OT/MISC When Good Intentions Go Wrong

Heretic

Inactive
When Good Intentions Go Wrong

While I was a senior in high school one of my ‘socially conscious’ friends became concerned about global hunger. Now the only time we went hungry was when we were to busy to eat. But still, I’d had cousins in Eastern KY that had known the bite of hunger; their dad was a periodic drunk. So who wouldn’t like to do ‘their’ part to help alleviate world hunger. My friend was much more tied into the political scene then me, and hooked us up with YWD, AKA “Young World Development”.

An innocent enough name.

We organized a local ‘Walk for Hunger’ where (mainly) junior and senior high students would get sponsors to donate so much per mile. We managed to organize about 3,000 students in our first ‘walk’.
The walk was ~26 miles long, perhaps there was some connection to the dreaded Marathon. Anyway the walk was a ‘huge’ success.

I graduated high school, and had a year to go in the Electronics program at the local Vocational School.

(I drove my high school career consular insane, while I insisted on taking vocational school (1/2 day) during my junior and senior year, I also took College Prep [Toady AP] courses in Chemistry, Physics, Trig, and, Geometry)

While finishing up Vocational my friend asked me to help organize another “Walk”. OK, no problem. It was interesting getting all the little details in order to make it happen.

Flash forward 3 years. My first class in college was “Introduction to Cultural Anthropology”. While I was on the ‘Physical’ track, I still had to take my share of cultural ‘nonsense’.

The professor’s specialty was Ethiopia. He started with a broad overview of the geography of the area, and then touched on the high points of current and historical culture(s). At this point he stopped and addressed the class. He told us about the damage ‘well intended fools’ had done to Ethiopia. How YWD had bought and distributed diesel powered pumps, how this helped in the very short term, but drained the aquifer, and when the water ran out, entire villages, entire cultural sub-groups were wiped out. He showed us some slides of one dead village. There were bloated dead bodies laying ‘everywhere’. He then explained how very difficult it was to ‘help’ less technologically sophisticated cultures.

The next class he used examples from Australia. This is not a slam at any folks down under, God knows we messed up. At least they didn’t intend to destroy entire aboriginal tribes.

For countless millennia before Europeans arrived many aboriginal tribes were ‘ruled’ by strong ‘head men’. They controlled the few stone axes. Control of the axes gave them a lot of political power. As could be expected from a close look at European history, many men with power abused that power.

Some of the early Christian missionaries were distressed (disgusted!) by this abuse and sought a way to stop the abuse. They ‘studied’ the system and realized that if they passed out iron axes then the headmen would lose their hold on power.

Such a simple way to get rid of horrible abuses.

Within 10 years the aboriginal tribes who had been ‘helped’ by the missionaries had ceased to exist. The social cohesion necessary to bond or to hold a group of people together was lost. Tribes fragmented along clan, then along nuclear family lines.

One man, or family by his, their, self is very weak. Strength comes from a group of people. Now in some environments it is possible for very small groups, say family sized, to survive, but in the areas inhabited by those aboriginal tribes, it took enough people, doing a lot of different tasks, for everyone to survive.

Once the village ‘imploded’ the few survivors were forced to find other means of survival. Now for many reasons, tribal folks generally don’t want a whole lot of new people moving in. This isn’t quite as silly, or mean, as it might appear at first glance. Tribes are complex social organizations. Political power is both clearly defined, and vague. The last thing needed for political stability is for a bunch of outsiders to intrude, outsiders that will have their own ideas on who should be in charge and how things should be done. There was a ‘lot’ of intermarriage between tribes, but the newcomers were limited in number and were forced to adjust, or comply, with the existing power structure.

So where did the surviving families end up? They found their way into white, er European, villages. The men had no skills to sell, but the women had certain natural assets to sell….

Yep, indirectly those well meaning Christian Missionaries created the conditions that forced ‘native women’ into prostitution. Again, this is not a slam, and I am most certainly not blaming anyone.

In the long run it didn’t make a lot of difference. As soon as Europeans arrived in Australia the Aboriginal way of life was doomed. The land they ‘owned’ always had something the new invaders wanted. The invaders had guns, horses and the will to use violence to achieve their goals.

But Dr. A hammered facts in us to force us to understand that any interaction, any well meaning ‘messing’ around with >ANY< aspect of a ‘primitive’ culture would have unforeseeable consequences. In part he hammered us so hard because most of the students were not going to be Anthropologists or Sociologists, this might be the only ‘social science’ course they took. And he wanted to make them aware that action, every action, has consequences, and that the most well meaning action could have the most dreadful consequences.

