Wiping Away some Condensation

A friend and I were talking earlier and I had a moment of clarity in terms of understanding myself.

I think it's important that the opinions you hold, the decisions you make, and the way in which you act are grounded in the first principles of your foundation. Most of the time we weren't so much as talking about first principles - we were mainly discussing politics - but we zeroed in on it at the end.

- Do not do unto others what you would not want done to yourself.
- Do not expect of others what you do not expect of yourself.
- Do not demand of others what you would not want demanded of yourself.
- It is my choice to decide who and what I am responsible for.

I do believe that there is some overlap with these. However, I see it as a Venn diagram, as there are some situations where one would apply but the others do not. It is worth noting that there may also be times where one principle may have to answer to another or may have to be broken, which suggests that there's likely a hierarchy to them. So I have listed them in order of most-to-least importance to the best of my ability.

The first ("Do not do unto others what you would not want done to yourself.") came up when we were discussing cheating. While it's pretty straightforward, it's certainly one that shouldn't be forgotten. It's really the basis for healthy and positive social interaction.

The second ("Do not expect of others what you do not expect of yourself.") could be applicable to work environments, especially leader and employee relationships. I say leader because if you're just a manager or a boss, you're not all that you could be. The standards in this area of society ought to be raised in my opinion, and the first step toward doing that is thinking of the role of "manager" or "boss" or "CEO" or "executive" in a completely new and improved way: leader. (Anyway, this "Principle of Expectation" is a general checks-and-balance to hypocrisy.)

The third ("Do not demand of others what you would not want demanded of yourself.") was more political in nature. We were discussing immigration. A metaphor I sometimes like using for this topic is houses. If I travel to another country I act as if I am a guest at another person's home. I don't break in. I respect their rules and customs. I do not start making demands that they should speak my language, or make me meals, or give me a room and a car. If they pray before eating that's fine, so long as I am not forced to do so (mutual respect; finding solutions by way of compromise). The same attitude exists if they were guests at my house. If I am not accommodating enough for them, or if there is some other disagreement that they cannot live with, they were not forced to come here and they are not forced to stay here.

The fourth ("It is my choice to decide who and what I am responsible for.") had to do with helping others, and this came up in a discussion about socialism. There are many people who are quick to make victims of others for the sake of helping other victims, or quick to do wrong by one person to do right by another because "the ends justify the means". Nobody likes being used by people who won't help themselves, and nobody likes having a gun put to their head by a third party in the name of supposedly being virtuous and helping somebody.

And so an adult decides who and what they are responsible for. I do not want people I do not know, taking my money that they did not work for, and giving it to people who I do not know, so that it can be spent in unknown ways. It isn't that I do not want to help people in need. It is the principle that I do not want it being done for me against my will. It's my decision to make. Other people's problems or the consequences of their actions originally did not impact me. You are crossing the line and going out of your way to make them effect me, when they did not effect me before you came along. It's that simple. If you told them "Foxxx helped you", you'd be a liar. I had no choice but to let you take my money and give it to them, lest I suffer your arbitrary consequences. That's a criminal abuse of the word "help".

But it's worse than that. You and your system are also forcing my problems, and the consequences of my actions, upon the shoulders of a magnitude of more people. You have no right to do that. This does not mean that I do not appreciate help, or do not want help. Rather, I believe in preserving the meaning behind cooperation. For example: If you do not have the time to help me move but have offered me money so that I can afford a moving service, I am thankful for that, and in some manner I will repay you in the future (or perhaps you felt you owed me, for which I am also grateful). If money is too tight but you can afford to spend an afternoon physically helping me move, the same can be said. These examples are actually personal in nature. It shows you care about me. And I care about you because I did not demand that you help me move "or else". I admit I may have expected you to help because I would do it for you, or have done it for you. It is nevertheless your choice to take on the responsibility. Not to mention, I would do the same for you if I could.

Preserving the meaning behind charity is nothing to scoff at. It strengthens the ties and bonds of communities, groups, neighbors, friends, and family. It helps build trust and respect in a tangible sense. None of this is to say that there's anything wrong with giving assistance anonymously. The key is that it's voluntary. That the people who help at least get to choose if they want to help. Even better is if they get to choose how to help. Often times I do not believe that throwing money at somebody or something is always the solution. And even if it's part of the solution, how it's being used is what matters, because how your money is being used determines how your time making it was ultimately spent, and time is something you do not get back. Do you want other people spending your time for you without your approval?