Reading the reports from Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, it seems that there is a bit of confusion as to what "RIGHT" and "FAIR" are in relation to one another and how they affect the world. I hope to share insight as to what I think about this.
Fair: Having or exhibiting a disposition that is free of favoritism or bias; impartial
Right: That which is just, morally good, legal, proper, or fitting.
Both terms are rather easy to understand and easier still to recognize, no?
Discerning the difference:
Many people still seem to get confused that 'right' and 'fair' are not one and the same. Things that are fair are also usually right, but things that are right are not usually fair. As an example well use the constant streams of reports about mistreatment and abuse with detainees from both Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay.
In a snippet from a CBS report:
Last month, the U.S. Army announced 17 soldiers in Iraq, including a brigadier general, had been removed from duty after charges of mistreating Iraqi prisoners.
But the details of what happened have been kept secret, until now.
It turns out photographs surfaced showing American soldiers abusing and humiliating Iraqis being held at a prison near Baghdad. The Army investigated, and issued a scathing report.
It’s shocking that our own countrymen would do such an inhumane thing to another person. We're there to protect and serve. We're there to maintain peace and spread Democracy. What we've done is not right. At least, some would say that anyway. Others might say that the 'enemy' has long mistreated US POWs and what we've done back is no different; what has happened is fair if you will.
So where does the line get drawn on 'fair' and 'right'? As a country we're supposed to uphold the standards we claim to be spreading. These actions do nothing but hurt our reputation and make us no less evil than our 'enemy'. At the same time the phrase "eye for an eye" comes to mind. We really didn't do anything that wasn't done to us. It’s a form of "fighting fire with fire".
Long have we seen footage of Americans being dragged down the street, beaten to death, beheaded, shot, and held hostage for the world to see. A public display of humiliation. Answering the violence with our own brand of violence is simply the nature of the beast. It is "war" and there are rules that don't apply; tactics used that otherwise would be unthought-of. We have to let them know that we will employ the same methods of information gathering as they do. We need to make sure that the "war" is fought on the same terms within both sides. This is hard to do when one side recognizes the Geneva Convention and the other side does not. The US isn't the only country that stands accused of humanitarian infractions, the UK and Australia are also under a bit of heat about this.
Inaction of the difference:
All the while, I sit and think "Well... it is fair. They do something to us and we have an unwritten right to do it back". Even as children we are taught to play a game by the rules, but the rules are written to be fair. If we have 4 pieces of candy and three other friends, then we're taught to give each friend one piece of candy so that we might all have a piece. We're taught to be fair. This is no different, we're being fair.
We may be acting "fair", but we sure aren't doing the right thing. Americans pride themselves (almost too much) as being inherently right regardless of the situation. As children we are also taught to believe that "honesty is the best policy", why? It is because telling the truth is the "right" thing to do.
This leaves us to figure out how we go about acting both fair and right while maintaining a set and civil standard for behavior. I'd love to be able to say it’s an easy task, but I feel that we must first recognize the infractions within ourselves and realize that a majority of the time we only do right if we're watched and are only fair if it benefits us.
Coming to grips with the problem:
To acknowledge that you are wrong when you actually are is hard enough, but to throw into that the idea you are also unfair can be more damaging. We all clamor for ground when we're accused of being unfair by justifying the smallest of points and stating only one side; our own perspectives without realizing the views of another. What we need to start doing is tolerate and understand the differences we all have. The catch to this is that while some will tolerate, others have the right to not tolerate. This would be fair. It is fair to allow some to tolerate a situation and let others not tolerate it; it is right to allow this to happen because it is fair. It is not right to go allow the unfair advantage of only being "black and white" about anything. Unfortunately the problem arises with time consumption. Weighing out the pros and cons of every detail of every problem or disagreement consumes an enormous amount of time. Unfortunately winning a debate, argument or even war is the result of being unfair. How then, is it the winner can also be right?
New paths:
If we look at "good" and "evil" we'll notice that the title is nothing more than a perspective. Those who fight for good are good because it is the side for which they fight. The opposition is almost always evil by default. This means both sides are good and both sides are evil depending on the side on which you stand, no? It is then safe to assume that fair and right also follow suit.
There is a saying "The only fair fight is the fight you win". This means that the victory is fair because you won the fight, the defeatist will claim unfair and wrongdoing on the basis of defeat. There really is no way to combat that outlook other than to simply acknowledge that in the end it is an opinion based on perception By understanding "that things that are fair are also usually right, and things that are right are not usually fair" we'll have a better idea of on how to combat the urge to lower ourselves into becoming the same level of people who mistreat us.
Closing the deal:
How does all of this relate? Well... I feel that if we as a nation realize that people in another country do not act and feel the same way on certain issues as we do, that it’s okay. I feel that if they have a different practice and methodology than we do, that it too is okay. To tolerate and not tolerate each other is absolutely fine and fair, but to stoop to a level of the same actions with justifications of being fair is wrong. The right thing to have done is uphold the standards we hold ourselves to and practice good moral ethics. It may not be fair, but it is the right thing to do. Since we want to harp up the ideas of being in the right, we should clean up our act and practice it. Maybe then the world will stop badgering us and labeling us as hypocrites.
Simply because other nations has mistreated our troops and ideals gives no justification to reciprocate the action upon their people. Our image as a country is horrible in the eyes of most of the world. I'm not going to point fingers at individuals or groups, but it is something we've done to ourselves. We've let pride step in and take over in place or morals and ethics. I feel that allowing the other countries like Iraq to beat and publicly display our troops bloodied, bound and dead is very wrong and it infuriates me, however there is a better way to resolve this.
Our troops join the military knowing they could be called to war and possibly die. It is part of the job. I was a soldier once and have been faced with the same possibilities so I'm aware of the risks involved. I don't think it is right to turn around and defile our own name for the sake of pride. I think maybe if we show the nations with power, that we are civil in the face of adversity, that we can withstand a little bit of foul play, then we can regain trust and honor amongst this good country. After all, its boiled down to "Do we play fair and give up our honor, or do we stand tall and do right giving up a bit of pride?" It has been my experience that too much pride will only give you enough rope to hang yourself.
As a thought, a couple of things my Akijujitsu sensei said to me many years ago:
"Power is not the ability to crush an opponent; it’s the ability to crush them and choose to let them go".
On the dojo wall hung an engraved plate:
Be careful my thoughts, lest they become my words.
Be careful my words, lest they become my actions.
Be careful my actions, lest they become my lifestyle.
Be careful my lifestyle, lest it become my heirloom.
If we were to relate any of this to the current US immigration fiasco we'd have to look at it objectively. Conservatives claim the legality of the issue making it hypocritically "black and white". While I tend to agree with that, the liberals play up and beat to death the fact that everyone breaks a law so why not let the immigrants continue to break a law until they get caught. Neither side makes a bit of damn sense. I believe we should take a hrd line, and say "Play by the rules or go home". Illegal immigration is not only unfair to natural citizens, but also to legal immigrants who waited in lines, filled out their papers, and got their approval to become an American.
Looking at "FAIR VS RIGHT" we'd understand that not only does two wrongs not make a right, but equating one crime to all others is not fair either. It negates the situation by playing on pure semantics of the issue without addressing the issue directly. Thus, an example of the problem in understanding "FAIR VS RIGHT" and how this lack of understanding continues to perpetuate a problem that exists.
