The Next Revolution, Part III

Leaders are at the forefront of how a culture functions. The direction the leaders take is what the culture will follow them into. A healthy leader will guide the populace into a healthy culture. An unhealthy leader will guide into an unhealthy culture. Leaders are trusted with the good of the culture. They are trusted with policy, surveillance, intelligence, growth, direction, and the implements of war. A healthy leader will be cautious with these tools. An unhealthy leader will abuse them.

We have the sophistication to test for aberrations in people. We can test for paranoia, for antisocial traits, for hidden personality flaws, for conflicted sexuality, for inordinate power seeking and fascistic traits, for stage of spiritual development. These tests are used every day to select and eliminate candidates in the corporate world, seminary, and the military. They are used on the entrants, however, and not on those who have attained positions of power. Yet we have the potential to eliminate unhealthy people from positions of power.

Why are these tools not used? Easily, it would immediately remove a good number of the current holders of power from their positions, and since they’re in power they won’t allow the use of testing. There are several other possible arguments against the use of such testing:

1. The removal of so many people all of a sudden from positions of control and direction would throw the worlds of government, industry, and religion into chaos.
2.Such chaos would place our nation at risk of takeover by other nations that are powerful and don’t implement the same changes.
3. The world is a ruthless place, and to put principled people in positions of power would place our nation at risk from ruthless leaders of other nations.
4. The power to be the gatekeeper of who is allowed into positions of power would be transferred to those who are doing the testing. What would guard us from unhealthy people doing the testing? Who would watch over them?
5. What would we do with all the former power brokers? What kind of jobs would we allow them to work?

There are counterarguments or answers for each:

1. It doesn’t have to be immediate, and instead a steady progression over a period of several years.
2. This assumes that principled people can’t cope with a chaotic situation, which is a pardonable error in logic if we haven’t had the experience for a while.
3. Ditto. There are principled people who can cope with ruthless people. And ‘the world is a ruthless place’ is a mindset that eclipses one’s ability to look for the good in people.
4. I haven’t figured this one out yet. It is an important problem. The best guess to date is that the entire population would have to police them.
5. Humility is a wonderful thing. People with aberrations can learn to change. There is no law that people with potential have to work jobs at the top of their ability, and if the potential hands them the opportunity to abuse then they shouldn’t be allowed such jobs.

Why should we undertake such a venture? Ask yourself how much you would like to see the elimination of crooked politicians, greedy businessmen, and sexually abusive ministers. What effect would that have on the entire culture if we no longer allowed such people into positions of trust and power that gets abused?

It is a major change of thinking to imagine an entire culture that doesn’t allow the abuse of power. We have the potential; what we need is the collective will.