I had Dr. A for 3 other classes. I never had the nerve to tell him that I was one of those well meaning fools who killed entire villages, entire unique ways of life. I was too ashamed to ‘own up to my crimes’.

Shortly before graduation he called me to his office. He was retiring and just wanted to talk with me. I was not your typical Anthro major. He knew I had no intention of trying for a Masters, then a PHD so that I could teach, he knew I was going back in to the comfortable world of electrical engineering and he didn’t hold it against me.

I almost fainted when he asked why I hadn’t mentioned that I had been active in YWD, and the Walk for Hunger (Or as I called it after I knew the facts, the “The Walk For Death”). I told him that I was simply too embarrassed. That on that first day as he described what me and my fellow nimwitts had ‘accomplished’ that I almost got up and dropped out of college. He laughed and told me not too worry; he always did some research on incoming Freshman who declared an Anthro major. He knew my friend’s dad and had quickly found out that I was a ‘ring leader’. He told me to forgive myself because truth be told they were already ‘dead’, that they just hadn’t quit breathing yet. I was puzzled and asked him what he meant.

Then he went in to the “dark and dirty reality” that none of my professors had ever addressed.

After WWII, as medical science advanced it became clear that ‘we’, the west, could vaccinate ‘primitive’ peoples and reduce if not eliminate many diseases that killed millions of children world wide. Between us (US) and them (USSR) we offered, bribed, cajoled many ‘primitive’ people into accepting modern health technology. Sometimes it was as simple as teaching people about basic sanitation. Sometimes it was some vaccine.

He said, “And that was a good thing wasn’t it?”

I hesitated, and then said, “If more children survive, they will in turn have children, and eventually their numbers will overload their food production technology and then mass starvation would set in.”

He congratulated me and told me that my 4 years of college hadn’t been wasted. He told me that the then Dean of the College of Anthropology had helped the US State Department and UNESCO ‘reach’ numerous ‘primitive’ societies, that he (Dean) had been instrumental in developing techniques to convince village elders into accepting our vaccine. And that this paragon of civic virtue, shaper of worlds, was not able to understand that by increasing the population he was dooming the very people he intended to help into catastrophic consequences.

This was in 1978 and Dr. A spent an hour explaining what was really behind the continent wide civil wars in Africa. While the US-USSR cold war didn’t help, and the mess left by colonizing European powers made it worse, in many cases western health technology had increased the population to the point that traditional food production technologies couldn’t keep up. That the increased population created serious political instability.

Ever since then I have been very leery about “Save The World Schemes”. Even if there is no graft, a rare situation, even if money isn’t diverted to arm some group of freedom fighters, the basic idea is so fraught with risks that I couldn’t participate. After I reentered the work force this presented some complications. The university had a strong outreach ethic. They felt that those of us who had been ‘gifted’, had an obligation to help the down trodden. I was always very careful to conceal my heretical beliefs, they didn’t quite burn non-believers at the stake, but they were well down that road.

I am not posting this to slam any Christian Missionaries, or any group that is trying to alleviate ‘third world problems.” I just thought that it might be worth the few moments it would take before writing that check to think:
“Will this really accomplish what I want it to?”
and
“What will the unintended consequences be?”

I mean on the one hand it sounds pretty damn callous to ignore starving and ill children, but on the other hand, it we feed and cure those children, what happens when the food runs out?

Why does anyone think we have so many people from Mexico coming to the USA?
Consider their population growth. If you had a choice between staying home and starving, or coming to the land of 'milk and honey' what would you do?

Don't get me wrong, I think we aught to do all that we can to discourage such invaders. Everything from live landmines to armed troops with shot to kill orders.
Yea, I am that nasty!

Terry
 

Mzkitty

I give up.
I think Mexico's problem is deeper.

