Right and Wrong

The concept of right and wrong is a concept that really fouls up the human race.
It operates at three levels.

The religious level

The legal level
The personal level.

At the religious level fanatics can do anything anyone at any time and remain free of sin
because whatever we are doing is God's will. Terrorism is often an extreme example of
this concept. Declare Jihad and kill the infidel. In the mind of the perpetrators they are
free of sin.

The Spanish inquisition operated on the same principle. The persecution of witches and
many other atrocities have occurred by invoking the same format. It goes back to the
beginning of time. Whether or not the perpetrators of these acts are doing God's will is
problematic.

There is a section from Matthew that does along the lines of 'You call my name but I do
not know you. You say, 'But Lord, everything I have done I do have done I have done in
your name.' But still I do not know you, for as you do to the least of my creatures, you do
unto me.' Just because we do something in the name of God does not make it God's will.
At the next level down, the legal, goes along the line of 'We can do anything we want to
anyone at any time, and provided it is legal, we remain free of sin.'

Our courts do not operate on justice, or any altruistic concepts, they operate on legality.
Stealing from shareholders is OK as long as it is legal. Stitching someone up with an
ambiguously worded contract is OK as long as it is done legally. Extreme greed is free of
sin provided it does not cross that legal line.

We will see a lot of the legality concept in the next year. When the dust settles on the
sub-prime debacle, and the world recession, the focus will turn to accountability. There
will be a lot of 'It wasn't my fault, it was legal.' It will be interesting to see how successful
the architects of the sub-prime market at claiming the legal high ground. Even if the sub-
prime market was legal it was still a stupid idea, and the authors of the stupidity are still
responsible.

The bottom level is right and wrong. We can do anything we like to anyone at any time
and provided we are right and they are wrong we remain free of sin. This works before
and after the event. Right and wrong before the event is a cynical exercise in creating the
other as the wrong doer before acting.

If we want to invade a sovereign country we might invent evidence of that country

having weapons of mass destruction. If we do this well we might even convince
ourselves that these weapons of mass destruction actually exist.
It is interesting that before the invasion of Iraq Bush, Blair and Howard spent three weeks
'proving' it was legal. Thus they remain doubly free of sin.
Right and wrong, after the event, is finding a reason why we did something that was in
hindsight, a mistake. Do we say 'I made a mistake' No. We find a reason we where right.
There is a traffic accident. The driver of the car that hit the other says 'It was not my fault.
I swerved to avoid the Hummer that cut across in front of me.'

This may be true. But very often it is the excuse for driving poorly and no Hummer
existed, or if it did it did not cut across. But given a short space of time the Hummer will
exist, and will have cut across, if only in the head of the driver who caused the accident.
That driver will, of course, remain free of sin.

You lie to your lover. It takes no time at all to find a reason why you were right and it
was their fault. Maybe you can find a reason why they deserved it.

This is the concept of right and wrong. It is a means by which we can avoid personal
responsibility by finding a reason why it is always the fault of someone else. Give a little
practice it is possible to do anything you want to any, at any time and place, and remain
free of sin under all circumstances.

Other than avoiding personal reaponsibility the concept right and wrong has no practical
meaning.