Systems thinking requires looking at the complete picture: inputs, processes, and outputs. Within any system, human processes naturally invite diverse perspectives, often leading to disagreement. When we examine human rights, civil rights, and constitutional law, people interpret these principles through personal lenses shaped by their backgrounds—perspectives formed as early as childhood.
 |
(Illustrative Only)
The importance
of preserving our
democracy moves
beyond the parties
and their agendas.
It is something
fundamental
to who we are.
When we don't reverse
the advantages of corruption
or have appropriate
checks and balances
we are all at risk.
No matter your
race, religion, politics,
or origine.
|
It is rare for individuals to question these foundational perceptions. Those who do are generally more thoughtful and capable of self-reflection, allowing them to shift their lens and view the world from other perspectives. They in history have also been mistreated for challenging assumptions that others take as fact.
...but then it changes (They are doing what nature designed them to do and that is reflective in the human species and history.).
This dynamic is central to the "Allegory of the Clan." based on an Elightenment concept. Within the mindset of those causing harm—whether through corruption, targeted hate, human rights violations, civil rights abuses, or the suppression of religious expression—individuals often act with impunity. Because their worldview tells them their actions are acceptable, they ignore dissenting information that challenges their biases. They allow harmful behaviors to persist unchecked simply because they are unwilling to grow and develop. Failing to undo harm to numerous victims is a data outcome of internal decision making.
Of course, some participants know their actions are wrong. In our allegory, even judges eventually recognize the systemic corruption. At that point, they face a critical choice:
Will they remain loyal to the partisan networks that secured their positions (as appointments are frequently driven by politics rather than merit)?
Or will they honor their fundamental responsibilities to society, their oaths, and a higher value system?
Making this pivot requires challenging deeply ingrained assumptions about others and about life—a hurdle some are unable or unwilling to clear. Ultimately, while institutional systems may seem cold and rigid, their application is deeply subjective. In our allegory, biased, bigoted choices were made that violated countless rights, perpetuated only because those involved refused to change their perspective.
Until these root problems are addressed, they will likely continue into the future, fueling declining public trust and as a consequence encourage social rifts as individuals repeatedly choose lower value systems over higher ones. Unless we expect them to do otherwise and in kindness, empathy, maturity and wisdom we can encourage them to do that; or not (This is where your value systems come into play.).
*This is a thought experiment allegory for learning purposes so feel free to change, discard, add or detract as one sees fit. Take with a grain of salt.
