By Mao Zedong
"In our society, as I have said, disturbances by the masses are bad, and we do not approve of them. But when disturbances do occur, they enable us to learn lessons, to overcome bureaucracy and to educate the cadres and the masses. In this sense, bad things can be turned into good things. Disturbances thus have a dual character. Every disturbance can be regarded in this way."
"Can Bad people turn into Good people?"
by 史蒂夫 奥多
So why bring this up! In Reading Philip Short's Pol Pot, he makes a distinction between the attitudes of the Chinese Communist Party and the Communist Party of Kampuchea. Having had the influence of Confucius who believed people were basically good, the Chinese believed in trying to reform people or giving them a second chance. In Kampuchea, the Pol Pot government was more influenced by Theravada Buddhism, a somewhat fatalistic religion with the belief that those who are bad are unredeemable.
Even though we are a capitalist society, it is odd that we keep leaning to the idea that people are unredeemable. More and more we here people say that small crimes, if not dealt with harshly, only lead to severe crimes. For example a petty thief will move up to murder and rape if not keep behind bars most of his life.
We have new laws against sex offenders. The restrictions are becoming so great, that some people are beginning to wonder where we will let these people live and where they will work? Also, while some of these people are quite vile, there may be some men who are 18 years old convicted of having sex with a 15 year old. Does it really make sense to lump them with 30 year old men that have sex with 9 year olds and have them carry that type of label the rest of their lives?
The drunk driving laws are stiffer every year. Now there is no way to expunge an earlier DUI charge, even if it is a minor one. It is a life long label.
This is probably the only country that will not allow a person to vote after a felony conviction, even after their time is served. This law actually violates a human rights agreement we signed years ago at the UN.
So the question I raise is --why are we following the examples of a person such as Pol Pot, when so many Americans have condemned him for his causal killing of people who made mistakes or broke minor laws?
Kansas, as with many states now has a carry and conceal law that allows a person who sees a robbery or crime in progress to act as judge, jury and executioner. Isn't this similar to what Pol Pot's cadre actually did? They were left on their own to dish out any punishment they felt fit a crime and that often met execution, even for minor theft.
A common argument for capitol punishment is that the criminal will never kill again. He also will not have a chance at rehabilitation.
I have a friend in prison who is a member of the Ohio 8. He told me the constantly cut back on educational opportunities for inmates and there seems to be a lot less emphasis on rehabilitation and more on punishment.
Another wise observation of Mao was:
"To sum up, we must learn to look at problems from all sides, seeing the reverse as well as the obverse side of things. In given conditions, a bad thing can lead to good results and a good thing to bad results. More than two thousand years ago Lao Tzu said: "Good fortune lieth within bad, bad fortune lurketh within good.''
So in America, we move closer and closer to a society which offers trouble makers no second chance for redemption. There is no longer the belief that people who have gone bad can be rehabilitated. Statistically crime has been going down, yet people, politicians and the news media continue to act as if it is still on the rise. This was pointed out in "Bowling for Columbine." Our politicians, pundits and many educators still call Mao one of the main mass murderers of the 20th century and yet even in his country, he believed in looking at the root causes of a disturbances and without looking at why people cause trouble. According to Short, in China they believed people could be rehabilitated.
In the US we are headed in a different direction. If anything, we are emulating Pol Pot who, along with his party, believed bad people were unredeemable. Some were unredeemable due to their background and upbringing. Is that the direction the US is headed? Will America's leaders be the next Pol Pot of the 21st Century?
Is this really what Americans want for their future?
Pol Pot --- the 20th Century authoritarian leader
George Bush --- the 21st Century authoritarian leader
No comments:
Post a Comment