From: Olga Bourlin (fauxever@sprynet.com)
Date: Mon Jul 15 2002 - 21:27:58 MDT
From: "Randy" <cryofan@mylinuxisp.com>
> On Mon, 15 Jul 2002 18:28:20 -0400, Harvey wrote:
> >I am getting tired of all these accounting scandals. [snip]
> >Then I realized that it's not just big business. [snip]
> >The news also said that scams by smaller business .. [snip].
> Completely agree. At the risk of using 100, 200, 300 year old
> arguments/observation, this problem is caused by the breakdown of
> society, i.e., the people who wiped your dirty bottom, i.e., you mom,
> grandma, auntie, etc., are not there to witness your unscupulous
> behavior towards what are supposed to be your fellow citizens,
> therefore, you cut people off on the freeway, you lie about whether
> the customer needs a valve job, or whether the client should buy that
> stock. People commented on this phenomenon back in Merry Olde England
> when London began to grow, and strangers came from the countryside,
> and began to act up--they were freed from the constraints of social
> reproof/control they got back in the village. Boomtown London awaited,
> and they were free of societal constraints, at least to the degree
> that they could elude the constable. And the distant threat of the
> constable was never--and still aint-- a match for granny's stern and
> disappointed looks.
Agree with Harvey (that lying is a serious and depressing problem today),
but have reservations about the "breakdown of society" argument of Randy's.
Compared to the present, a LOT more lying went on in the past.
*In the past*, avowed atheists were often referred to *in the past tense*,"
as it were (because of the charming custom of burning heretics at the stake
and the like). Not surprisingly, freethinkers would often lie about their
[non]beliefs (in Western society, at least - more so then than now).
>From the nostalgia department, we're all familiar with the friendly
neighborhood butcher's trick of "putting extra weight on the scales" (but
maybe - having watched too many cartoons as a kid - I am simply stuck with
that uncorroborated visual image).
And what about the meat packing industry (which led Sinclair Lewis to write
The Jungle) of yore? It would not be rash, I think, to assume that many
other businesses in the past were not sterling in their business practices
and ethics, either.
"Unwed" mothers were expected to hide their condition and were encouraged to
"go away to Aunt Hazel's for the summer," wink, wink. (On a related note,
adoptees in the past were more often led to believe they were the biological
children of the people who adopted them.)
To say the least, homosexuals were not encouraged to be honest about their
sexuality.
Many women (compared to today) lied about sex coming and going (either
because they liked it, and did not want to be thought of as "loose" women;
or because they didn't get much out of it, and would pretend that they did).
Friends and relatives (as well as your friendly neighborhood priests) who
sexually abused children not only lied (by omission) about what they did,
but it was expected that their victims would not tell (because of shame and,
ironically, because it was the children who were thought to lie about these
sorts of things).
Doctors sometimes lied to their patients about their patients' illnesses,
especially when there was a life-threatening condition. And, often, the
patients didn't want to know the truth. This practice of sparing patients
bad news about their physical condition is rare if not extinct today.
Take movies of the past - did they portray society as it was in the United
States, or did they outrightly just "lie" (in their misrepresentation of
just *who* constituted the citizens in the United States)?
Many other examples abound in comparing the honesty v. dishonesty of the
past v. the present. Yesterday, I gave a couple of links to books
demonstrating how much "lying" was the norm on in our history classes. The
critical history books we presently have which question and supplement what
we learned in the past is good IMO - at least a sign that more objective
information (and honesty) is available. On the upside, the truth of history
is much more dramatic, interesting, and full of life (as well as horror),
compared to the pabulum that is still taught.
There were a lot of "hidden" lies in the past - one might say our society
was "built" on lies (purporting to be a democracy when it really wasn't,
etc.). If one were to construct two mountains - one mountain constituting
all the lies that were commonly practiced in the past, and another mountain
gauging the lies with which we are afflicted today - I'd speculate that the
"past" mountain of lies would loom over today's.
Olga
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:28 MST