Dear Friends,
It seems to me, asynchronous power is the source of all injustice. Because injustice cannot exist when power is equal. Some see the problem of asynchronous power and believe the solution is to use it to punish, instead of eliminating the problem altogether. Their reasoning is that if there’s a disparity they should use it to fix the wrongs and set things right. Others simply want to exploit asynchronous power structures to expand their ego. There are those who may say that asynchronous power is everywhere and so questioning it is like questioning air. Yet we do question air. We have decoded its very atomic structure. We use reductionism on everything so why not asynchronous power? If it is indeed the source of all injustice, then how can we fix it?
Asynchronous power is everywhere. The problem of asynchronous power isn’t new, the ancients struggled with it as well. It surrounds us, in the family, business, government, and the power can be political, monetary, or any number of things. Moreover, there are times when asynchronous power is absolutely desired. As in the case of a parent and child relationship. The problem arises when that disparity of power is abused. Often we see it abused in the family, where a youth is started out with the goal of seeking asynchronous power to exploit. This is usually the case in broken homes. In healthy homes, however, the model is quite different. Asynchronous power is used to protect, nurture, and love. That is the better example. We all follow examples.
If lightning hits you, that’s tragedy, but if a king orders your execution for a speech crime… that’s injustice. Moreover, if your power is equal to the king’s the order is nothing but hot air. It’s when someone has authority over another that injustice is possible. There are general injustices and personal injustices. We have all suffered them. Plus, we have all inflicted them. Injustice can be inflicted on those with more power… if it’s done clandestinely. You could say that the more injustice there is, the more there will be. This means that the opposite is probably true as well. The less injustice there is… the less there will be. How do we get to a place where there’s ever less injustice though? One way is to follow Confucius’ advice, that leaders lead by example.
When Confucius was in Lu state, the Duke of Lu ordered the sage come visit. During the visit the Duke asked Confucius how he could get his people to stop drinking to excess, lusting after each other’s wives, and gambling… to which the sage replied, ‘You could lead by example and stop doing those things yourself.’ The next day Confucius and his disciples escaped Lu state. They fled due to the asynchronous power of the bacchanalian Duke and the wise man. The way is clear but it requires ethics, courage, and a spine… the elite lack all three. Nevertheless, injustice comes from the top and flows down, so justice must start at the top and flow down. The normal paradigm however is that injustice and violence to keep people in line flows from the top… and resentment from the bottom.
The more injustice we see the more likely it is that when we have the upper hand… we’ll be unjust. Because we copy what works in our society. Mencius had the golden path and Aristotle the Golden Mean… in both, the wise person isn’t overly virtuous, or too despicable. The sage chooses the middle path in the society he or she find themselves. In Sodom the golden mean was far different than in Victorian England. Nevertheless there was a mean in both places. If the mean then is to abuse asynchronous power, then the incentive is to abuse power and that will be the norm. If the incentive becomes not to abuse power, then that will become the norm. We’re all leaders in some way. Start by leading by example in your own sphere. The mean in society is what we make it… by our examples.
Sincerely,
John Pepin
