How can we truly distrust the system?

“Where ignorance is our master, there is no possibility of real peace.” – Dalai Lama

The definition of ignorance, according to the Merriam Webster Dictionary is: Resulting from, or lack of knowledge or intelligence.

Nonetheless, in accordance to society, ignorance is much less empathetic. Ignorance results in the state of having disinterest for the acquisition of knowledge, rather than a simple lack of such. Ignorance compromises not the absence of intelligence, but an apathy when facing the possibility to increase it.

Ignorance is a society’s black death, major plague.

There are multiple types of ignorant people within a country, and I am not claiming I am the wisest of all civilians, but given the life I was provided by my family, I consider myself to be average if there ever were to be a scale in which ignorance is at one end, and “wiseness” at another. Anyhow, there is one type of ignorant people in which I am most concerned about, as these: are the most viewed, consider themselves to be the subject of more justification, and manage to create an illusion toward the righteousness of a person. One cannot seek to disobey if in discordance with a specific norm, however, one can seek to disobey if in discordance with a norm and if in action to change such. The type of ignorants I am referring to are those that claim they distrust the system. Distrusting the system majorly includes a lack of trust in a method used to perform a specific task, hence, within a nation there can be multiple systems. The system can also refer to the functioning of a nation in its overall, e.g. The capitalist system, when referring to a major socioeconomic one. These people, especially in a third world country, attempt to challenge the status-quo without an argumentative base, for their own benefit, and by providing no alternatives for the progression of the system itself, or for the substitution of it.

Initially, these somewhat transcendentalists tend to enhance the misfortunes inside a system as an excuse to contend for its failure. For instance, inside the welfare system there are multiple defects, which include the programmed visits by the social security workers to the houses of those receiving the welfare. These programmed visits are, as the word itself states, programmed, therefore, do not reveal the daily life of whomever is receiving the welfare and whether these are using it to improve their current life-style or whether these are just using it to become societal vegetables. Nevertheless, these programmed visits are just a portion of what welfare involves, and these ignorants would use this mistake inside the whole welfare system as a way to argue for its complete fiasco.

In many cases, these people also tend to falsely claim they do not believe in the functioning of a method in order to not act upon it. For a person can act upon what he believes unjust, but not falsely claim they believe something is unreasonable in order to prevent them from contributing to it. This scenario is mainly visualized in third world countries, were (in presidential elections) people who are unaware of the each of the candidate’s contentions claim they do not agree with them, believing themselves to be superior, and in another level of morality. Yet, there is nothing moral in avoiding a nation’s attempt to listening to its people by becoming mute to these possibilities. There is nothing moral in using witlessness as an excuse for not contributing. And if one truly does not agree with any candidate, including those of third parties, why not seek for the bettering of the system, and for the moment, vote for the one who is in more accordance to your moralities? Not contributing makes oneself more sinful, and as a result, more ignorant.

How can we truly distrust the system? When we know all of its positive and negative remarks, when we are not using it as an excuse to not act upon it due to slothfulness, and when we can provide alternatives.

A technique not functioning properly, does not signify it is not valid, as it may perhaps require modernization. When one can prove the complete letdown of a method, and one can sincerely provide other methodic alternatives-that do not involve the increment of personal benefits- for the resolution of a problem, it is when one can distrust the system. The real ignorants are those that claim they misbelief in something when they do not comprehend the veracity and usefulness of it . Every nation’s utopian dream is peace, and, as asserted by Dalai Lama, there is no way to achieve this vision if ignorance fulfills the minds of its people.

One thought on “How can we truly distrust the system?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s