘trust’, well, if a businessman overtly comes on with ‘trust’ he is about to bribe you, because that’s the only way to establish trust in business. In fact, it is the incorruptible person that causes stress and distrust.
MORALITY
As to politicians: they must bend the ‘truth’; this is not a secret but the mendacity of their profession, which is not as irresponsible as it may sound because it reveals the complexity of political life that goes beyond the limited horizon of our school textbooks: morals change with number, aspect, and over time, and to make matters worse, ethics come in hierarchies. It’s a bit like Maslow’s ‘hierarchy of needs’: Only after people climbed up the ranks to the top will they experience more complex layers of morality.
HIERARCHIES
The starving will steal, the insecure will cheat, and the rich will bribe, and if they don’t, they risk penalties: existential demise, fewer or no offspring, and corporate failure. Only the ladder stands firm.
MASTER, SLAVE
Since most human beings are in no position to reach their highest potential and feel what it is like to have a blast at life, to enjoy patriarchy, nepotism, and the benefits of the highest connections; we might as well tell them that it would be all bad for them anyway. Hence the breathtaking moral discrepancy between the masters of humanity and their sheepish followers.
NOBLES
Every religion dichotomizes human beings into at least two spiritual classes –the better nobles and the ignoble rest– with clearly different ethical outlooks: the nobles see good and evil as the two sides of the same coin and make good use of it, while the idiots of this world have moral calms, reservations, and sentiments.
EVIL
As to more complex human interactions, no matter what the hapless man on the street considers morally good, it is impossible for him to fathom the greater universe of relations in which even his annihilation may become a moral necessity (say, sacrificing him in a war); his employment; the ruin of his family…, all for the servings of the Greater good of society imagined by someone else. What we consider good or evil, let us make no mistake, can be interpreted to anyone’s liking, in anyone’s favor, tailored to anyone’s circumstances.
CONDEMNATION
Corruption should be liberalized in all its forms, and never be morally condemned. Let us punish people for breaking the law, not for being bad persons. If we had total transparency of society, most would be shocked that our ideas of morality were mostly garbage talk. That’s because every action, big or small, has inevitably disruptive consequences for our fellow human beings and the environment; the bigger footprints we leave, the more insects get squashed.
IMMORAL
Certain forms of moral corruption that were once considered despicably evil are now acceptable behavior; we don’t even think about them as moral failings at all. Homosexuality was long thought of as the breakdown of public morality; so were promiscuity, divorces, abortions... Pedophilia, polygamy, and sodomy are common aberrations of human behavior; We arbitrarily lock such people up, this may well so continue, but who are we to call them “immoral?”
LAW
The Law, although based on some archaic religious notions, clearly tries to distance itself from ethics in this century, as most lawyers would confirm. The criminals, too, have relinquished the idea of fixed ethics; instead the pilloried of today more than ever are perfectly satisfied with the simple fact that their having circumstantially broken the laws of the land may have caused their punishment. If only we spared them with our moral hypocrisy.
SUCCESS
In world history, the most ruthless, rapacious, fearless and corrupt personalities were also the most successful –conquerors, emperors, dictators, and spiritual leaders, and, recently, the CEOs and bankers. Weak people suck the tittynope. The greatest works of literature are tales about unusually cruel things. Scholars, too, have adopted writing styles that eliminate moralization; “Who are we to tell?” --judgment about “good and evil” is necessarily non-objective, gratuitous, quite cheap, and utterly pointless.
CORRUPTION
Hedonism, promiscuity, obscenity, egoism, and all money crimes are no longer immoral in America; on the contrary, the excesses of humanity are celebrated and hero-worshiped. Stars are expected to live in a style 99% of other human beings cannot afford with their conscience. Cronyism is a given in all nations, patriarchies, dictatorships, as well as is in all organizations that have fierce competition written all over their banners.
HUMAN RIGHTS
Human rights were invented accidently in Europe (and nowhere else in the world); they are man-made and culture-based: That’s why it is so hard to force other civilizations to comply. Any dominant civilization needs imperialism, indoctrination, and armies to beat its crassness into others –another proof that moral norms are essentially arbitrary.
CAUTION
To be safe, if any group, cooperation, or self-proclaimed humanist approaches us with ‘universal laws’, bad things are about to happen and you may want to run for your life. There has yet to be found a single moral teacher who practiced what he preached. More often spiritual leaders are frauds, charlatans, and masters of their own cause.
WEAKNESS
Science is inherently non-ethical –there is neither good nor bad, or so they say. Nature certainly has no morality. Laws are human fabrications; let’s not pretend they are God-given. All ethical prescriptions are but pretensions, designed to create dependency among human beings. And in universally condemning things we didn’t do or couldn’t do, we are but staging a self-righteous show portraying our limitations and parading our weaknesses.