Continuing the discussion of the hypothetical Feather Party—a platform centered on independent decision-makers using a decision-making matrix that encourages independent thought—we turn our attention to freedom of religion.
This is an important discussion and when it comes to religion people get really really upset but if we reflect on the essential teachings we can gain the insight that is inherent in nearly all, if not all religions.
Bigotry and religion have likely coexisted likely since the inception of religion itself, serving as mental constructs we use to either divide one another (it's core message perverted for political or other reasons) or bring us together in common humanity (What most religious and secular philosophers taught.). Those who want to divide will take one train of logic and those who want to do good will take another.
This is where the founding fathers and mothers got smart with the lessons of their own abuse. They learned, gained wisdom and wanted to pass that onto the next generation. The core issue is that the Enlightenment principles upon which our country was founded make those bigotries within an institution illegal at their root. Despite this there are still a minority of people who use their positions to promote their own religions and perceptions of heightened value to the harm of others who also deserve religious liberty (There were a number of religions practiced at the formation of a society which are not always acknowledged and the value system extends to all religions.).
This brings us back to the philosphical learning story the Allegory of the Clan: a few bad actors engaged corruption, hatred, and unaddressed bigotry where wrongdoers operated with impunity for years, regardless of complaints. The segregationists, criminal element and extremists of our time. Other crimes and misconduct against women, elderly, children, etc. went unchecked because the decision-makers were driven by prejudice which dehumanized the other and invalidated their rights (..at least for a time.). (Also notice the connection between bigotry, corruption, and performance. It will become more important in future discussions.) Whether intentional or unconscious, they dismissed opposing viewpoints simply because they failed to recognize any validity. The financial and social incentives of dehumanization clear (There is a high likelihood this will change and be reversed.).
While these poor actors represent a minority they still had the ability in this thought experiment to warp the entire closed system. No stops, no red lights, no critical thinking. Any behavior was justified against whistleblowers and witnesses in order to silence them. The more degrees of difference the greater the brutality. Public service was not on the priority list and it was unfair for good officers and officials to have to work with the more corrupted members who were immunized or given sweetheart deals when caught. So the community challenged and improvement occured.
What they found within a year or so after some of the challenge settled was that household income rose, crime declined, investment went up and people become excited about helping their community. Pride developed and a sense of togethers formed to create positive connections. Removing corruption raised the morale, performance, and trust of public service. No thanks to some but to the benefit of all; especially the next victims likely to be undermined.
We want to see this positive growth and momentum in every community in society. When we grow together we can accomplish great things around our shared principles. It is the common man and woman that benefits when our values are upheld by those in leadership positions and they work on society's behalf (i.e. broad based capitalism in contrast to concentrated capitalism.)
 |
| Illustrative Only |
The hypothetical Feather Party argues that we cannot allow institutions—or the people within them—to operate outside of their social contracts and mission statements, especially if public trust declines. We cannot afford selfishness or over influence on decision making that doesn't consider the broader needs of society. There should be no second class citizens intentionally harmed by those who neither respect our values or the inherent rights of others no matter their position within the institutions themselves (i.e. they accepted the dark logic versus what is good.)
So, how do we enhance trust?
Elect Accountable Leaders: We must choose individuals for positions of power who do not harbor racial or religious bigotries, and who refuse to make decisions that violate constitutional principles.
Prioritize Character Over Party: This is not about being pro or anti-party. Rather, it acknowledges that traditional parties have sometimes demanded rigid adherence that may not fully serve the best interests of the public. All parties contain the ability to do good or do harm depending on how free members are to vote their conscious and make decisions that resonate with their values systems.
Vote Your Conscience: Regardless of party affiliation, we must ensure the people we elect do not promote the supremacy of any specific religion or demographic. We know right from wrong—so vote your conscience. The land of the free is for all of us and no one from the top to the bottom has the right to violate those social contracts.
*These are philosophical explorations and discussions so you may change around the elements, reject/accept, disagree/agree, etc. Take with a grain of salt. There is no right or wrong answer.