They are Catholic, and have always been told (up until now that I know of) no birth control.
 

tanstaafl

Has No Life - Lives on TB
In the mid-1960's my father worked with the Ford Foundation to help the Indians (subcontinent) learn how to grow Western-style crops (corn, wheat, etc.) in the Western way (mechanization, heavy use of fertilizers and pesticides, etc.). Not so long ago research showed that typically any culture that survives for long learns how to create a more-or-less balanced diet with the native foods and resources available. Which makes sense ... if you can't stay strong enough and smart enough to literally continue surviving (and along the way resist invaders always eager for new territory) then it's a self-regulating cultural mechanism. Sort of like the tongue-in-cheek First Law of Socio-Genetics: "Celibacy is not hereditary." What my father did helped to screw up regional dietary systems that had taken thousands of years to get "good enough" for survival and his work resulted in new dietary and other diseases for India. Not to mention it didn't help their population boom. But my father never did acknowledge that what he'd done may well have been wrong FOR THE INDIANS.

And I'm not entirely sure he WAS wrong. It takes a cold-blooded type to see suffering individuals and still be able to think in terms of the greater history. Stalin was able to do that ... "The death of one man is a tragedy, the death of millions is a statistic." (Although apparently there's some doubt that Stalin actually said it.) One of the few things in life I'm sure of is that I'd rather not share the same space in Hell as Stalin and Hitler. But in general, scientists and intellectuals have often done no better at cultural planning when they get into positions of great power -- for me it's a variation of "Never trust a man with your finances who won't bend down to pick up a penny."

Nonetheless, the lesson I learned from that and other education over the years is one of my operating principles: "Just because you CAN help someone doesn't automatically mean you SHOULD help them." For example, if you won a multi-hundred million dollar lottery tomorrow it would almost certainly NOT be doing a kindness to them to hand out millions in cash to your family and friends and even strangers, because it's practically a given that some (and maybe most) of their lives will implode (divorce, bankruptcy, suicide, and who knows what else) -- if you don't believe it, look up the stories about the "lottery curse." But I also think you can go just as wrong by not helping AT ALL. So it really comes down to a case-by-case basis and hope that you're wise enough to know the difference. Just keep in mind that NOT being wise enough (that is, making mistakes) is practically the definition of being human.
 

Meadowlark

Has No Life - Lives on TB
The temperence movement and the anti saloon league come to mind. They were filled will well intentioned people who equated liquor with evil and wanted to eliminate evil. Never mind the illogic, they were trying to save the world. How do you force someone to stop and see reason when they are trying to save the world?
 

FREEBIRD

Has No Life - Lives on TB
So the problem in the world is that poor brown people don't die fast enough to suit comparatively rich white folks. That, and some poor people are Catholics.

Thanks for sorting that out for me. I think I'll stick to what Jesus said about what we do to the least of His brothers.
 

Mzkitty

I give up.
So the problem in the world is that poor brown people don't die fast enough to suit comparatively rich white folks. That, and some poor people are Catholics.

Thanks for sorting that out for me. I think I'll stick to what Jesus said about what we do to the least of His brothers.

Well, there is that. I'm not picking on people for being Catholic or not practicing birth control (even the old "rhythm" method), but over-population is the result. And then they all came here!

Happy with that?

I mean, I'm just trying to think common-sense wise. What if I'd run out and got married real young and had a passel of younguns? I was in no way able to be a mother at a young age, and ended up with only one much later. I don't think that was the wrong thing for me. We don't even have enough jobs for everybody now! Just musing here.....

:)
 

Double_A

TB Fanatic
I came to the conclusion a few years ago that a large measure of modern societies problems could be summed up by the old saying ... the road to hell is paved with good intentions

A common statement with several variations that just makes me cringe with dread is .... if I can prevent just one more _____ by ________

Often it can be heard in this form at a tearful news conference "If I can make my child's death meaningful and prevent one more childs death and prevent another parent's suffering by banning XYZ it will be worth it"

In fact what commonly happens is not the prevention of suffering but creating a whole class of people who suffer with the misguided well intented mistake of a greiving parent.

What on earth do you say at a time like that that does not make you sound like a cold hearted SOB?
 
Last edited:

Heretic

Inactive
So the problem in the world is that poor brown people don't die fast enough to suit comparatively rich white folks. That, and some poor people are Catholics.

Thanks for sorting that out for me. I think I'll stick to what Jesus said about what we do to the least of His brothers.

Hum, how did you get that from my post?

Did you get the part about YWD 'help' that resulted in the destruction of entire villages, entire and unique ways of life?
Talk about helping 'little brown brother".....

I don't have the answers, I only have seen some serious problems, problems that will manifest themselves with a lot of people dieing....

Or are we supposed to be working to create as many 'good souls' as we can in the short term and to not worry about the long term consequences?

Sorry but your "reasoning" lost me.

