Some of history's most consequential disasters began with people who genuinely believed they were doing the right thing. You know the old saying, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." The French Revolution began with liberty, equality and fraternity. It ended with the Reign of Terror. Prohibition sought to improve American society but helped create a lucrative criminal underworld. Reconstruction sought to rebuild the South and secure freedom for formerly enslaved people, but political corruption, competing interests, and the eventual abandonment of federal enforcement undermined its promise and potential.
Programs, movements, crusades, laws, so many have been developed and designed to solve a big problem. To improve the lives of others. Yet so many throughout history have failed. Was it because of incompetent leadership and administration, corruption, or both, perhaps. Yet it happens so often. At some point the pursuit of seemingly good ideals becomes more destructive than the problem(s) they were designed to solve.
History repeatedly demonstrates that societies are extraordinarily complicated. Anything that involves masses of humanity is going to be so. Yet governments and movements routinely assume they can redesign human behavior through legislation, regulation, or ideology. Such has been the doctrine of failed social experiments throughout history. Marxism, Leninism, Maoism, Stalinism, and the various authoritarian regimes built around these doctrines have left behind a legacy of repression, economic failure, and human suffering. Nazism, though rooted in a very different ideology, demonstrated another equally horrifying consequence of political fanaticism and the concentration of unchecked power. China, one of the most populated countries on earth still operates as a socialist state under a dictatorship. Much the same as Russia does. Are they superior forms of government? The ruling parties believe so, the citizenry, not so much. Are human rights respected under these forms of rule? No.
Some other examples of social engineering failures: the collectivization of agriculture in the Soviet Union, Mao's Great Leap Forward, Prohibition in America, and numerous attempts to engineer economic equality through centralized planning. All of this begs the question: why do intelligent people repeatedly believe they can engineer outcomes that human nature and historical experience suggest are unlikely?
Perhaps the most dangerous phrase in politics and public life is "It's for the greater good." That and perhaps Ronald Reagan's statement "We're from the government and we're here to help." Once people become convinced their cause is morally superior, they can begin justifying almost anything in its pursuit. A few glaring examples: The French Revolution's justification of political executions, Revolutionary movements that became authoritarian, and political leaders who justify suppressing dissent in the name of national security or social progress. The tendency to believe one is on the right side of history makes one less likely to recognize when their actions are wrong or deleterious.
Now, having said all of the above, think of situations and events occurring in the world today. The war in Ukraine. The riots in Europe. The Iranian "war." I am reluctant to call it a war, I'm more inclined to think of it as a 'relentless, senseless conflict.' Are the movements taking place solving a problem? Are they changing and shaping human behavior for the better? Is there a truly noble cause anywhere in the equation? Can progress be seen or visualized anywhere on the landscape?
Perhaps the greatest lesson history offers us is that good intentions are never enough. Noble objectives require sound judgment, competent leadership, accountability, and an appreciation for the complexities of human nature. Without those things, even the most admirable ambitions can become instruments of destruction. And history, unfortunately, has given us more than enough examples.
No comments:
Post a Comment