Just Passing Through
Our country is going to have a long weekend this week because a certain important event is happening. A well known dignitary is arriving for a visit. And if my analytical thinking serves me right, someone from the highest ranks of any organizational structure only comes for a visit anywhere if the matter to be discussed within the organization is something the subordinates are not being allowed to handle by themselves. Which is then a curiosity to me. Why is he coming for a visit, really?
There has been a whole lot of preparation made for the visit. Issues from security to accommodations to guest and crowd control have been laid out for months. It’s a standard everytime someone from higher ranks come for a visit. Which prompts me to ask, why is it that we always have to wait for someone “important” to arrive before we actually clean up things. It’s like in the house. We leave the clutter lying around when we aren’t expecting any guests. But when we know someone’s going to come for a visit, we prepare the house so well until it’s spic and span that you can actually see someone’s underwear from the reflection on the floor if they were wearing a skirt.
The preparation for this visit has been done for months. Which to me means, we are actually capable of planning and preparing for things months in advance, until eventual implementation of such plans and preparations. Planning of things that are connected to beautification of our surroundings. I’m so sure the cleaning up has been astounding just so that when that dignitary arrives, their whole group would see that the roads are clean, the stray living things (animals and people) lining up the streets on a daily basis would not be there, and almost everyone around them would have halos on their heads. Which I think would be speedily disposed of when the entourage has left. In other words, everything to be seen by them are arranged to be sickeningly nice and clean for the duration of their visit, which then returns to the normal status afterwards.
But these are for aesthetic value only. Something that is nice for the eyes to see. What I am really concerned with is this.
It is a known fact that high ranking positions hold a whole lot of clout. By clout I mean, they could make things happen when someone asks them to. And this particular dignitary can just wave a finger and have all the clouts do something simultaneously. A power that to me is not only scary but to be feared.
When I was so much younger, someone asked someone of the same rank to support a revolution in our country. A revolution that was known to many as a peaceful revolution. But contrary to what everyone thought, it was not a peaceful revolution. It was a well-planned economy controlling event that until now has caused many of our countrymen to become poor. Which only when I reached adulthood that I truly understood.
Which is why to this day, after I had fully understood that part of our history, I look upon this visiting dignitary’s position not with respect but with fear. Fear that indeed, with much power comes great responsibility. And when that responsibility is used to control others, benevolently at times, because a favor was asked by someone they deem as worthy to bestow a gift upon, then you would know that the decision-making has been compromised.
I have so many questions kept inside me all these years.
In that so-called peaceful revolution decades ago, who gave the go-signal for their people to step in and endorse the decision and the event?
Who asked their people to step in and endorse it?
When someone asked them for “help” to make the event “peaceful” did they do their research and presented to each other all the projections of the possible results on the economy, societal structure, and the people’s personal principles from the support they would give?
If the results didn’t turn out the way they were expecting it to be (that is, benevolent), did they have a contingency plan on how to give a different kind of support for our country after the damage had been done?
In my country, I have long accepted the fact that there is no actual separation of “church and state”. It has been that way for centuries. And if anyone would even learn from the Da Vinci Code’s lessons, there is really no good enough reason to destroy an organizational structure that many believe and rely upon because it keeps everyone feel safer, even if you don’t believe in what they believe in. Respect for each others’ groups is always the best way to treat each other. But the question I have is for those at the top of this organizational structure.
If at any time in the future, someone from somewhere would again ask them to help support another so-called “peaceful revolution” such as the one held in my country decades ago, would they?
Because personally, I think they shouldn’t.
Every revolution means there is a change in the entities holding the power. And when there is a necessity for a change, then there should also be the necessity for more than just an in-depth study of the effects of such a change. And if those who are expecting to gain power from the so-called change cannot fully guarantee that the people would not be suffering most of the consequences of such a change even decades after the change, then they should not receive any kind of support from any kind of organizational structure.
If I was to make my statement above any simpler it would be this.
Group A wants to gain power under the guise of a “peaceful revolution”
Group A asks Group B to support them to gain power
Should Group B say yes or no?
I personally think Group B should do research and
- Find out who’s really asking for the support
- Find out what the real intentions are
- Find out who is going to gain the most power after the support is given
- Find out how many people’s lives are going to be affected after the power is transferred
- What kind of effect would it have on the people, would they become richer, poorer or stay the same
- How many people would be affected
- How long do the negative/positive effects last? A year? Several years? A decade? Decades? A century or more?
- If after the event the people who planned it and asked for the support died? Who would take over them and would they have the same intentions?
- Research on all the existing laws and regulations that would be affected or be bypassed by such support
- Research on all the existing groups outside of their own that would be affected or be bypassed by such support
- Make their numerous charts and graphs so that even the oldest ones from their group would be able to visualize just how good or damaging the support requested would be to the society and the economy
I could write more about this but I think my point has been made.
And if things could possibly be explained any simpler it would be
“If someone asked you a favor and you granted it, would you be responsible enough to clean up all the mess afterwards when the favor has been used, abused and misused?”
Because if anyone would like to be involved in our country, but you are not a permanent resident of our country, whatever kind of involvement you would have with us would stay with us because eventually, you would just be passing through. And when you are gone, we would be left to stay and pick up the pieces or enjoy the fruits, whichever it is that results from your passing through our land.
For that is where the real concern is, when you think of what would be left behind after you have passed through. Either we continue smiling after saying goodbye or we don’t.
I’d prefer to think of it as just a visit, like a vacation to the beach. No favors asked, no favors granted. Just passing through.
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.
Comments
No comments yet.
Leave a comment