Terry
 

willowlady

Veteran Member
It's not about Christianity, prejudice or racism or any other moralistic point of view. The OP stated the simple fact of the problem succinctly:

I hesitated, and then said, “If more children survive, they will in turn have children, and eventually their numbers will overload their food production technology and then mass starvation would set in.”

That statement is what is happening all over the world, and in the US today. This is one of the reasons for prepping. In the US, it will only take one little power outage, one little CME, one little cutting off the oil, and the US will crumble in exactly the same way the third-world countries crumble. Our society for over two hundred years has been dependent on cheap energy and advancing technology, not to mention an economic system built on the principles in Adam Smith's "The Wealth of Nations." And it doesn't take a genius to figure it out, either. It's extremely tough, hard, cold, mean and nasty, but what on earth does anybody think life will be like if those things for which we prep actually come about? Take a good, hard look at life in many of the US' inner cities. And then think of that life without handouts from the Uncle.

The OP also said, "Just because you CAN help someone doesn't mean you SHOULD help them." Very true. What the OP is actually about is redefining what constitutes "helping." Each and every one of us who have been prepping will have to face that very issue and all its ramifications when TSHTF.
 

TexasQF

Senior Member
This made me think of this quote I saved and include in our *civics* class -

Most of the harm in the world is done by good people, and not by accident, lapse, or omission. It is the result of their deliberate actions, long persevered in, which they hold to be motivated by high ideals toward virtuous ends.
— Isabel Paterson
 

beaglemama

Senior Member
Yet when Planned Parenthood tries to disseminate birth control information to help control overpopulation, they're demonized. :rolleyes:
 

Heretic

Inactive
Yet when Planned Parenthood tries to disseminate birth control information to help control overpopulation, they're demonized. :rolleyes:

Perhaps because as part of the Planned part they >PUSH< abortion.
I have video taped counseling sessions where I witnessed this first hand!
June 11, 2002, 11:00 Lexington KY.

I really wish the left would study their own history:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics

There are much better resources but time is limited, so I went with wiki.

Guess what western ideology Hitler, in large part, got his idea of a master race from?
Eugenics, you know the concept that defectives should be prevented from breeding.
Like those defectives should be eliminated.

"The lesser races were both inferior and worthless: "woolly-haired" peoples, he concluded, are "incapable of a true inner culture or of a higher mental development...no woolly-haired nation has ever had an important history" (1876, 10). Haeckel even argued that, since "the lower races – such as the Veddahs or Australian Negroes – are psychologically nearer to the mammals – apes and dogs – than to the civilized European, we must, therefore, assign a totally different value to their lives" (1905, 390). And Stein notes that this was not a minority or an extreme view: "Haeckel was the respected scientist; the views of his followers were often more extreme" (Stein 1988, 56)."

"Their political dictionary was replete with words like...struggle, selection, and extinction (Ausmerzen). The syllogism of their logic was clearly stated: The world is a jungle in which different nations struggle for space. The stronger win, the weaker die or are killed. In the 1933 Nuremberg party rally, Hitler proclaimed that "higher race subjects to itself a lower race...a right which we see in nature and which can be regarded as the sole conceivable right because [it was] founded on reason [of evolution]" (Quoted from The Nuremberg Trials, Vol. 14, pg. 279)."

""monstrosities halfway between man and ape" and lamented the fact of Christians going to "Central Africa" to set up "Negro missions," resulting in the turning of "healthy...human beings into a rotten brood of bastards." In his chapter entitled "Nation and Race," he said, "The stronger must dominate and not blend with the weaker, thus sacrificing his own greatness. Only the born weakling can view this as cruel, but he, after all, is only a weak and limited man; for if this law did not prevail, any conceivable higher development (Hoherentwicklung) of organic living beings would be unthinkable." A few pages later, he said, "Those who want to live, let them fight, and those who do not want to fight in this world of eternal struggle do not deserve to live.""

"commonly portrayed...as fanatic, half crazed criminals conducting their evil plans with as much reason or sense as 1930s television gangsters. This is a false impression for a number of reasons, but primarily because it underestimates the degree to which large numbers of intellectuals, often leaders in their field, were willing and eager to serve the Nazi regime. Evidence presented in the [Nuremberg] trials reveals the involvement of doctors in a massive program for the extermination of "lives not worth living," including, first, infants with inheritable defects, and later, handicapped children and patients of psychiatric institutions, and finally, entire populations of "unwanted races"

Perhaps I should have added, that sometimes the best of intentions are hijacked and lead to unspeakable evil.

