Compromise

Compromise

“You said you would never compromise your principles. And now look what you have done.”

“What have I done? Think about it. Would you rather have nothing or what we can get? What is it you believe I am compromising in order to adhere to a pledge I made when I knew little of how the world works, and even less about people.”

“You once said that once you deviate from an ethical code, you become the very thing you are attempting to eliminate. You must remember saying, “lies become the origin of more lies, distortions of facts, and the truth those facts are based on.” Don’t you remember the speech about the sandcastle and the tide? How a simple grain of sand can, when joined by others become a castle, built from innocuous individual grains of sand that when left on their own, remain the consequence of time and external forces, but nothing as magnificent as a castle.”

“I know what I said, but I have matured. I realize that to compromise exhibits the ability to understand the problem not proselytize its nonexistent qualities, driving them into camps where truth can be agreed upon, not just bandied about as an excuse for the differences of opinion.”

I understand the concept of give and take, but I also am aware that once you begin to bend you also begin to create an environment where change becomes easier. The stringent guidelines that once defined the unacceptable, begins to waver. Each time you lose more of your conviction under the guise of compromise, you allow the principles to change to accommodate what you perceive to be the best for everyone. You begin to rationalize your thoughts and actions to mimic your change in attitude and belief and find yourself closer to the imprecise façade of appearing to help with no impactful solutions, only the appearance of having done what is in the best interest of everyone concerned.

“I have no problem with you changing your stance on issues, but you should, if they are legitimate, be able to explain the reasoning behind your resolve. I have no problem changing my mind if I am convinced by data that I had not included certain aspects of the equation. But if I am not positive that the data is correct, what do I gain by changing my position if it is only going to appease those who have a different opinion.

In the past several elections we have been asked to vote for the lesser of two evils. Not that the candidates are inherently evil, but they are certainly not the best candidates, only the ones who are politically connected, which In translation are ones who have the monetary resources backing them.

Why would you spend millions of dollars supporting someone if you were not convinced they were going to make decisions that enriched you, and solidified your stance on issues? Not issues that would necessarily benefit the majority of those you represent, but those who have entrusted you with keeping the status quo alive and well.

You can, you must know, push too hard and find yourself the target when there appears no way of escaping the hand that is perceived to be preventing them from sharing in the wealth. Revolutions are born not out of merely anger and frustration, but more so the feeling that your life does not matter. Democracy when tied to a fatalistic notion that your survival is at the discretion of someone who has been isolated from life by money and therefore has not concept of what it is like to be you, or those like you.

When you are raised in a bubble that protects you from the realities of survival your disappointed hinges on a personal aspect that does not consider others, but an opportunity to exploit a situation to better enhance your own interests.

When money and power provide an illusion of absolute safety you forget that vulnerability is a part of the lives of the majority of people, and you have no way of relating to the challenges faced daily when you live outside the dome and are only able to see in but not share in the protection provided.

The mistake the privileged make is believing in their own invulnerability. Nothing can touch them but the arrogance of another who shares the privilege with you and realizes one day that if you were no longer there, there would be twice as much for him or her. Delusion is a disease that eats away at the presumed safety you believe you have, exposing the reality that you only survive because of the support systems of the people you look upon as inferior to yourself.

It is the reason you vote against universal health care, a minimum wage, affordable housing, they and many more items you disregard for the same reason, they make life equitable. Wealth allows the cast system to continue and become increasingly more profound.

I suggest you consider the Rasputin’s of the world, and the Romanov Empire that was nothing more than an illusion that dissolved the moment people realized it only existed because they allowed it to.

They begin to ask why they have so little, and you have so much. They begin to realize that you get the best health care money can buy, and they get whatever health care they can obtain for the money they have available. They begin to realize that your life is considered more valuable than theirs, although they grow the food you eat, educate the doctors that provide for your well-being, and protect you from those who are attempting to equalize the situation by taking some of the excess for themselves.

You use the natural resources of the commonwealth for you benefit. You have written the laws making it possible to exploit resources for personal gain while the remainder of the population suffers the consequences; dirty air, water, and an environment that is warming at an alarming rate, threatening all of humanity.

