A Sign of the Times
On an item on TV about workplace rage, a woman laid some of the blame on companies for cutting costs. For example, by cutting their branches, banks had increased waiting time and resulted in more annoyance and rage. Now I've got no sympathy with banks. In a well-managed society much of what they do would be considered illegal. However, blaming longer waiting times for people getting angry is symptomatic of a modern way of thinking. It says that people aren't to blame for their behaviour but that the blame is attributable to circumstances and, therefore, lies with the people who create these circumstances. Invariably rich companies.
There's a similar argument regarding hacking - the blame lies not with the hackers, so the argument goes, but with Microsoft or other organisations who should make more effort to prevent hacking.
A similar thinking underlies the sue-for-money attitude that is coming more prevalent, and it is invariably a rich corporation that is sued, after all there's no point in suing someone with no money.
We also saw this thinking some years ago when riots broke out in Los Angeles after the Rodney King trial. Commentators remarked that impoverished people rioting were correcting an imbalance of income. Basically, this was socialism in action. In fact the rioters were not stealing food or essentials but designer clothes and luxury items.
The UK Guardian newspaper even had an article blaming white racist attitudes for the actions of Mugabe in Zimbabwe, not just that these attitudes resulted in his power (which may be true) but that he was justified in his actions because of the way black Africans had been treated by white imperial powers. Black racism is justified by previous instances of white racism. A similar attitude exists among some feminists: it's OK for women to put down men, so the argument goes, as men have been doing this to women for generations.
This thinking is so entrenched that poverty is considered not on an absolute basis (that is, can these people afford the necessities of life: a decent home, food and clothing?), but on a relative basis (how much difference is there between the richest and poorest people?). In other words, even if you are well off you have a 'right' to complain if other people are better off than you are. Why?
In order for the soul to evolve we must learn, and a large part of learning means learning from your mistakes - facing the consequences of your actions. These political correct attitudes prevent people facing the consequences of their actions, which mean that the lesson has to be learned in other ways. If you don't learn the lesson the first time it comes back harder the next.
The problems facing the world over the next few years will be immense: economic stagnation, war and disease. When times are hard people become more spiritual. This is how the forces of the universe correct the imbalances that people have brought on themselves. It's no good blaming God or saying that catastrophes 'prove' that there is no God. The human race has only themselves to blame for what will befall them.
