Madican's Meditations on Life

Intelligence, Inconsideration and Inspiration

 

This 2nd part looks at 3 other basic aspects of human life that begin with “in” and starts with a question about money.

 

It is quite an easy thing to see how the rich get richer. They have power and money and use it to get more. However, it is quite a difficult thing to comprehend why people without much money allow it to happen and have allowed it for so long in the past.  There are, after all, more of us than them. The rich rely on the majority of people buying their goods or products. And if the people organised and got together to stop helping the rich make profits from their labours…

 

​

 

​

 

 

 

 

​

 

 

 

 

My 2nd theory on human beings tries to answer this basic inequality. My take on it is that humanity can be divided into considerate and inconsiderate people then sub-divided again into varying degrees of intelligence ranging from very intelligent to not too intelligent/unintelligent.

 

(A better word than “intelligence” might be cleverness, reason, shrewdness, know-how or plain common sense. I have used intelligence for the simple reason that none of these other words start with “in”).

 

To divide up humanity into the 2 attributes I want to consider then imagine an X-axis on a graph that showed the ranges from totally considerate to totally inconsiderate then imagine the y-axis to show intelligence as a varying factor from highly intelligent to unintelligent along this axis.

 

People could therefore be divided into these 4 basic categories.

1. There are extremely inconsiderate people whose intelligence ranges from extremely intelligent to unintelligent - about 5 - 10% of the population.

2. There are about 40 - 45% of people who are inconsiderate (ranging from very to mildly inconsiderate) and intelligent ranging from clever to not too clever.

3. There are another 40 - 45% of people who are considerate (ranging from very to mildly considerate) and intelligent ranging from clever to not too clever. 

4. Finally there are exceptionally considerate people whose intelligence ranges from extremely intelligent to unintelligent – again about 5 - 10% of the population.

 

(The figures I have used may seem a little pessimistic. I am not wedded to these numbers.  I know of no studies to support these figures. I have simply split the world ‘s population in half as part of this explanation. As far as intelligence is concerned then by definition, approximately half of the world must be at or below average intelligence. If you want to think there are many more considerate people, say 60% or 70 % or more then feel free to do so. However, you do have to reconcile this with why the human world is not quite the paradise it could or should be if it is overwhelmingly populated by kind and considerate people).

 

The extremely inconsiderate and intelligent people in 1) above run the planet. They rise to this position because they will step on and all over everyone else in their pursuit of money and power and they have the brains and/or money to do so. The others who are inconsiderate and not as clever in 2) above don't stop those in 1) as they are just looking out for themselves and may not be aware enough to do so anyway.

 

The considerate, but not intelligent people in 3) above may want the world to be different - a fairer distribution of wealth, a health service which is free for all etc, - but they are not clever enough or organised enough to bring this about of themselves.

 

Finally the intelligent, considerate people in 4) above do try to change the world. At the top end of this scale are the Ghandis, the Attlees, the Mandelas, the Luther Kings etc of the world. They are usually attacked in their own lifetimes by the their inconsiderate, but intelligent counter-parts who see that inspiring poor people to create a fairer world will impair their ability to accumulate more wealth. Unfortunately, these inspiring people are hampered by the fact that 50% of the world is not really concerned about the other 50%. Plus 5 - 10% of these inconsiderate people are actively engaged in not making the world a fairer place. They use their power, influence and money to put out messages in the press, in the media, in society – some subtle, some not so subtle – that divide people and delude others into opposing the inspirational people. These people know that their power and wealth will be diminished if they are more equitably distributed amongst the majority.

​

You can see this in America where the Republican message is that socialism and communism are dirty words. Why doesn’t the USA have a National Health Service? Why doesn’t the American government restrict the sale of guns especially semi-automatic weapons in spite of the regular mass killings that occur in schools or cities? It is because the pharmaceutical, private insurance and gun companies make lots of money out of selling medicines, insurance and guns. The profits from these companies are then used to lobby politicians and governments of all persuasions to introduce legislation that make it easier for them to make even more money or at the very least to oppose the creation of laws that would restrict them in any way. Money is a very effective tool to creating partnerships with people even though the consequences of those partnerships result in the long-term detriment of the partners who are being paid.

 

Even when the tide of public opinion turns and it swings against unbridled corporate power, those others who are considerate are usually not organised or intelligent enough to fully take power away from the really inconsiderate minority. Again you can see this after the 2nd World War when the Labour government was elected with a massive landslide majority. The Attlee government did lots of great things – nationalizing the coal, gas, trains, steel industries and creating the NHS to name but a few. However, great as the NHS is, it is simply being paid for by the majority of the people. Nye Bevin once said he was able to create the NHS because he “stuffed the doctor’s mouths with gold”. By that, he meant that some doctors would not co-operate with the NHS idea and he allowed them to be able to continue in their very lucrative private practices. Again if you look at the companies that were nationalized – coal, steel, gas etc. Some of these were in dire straits financially. The coal mines had been in trouble for decades and had been the cause of the 1926 General Strike. The government took these industries on and rightly so and used public money to invest in them and resuscitate them for the public good. Profitable companies, however, were left in the main to carry on making money. The government failed to follow through by incorporating more companies and more profitable companies into Great Britain PLC as part of the nationalization plan.

