Part 1: The Need for Diagnosis.
As elections are upon us, the social welfare of Trinidad and Tobago is all but up in flames. To get a grasp of the seriousness of the situation, one needs only to think of the ever-increasing crime rate, percent of broken homes, income inequality, government corruption, lack of national autonomy, racism between political parties, gang and police violence, and the media’s promotion of the poisonous LGBT ideology. These are only some of the problems occurring throughout our twin-island and as more people begin to directly fall prey to one or the other of these said problems, a solution is becoming increasingly desired and discussed by many.
In social circles of every type, it is not uncommon to find social problems being diagnosed and solutions being suggested that might serve to tentatively make our society “better.” While differences of opinion are normal, we must admit that within such discussions everyone is focused on creating a society based on principles of natural (and sometimes divine) law (i.e. those universal principles found in the consciences of everyone). Everyone is arguing about what will make our society more just, pleasant, fair, and fulfilling. Everyone may disagree on what a “fair society” consists of but, for example, no one will argue that a society should be built on principles of “unfairness” or “injustice.” No one will say “I think society should consist of more liars, thieves, and murderers, we should educate our children in this way too!” People don’t speak like this since universally it is accepted that lying, stealing, and killing, are wrong. Fundamental to everything then is the understanding that most people, even those who disagree with my own takes, are of good intention and are (in most cases) using virtuous principles (such as equality) to justify their claims.
I propose here then to highlight what we should perhaps aim at understanding in order to have an idea as to what society is supposed to be and consist of. In so doing, it will be less burdensome and laborious to see where and why our society socially falls short. I think it will also provide the readers with the much needed ammunition for when next they engage in a conversation surrounding society as a whole. Honesty is the best policy, so with an honest investigation into the concept of society we shall discover how little we actually know.
Suppose you have never seen or heard of an apple in your life. Then someone brings you a half-rotten apple and explains to you in the most “scientific” manner that the rot and filth are, in fact, part and parcel of the apple itself, say a sign of its being ripened and ready for consumption. In such a situation, since you may have some understanding of what rotten things look like, you very well might protest. Yet it would also be likely that, because you have no experiential knowledge of good apples, you accept the awful one has good. In this bad analogy, you are not “enjoying” the bad apple because it is bad, but rather because you have been fooled into thinking it is a good one. Your being fooled is partly dependent on the wit of the fooler, but more so on part of you having no knowledge of what a good apple is in the objective sense. This I believe to be remotely likened to the problem with the dialogue of many modern men (and women), regarding social justice. Perhaps it is that we find ourselves in a situation where despite aiming for social justice, our notion of the entire thing is half-rotten like our apple. It is therefore most relevant to examine everything from the very fundamentals of individual social life to the broader concepts of the political society in order to properly see if this is in fact so.
In the second essay, this process of examination begins namely with addressing what society and man are in general. Man will be addressed since a collection of men make up a society. Society will be addressed since wherever man finds himself he is always in a society.
May God Bless Our Nation!