Terry
 

Heretic

Inactive
Perhaps because as part of the Planned part they >PUSH< abortion.
I have video taped counseling sessions where I witnessed this first hand!
June 11, 2002, 11:00 Lexington KY.

I really wish the left would study their own history:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics

There are much better resources but time is limited, so I went with wiki.

Guess what western ideology Hitler, in large part, got his idea of a master race from?
Eugenics, you know the concept that defectives should be prevented from breeding.
Like those defectives should be eliminated.

"The lesser races were both inferior and worthless: "woolly-haired" peoples, he concluded, are "incapable of a true inner culture or of a higher mental development...no woolly-haired nation has ever had an important history" (1876, 10). Haeckel even argued that, since "the lower races – such as the Veddahs or Australian Negroes – are psychologically nearer to the mammals – apes and dogs – than to the civilized European, we must, therefore, assign a totally different value to their lives" (1905, 390). And Stein notes that this was not a minority or an extreme view: "Haeckel was the respected scientist; the views of his followers were often more extreme" (Stein 1988, 56)."

"Their political dictionary was replete with words like...struggle, selection, and extinction (Ausmerzen). The syllogism of their logic was clearly stated: The world is a jungle in which different nations struggle for space. The stronger win, the weaker die or are killed. In the 1933 Nuremberg party rally, Hitler proclaimed that "higher race subjects to itself a lower race...a right which we see in nature and which can be regarded as the sole conceivable right because [it was] founded on reason [of evolution]" (Quoted from The Nuremberg Trials, Vol. 14, pg. 279)."

""monstrosities halfway between man and ape" and lamented the fact of Christians going to "Central Africa" to set up "Negro missions," resulting in the turning of "healthy...human beings into a rotten brood of bastards." In his chapter entitled "Nation and Race," he said, "The stronger must dominate and not blend with the weaker, thus sacrificing his own greatness. Only the born weakling can view this as cruel, but he, after all, is only a weak and limited man; for if this law did not prevail, any conceivable higher development (Hoherentwicklung) of organic living beings would be unthinkable." A few pages later, he said, "Those who want to live, let them fight, and those who do not want to fight in this world of eternal struggle do not deserve to live.""

"commonly portrayed...as fanatic, half crazed criminals conducting their evil plans with as much reason or sense as 1930s television gangsters. This is a false impression for a number of reasons, but primarily because it underestimates the degree to which large numbers of intellectuals, often leaders in their field, were willing and eager to serve the Nazi regime. Evidence presented in the [Nuremberg] trials reveals the involvement of doctors in a massive program for the extermination of "lives not worth living," including, first, infants with inheritable defects, and later, handicapped children and patients of psychiatric institutions, and finally, entire populations of "unwanted races"

Perhaps I should have added, that sometimes the best of intentions are hijacked and lead to unspeakable evil.

Terry

Please note that these are not my beliefs I only quoted them to show just how twisted good intentions can become.
I have no doubt that those who developed he concept of 'Eugenics' didn't intend for them to be misused this way.
 

Be Well

may all be well
Hum, how did you get that from my post?

Did you get the part about YWD 'help' that resulted in the destruction of entire villages, entire and unique ways of life?
Talk about helping 'little brown brother".....

I don't have the answers, I only have seen some serious problems, problems that will manifest themselves with a lot of people dieing....

Or are we supposed to be working to create as many 'good souls' as we can in the short term and to not worry about the long term consequences?

Sorry but your "reasoning" lost me.

Terry

Very interesting OP. IMHO expecting everyone in the world to live the way "we" live in the US, or EU, is not only unworkable, it is destructive. There is value in other cultures; sometimes not obvious. Sometimes "live and let live" with a bit of appropriate help is the best way - appropriate to those being helped. What do THEY want? What helps them live THEIR lives? etc. And on another thread, Hooters and McDonald's were held up as some kind of beacons of the wonders of the US. Excuse me? Women dressed as sluts marketing toxic junk food is what makes the US a great country?!?!?

Anyway, God created many different kinds of life for many different kinds of people. There are reasons for that not necessarily obvious. People are where they are and trying to forcibly extricate them from their village/tribal/aboriginal lives and stuff them into Western mores and consumption habits has been a dismal failure. Of course some of these aboriginal ways of life are truly abhorrant (Papua New Guinea comes to mind - witchcraft, filth, eating brains and sodomy..>!!!) but what do they have now? The ones who have given up their traditional way of life are mostly drunken sots many prostiting themselves.