 

At first sight, I must admit that this analysis does not seem to bode well for the building of a fairer or more caring society but it’s not all pessimistic. It is here therefore that I need to introduce some optimism by use of another IN word. That word is “inspirational”.  The Attlees, the Mandelas, the Martin Luther-Kings are all people who inspire us to be better than we would be of ourselves. They can be the catalyst that makes a revolution occur. By “revolution” I do not necessarily mean some violent over-turning of a regime by a mass of armed revolutionaries – although this can happen. By “revolution” I mean a rejection of or revolt against the current or accepted way of political thinking.

 

Revolutionary moments usually occur when there has been an event or long series of events that make people think “up with this, we no longer want to put”. This could be due to a deadly dictator, a brutal regime, a prolonged period of widescale poverty, a world war etc. When people have had enough of a particular system and this coincides with the rise of a highly inspirational, intelligent and considerate figure (like Attlee at the end of WW2 or Mandela in South Africa) then people can come together and build a truly inspirational service – like an NHS or a movement for independence. However, it usually takes very hard times that impact on a lot of people and an inspirational figure or figures to bring this about. In the intelligence/inconsideration graph, the considerate people in 3) are guided or led by the inspirational people in 4) and even some of the inconsiderate people in 2) are convinced. The people in 1) realise they are beaten and must give ground for the time being…

 

​

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

​

 

The rich get richer usually by degrees rather than in one fell swoop. It is often a gradual incremental process and people do not see or realise how great the differences are between their lives and those with huge amounts of money. Plus this process is disguised by the advances in technology. It is an obvious fact that people’s lives have become better with the advent of technology – at least in the developed world. A fridge would have seemed a luxury to my parents in their youth in the 1930s. I still remember my parents buying a fridge in the early 1970s. Nowadays in the UK I would hazard a guess that very few people would not possess one. Ditto colour televisions, phones, cars, washing machines. The luxuries of one generation rapidly become the standard possessions of the next. In that way, people’s lives are improved and technology takes away some of the drudge and makes things easier.

 

However, even taking this into account, the world is still grossly unfair. Half of the people on the planet are still living lives that are not much different to their grandparents or their great grandparents. This is certainly true in the less developed south of the planet. The argument for the trickle down of wealth has been soundly discredited by the rich getting richer in the more developed north. The rich are getting richer and the gap between the rich and the poor is greater than ever.

 

I do not see this gap getting smaller because of religions. Take the two great religions of the world – Christianity and Islam. Two thousand years ago, Christianity was started after Jesus preached his message and then Paul founded churches around the Near East and Greece. Rome adopted Christianity in the early 4th century and by the end of the 4th century the Christians were in charge and persecuting the pagans. By 1000 CE Christianity was thoroughly established and had spread right around the northern countries of the Mediterranean and in part of both the east and west Mediterranean. In the 7th century Muhammad received his message from the Angel Gabriel and the Koran was written down. By 1000 CE, Islam had spread through the Middle and Near East, across north Africa and into Spain.

​

Both religions teach a belief in one God and that as the creatures of that God we should treat each other with respect. So for the last 1000 years, Christianity and Islam have been preaching their messages to peoples right around the Mediterranean. But just look at that world. Does it look like a success story for either of these religions after 1000 years of preaching to millions upon millions of people? The combined numbers of Muslims and Christians is about 4 billion people now - over half the population of the planet. To my mind, trade unions have done more in the last 150 years to further the cause of ordinary people and to improve their lives than all the religions put together. Trade unions are not perfect organisations, but consider what they have achieved. Working conditions have improved, health and safety is better, wages have increased, society is more tolerant and all of these things have come about either directly or indirectly because of trade unions. I don’t say that religious people played no part – a fair amount of trade unionists have religious beliefs – but before trade unions, the main religions had 850 + years to improve people’s lives and came up with not much. In 150 years the unions have left religions behind in their positive contributions to society in general.

 

I believe that as in trade unions it is only by uniting together and fighting for a better world that we collectively will make it come about.

​

Conversely, it is because people do not get together in an organised fashion or in great enough numbers that the world remains the way it is. We need to join together to be able to really eradicate poverty and to create a world where people co-operate with each in a positive fashion so that we truly could create a paradise on earth. But a paradise based on human achievements.

 

In the 5th century BCE, Protagoras said “Man is the measure of all things” (update “Man” to “Humanity” if you want).

 

Another Greek Xenophanes of Colophon said : “If cows and horses had hands and could paint with their hands as men do, then cows would draw gods that look like cows and horses would draw gods that look like horses.”
 

Just as the ancient Greeks dreamt of gods who look like human beings so too have all other religions brought something of themselves into their own god or gods. We are not going to be saved by religions which have all been created by the fears, insecurities and vivid imaginations of other people. Some of these religions were created by people in times when it was still thought that the earth was flat and for whom iron was “the very latest thing” to make your swords and spear tips out of.

 

As a race we need to realise that it is only by relying on ourselves that we can really thrive and better ourselves. We do not need divine inspiration. We need to educate people especially in science to eradicate belief in spirits, myths and superstitions. We also need to supply good examples of being more considerate towards our fellow humans. There is a great and natural inspiration in us already which will be drawn to these examples. Down the ages we can see that all great men and women have inspired people to come together to understand our true shared and common humanity. Slowly, step by step, people have been encouraged, pushed or nudged forward. It is by being inspired to be more human and to share our resources with our fellow humans that we will create a paradise on this earth in this life – the only one we truly know we have. 

 

 

Solidarity

Brian Madican

May 2020

​