Money is only worth what it will buy in terms of tangible goods, when no one can afford to buy them they no longer have value. Wealth is an illusion of power that translates to survival, only as long as there is someone who believes what you are asking is what it is worth to him, not the ever-moving market of speculation based on what it might be worth. The bitcoin phenomenon is based on an artificial value given to a nonexistent product that was conjured from this air for the very purpose of feeding the egos of the wealthy.

Let us use a bushel of corn or soybeans as our monetary power for purchasing whatever. It has value in that it can be used to produce other commodities that are essential to survival. You cannot eat bitcoins.

When people refuse to honor your illusion, what will you do then? When a million dollars will not buy you a loaf of bread or fuel for your stove. You will be reduced to the ranks of the general populace, where wealth is measured by your ability to survive, not what is written in a ledger and hidden under lock and key as if you were ashamed of the hypocrisy you heap on those who make it possible for your illusion to continue, at least in your own mind.

Civilizations grow until they can no longer maintain the strangle hold that allows them success, and then it becomes a feeding frenzy as those a wrung or two down the economic ladder have had enough and want what you have. The cycle begins again, corruption takes hold of honorable traits, and money once again is valued at what it can purchase in the way of illusions.”

“You argue against a dilemma that has existed since the beginning of humanity. I am attempting to bridge the gap between those that do not have enough and those that have more than they need. To hold a hard line will do nothing but escalate the tension. Compromise is a way of allowing all parties to come away with something. Refusing to budge only cements the idealism of separatism that is the root of the problem.”

“Do you believe by compromising, those who use their power and influence to tip the scales of commerce and law in their favor, will level the playing field? Don’t you remember the idealism behind the “trickle down theory?” Those who are enriched by the laborers are going to recognize, that without the worker they would have nothing, and then they will turn around and begin sharing the profits by investing in infrastructure and creating meaningful well-paying jobs?

You ignore the fact that people tend to covet what others have, and they are not about to allow someone to take it because it is the fair thing to do. They are going to find legal and even unethical ways to keep that from happening. Couple that with the fact that the longer they remain in authority the more difficult it is for them to relinquish power. If it were not for the Constitution, presidents would remain in office indefinitely? All power ascends until it is stopped; it is the nature of the game and has resulted in the abandonment of shame and honor; two attributes that used to function as a control on corruption and self-aggrandizement.

What I fail to grasp in your argument for conciliation, is who determines when the glass is half full or half empty. It has traditionally been the one in power as it is assumed that he or she being in the seat of authority would know when equilibrium has been reached. My experience, however, is that they, like you, tend to give weight to those that benefit you, and dismiss the so-called minor contributions made by their corresponding counterpart as insignificant.

I will not argue that someone running a company does not deserve to be fairly compensated for his ingenuity and risk, but 500 to a 1000 times more than the people who also jeopardize their livelihood to produce what insures the products value. Shouldn’t they be compensated in a manner that reflects their contribution?

People are far more likely to perform to the best of their abilities when they feel they are an integral part of an endeavor, and not just a cog in the wheel that can be replaced when he or she is determined no longer to have value.

Automation is touted as being the salvation of business, when in fact it is more likely to replace middle management than the traditional workforce. What you do not seem to appreciate is that everyone works for someone. Each of us has our own talents and given the opportunity will use them to the betterment of whatever enterprise they are involved in. Pride is a motivator. People like to feel appreciated, which means being acknowledged for their contribution. realize.

Respect for another’s ability has gone the way of honor, fairness, and decency. A sustainable business relies on workers and management working together to produce a product that not only can they be proud of, but the consumer respects because it has an intrinsic value.”

“Your rhetoric is admirable, but business is no longer about respectability. It is solely about the bottom line. People can come and go but the profitability quotient has to remain attractive. You do not seem to appreciate the fact that power writes the laws that make it possible for the idealism behind honor and respect to be ignored; they no longer have any value. Profit is the heart of any business, everything else is window dressing and capitulation to an idealism that no longer is respected. I am attempting to get as much as possible with the little leverage I have. If I have to compromise my values to achieve that, I will.”

“What you are saying is that ethics and morality have joined hands and now worship at the alter of greed and self-interest, and if workers are to survive they will either have to bend to businesses idealism, or go to the shed and find a pitchfork and look for someplace to put it?”

“Amen.”