Solution? I don't have one. But I know some things that would help.

Each person, each locality, and each country - trying to live by the Golden Rule (there is one version of it in every religion).
 

Be Well

may all be well
Please note that these are not my beliefs I only quoted them to show just how twisted good intentions can become.
I have no doubt that those who developed he concept of 'Eugenics' didn't intend for them to be misused this way.

Actually I am sure that they did.
 

dstraito

TB Fanatic
Especially troublesome is just about ANYTHING .gov does.

Create an agency to reduce our dependency on foreign oil, decades later, with 16K Federal employees our usage has doubled.

Put an animal on endangered species list and with no predators the population explodes causing harm to people and other animals.

Restricting water by 90% so a bait fish can survive, all the while taking away people's lively hoods and reducing food production.

Aggressively put out forest fires so there is no natural clearing out and develop megafires that can't be put out because there is so much fuel.

Creating an insurance program so more uninsured people would be able to get insurance only to have the end result that a LOT more people are going without insurance because their plan was cancelled or they can't get the technology to work.

Give weapons to one faction in a Podunk middle eastern country only to have those weapons used on their own people and against us.

Put excessive regulations on almost everything so the US goes from being a producer to a consumer.

I could go on for ever, we need less Government and despite good intentions (with this .Gov, that is in doubt), unintended consequences can and do happen.
 

Luna

Contributing Member
It seems like most people respond to suffering with a desire to help in some way. This may be an innate human trait (unless you're a psycopath). I don't think this makes a person a 'libtard' (to go off topic a bit) but a caring and emotionally healthy human being. If you have a desire to express spiritual values through your actions and decisions, then you have to give this topic a lot of thought. When is helping not helping? What kind of help is appropriate in any given situation? Should you ever help?

I do some work in animal rescue. Basically trying to reduce the feral/abandoned cat situation which is out of control in the city I live in. I've seen bedraggled, demoralized, rags turn into happy, responsive and loving animals with food and care. However, just feeding these cats does not solve any problem, except their immediate suffering. The better fed and healthier they are, the more they breed, the worse the problem becomes. So we trap and neuter all cats that show up at our colony. Hundreds of people are doing this work all over the city. Will it work? Maybe. But it's more satisfying to feel like I'm making a difference than just watch the suffering.

Obviously a cat is not a human. But the question is, can suffering be alliviated without causing more harm? In this case I think it's true.

But on a human scale, to be honest, I don't think we've evolved enough as a species to make those decisions. Nor do we have any role model for a society where everyone is valued. All we have is a history of conquerers, kings, tyrants, emperors, banksters(heh).....those Who Have dealing with those Who haven't in various appalling ways.
 

Jeff B.

Don’t let the Piss Ants get you down…
Interesting. As things that catch our interest, they usually strike some component of our memories or past.

This was in 1978 and Dr. A spent an hour explaining what was really behind the continent wide civil wars in Africa. While the US-USSR cold war didn’t help, and the mess left by colonizing European powers made it worse, in many cases western health technology had increased the population to the point that traditional food production technologies couldn’t keep up. That the increased population created serious political instability.

I recall this time well. I strongly considered and looked into going into the service of a foreign military at this time. I had the experience and schools that this nation wanted. I decided to go on to college instead of confronting what we now know as evil. I know that one more foreign volunteer wouldn't have made a difference, but I still wonder today if I made the right choice. I know what we see now in what was the breadbasket of Africa. Believe me, perspectives of this sort have a great deal to do with ones view of government, statism and individual rights.

Jeff B.
 

Dex

Constitutional Patriot
Good OP, definitely something to think about. It can be summarized quite simply with two words.

Prime Directive

I think Roddenberry was on to something.
 

Anrol5

Inactive
I think the OP was a great post.

This made me think of this quote I saved and include in our *civics* class -

Most of the harm in the world is done by good people, and not by accident, lapse, or omission. It is the result of their deliberate actions, long persevered in, which they hold to be motivated by high ideals toward virtuous ends.
— Isabel Paterson

So right.

The trouble is those people who are motivated by high ideals toward virtuous ends, are usually incapable of seeing the damage they do to others.

The temperence movement and the anti saloon league come to mind. They were filled will well intentioned people who equated liquor with evil and wanted to eliminate evil. Never mind the illogic, they were trying to save the world. How do you force someone to stop and see reason when they are trying to save the world?

You cannot force someone to stop and see reason when they are trying to save the world. They are in full steam roller mode. They flatten everyone who gets in their way, and seem perfectly capable of ignoring the screams of those hurt by their actions. I do wonder if they are psychopaths. They certainly have no empathy for others. Their cause is far more important than anyone's life.


I came to the conclusion a few years ago that a large measure of modern societies problems could be summed up by the old saying ... the road to hell is paved with good intentions

A common statement with several variations that just makes me cringe with dread is .... if I can prevent just one more _____ by ________

Often it can be heard in this form at a tearful news conference "If I can make my child's death meaningful and prevent one more childs death and prevent another parent's suffering by banning XYZ it will be worth it"

And whne uit comes to abortion, we have plenty of people

In fact what commonly happens is not the prevention of suffering but creating a whole class of people who suffer with the misguided well intented mistake of a greiving parent.

What on earth do you say at a time like that that does not make you sound like a cold hearted SOB?

I agree with you on abortion. The *ONLY* stuff, anti abortionist concentrate on is the egg, the sperm, the embryo, and the foetus till 23 weeks. Anything over 23 weeks is completely ignored in the laws they pass. Pregnant women die, infertile women, men, children, even very young babies, but they are motivated by high ideals toward virtuous ends.

I understand why these people are so motivated. They care. But do anti abortionists really realise the incredible amount of damage they do. I frequently feel the road to hell is paved with good intentions. They are very well intentioned. Their motives are good. It is just their actions I have a problem with. They are so cruel.

Especially troublesome is just about ANYTHING .gov does.

Create an agency to reduce our dependency on foreign oil, decades later, with 16K Federal employees our usage has doubled.

Put an animal on endangered species list and with no predators the population explodes causing harm to people and other animals.

Restricting water by 90% so a bait fish can survive, all the while taking away people's lively hoods and reducing food production.

Aggressively put out forest fires so there is no natural clearing out and develop megafires that can't be put out because there is so much fuel.

Creating an insurance program so more uninsured people would be able to get insurance only to have the end result that a LOT more people are going without insurance because their plan was cancelled or they can't get the technology to work.

Give weapons to one faction in a Podunk middle eastern country only to have those weapons used on their own people and against us.

Put excessive regulations on almost everything so the US goes from being a producer to a consumer.

I could go on for ever, we need less Government and despite good intentions (with this .Gov, that is in doubt), unintended consequences can and do happen.


Forcing people to respect the "Sanctity of life", even if those laws cause the deaths of every born living person on this planet.

Well intention people.

Anrol
 

Kathy in FL

Administrator
_______________
I came to the conclusion a few years ago that a large measure of modern societies problems could be summed up by the old saying ... the road to hell is paved with good intentions

A common statement with several variations that just makes me cringe with dread is .... if I can prevent just one more _____ by ________

Often it can be heard in this form at a tearful news conference "If I can make my child's death meaningful and prevent one more childs death and prevent another parent's suffering by banning XYZ it will be worth it"

In fact what commonly happens is not the prevention of suffering but creating a whole class of people who suffer with the misguided well intented mistake of a greiving parent.

What on earth do you say at a time like that that does not make you sound like a cold hearted SOB?

You said exactly what I've been thinking since I read the OP.

As a Christian my personal take is this: prayer first because it may not be YOUR place to help someone, much less try to "save" them.

Another thought ... obviously some societies have created these technologies and they were for the most part "good." That said, most did not happen over night or in a vacuum. The technological changes happened over time while simultaneously happening with other social and physical stimuli. They also didn't appear out of thin air in a perfected state. Society "eased into" the changes and/or they happened incrementally. I think dropping a new technology into a society can sometimes create the "shock and awe" that destroys what it seeks to heal and/or better.

On a very simple level you can equate giving money to the beggar on the street corner. One, most homeless coalitions frown on the practice as it dilutes the "good" that can be done by targeting dollars to those that can benefit the most. Two, you don't know if the beggar is really homeless or "faking it" or if someone has stuck one of their most pathetic family members out there to get the money to be used for a different purpose than what the giver thought it was going for. The givers heart might be pure as far as motivation but the results could be as awful as if the giver had been a black hearted snake.
 
Top