In Japan, a Portrait of Mistrust
Trust the “authority”. How is that working out for humanity? Communities establish “authority” to provide information, security, and justice. Society and communities give authority power by the trust given to the authority to provide what they’ve been “authorized” to provide. That’s the dilemma faced by the Japanese people in this NYTimes video. Who can we trust? We spend a great deal of time putting trust in “authorities” that tell us what is safe, what is news, what is just. How often do we explore the accuracy of these “authorities”? Not often enough.
How often do we rely on the “authorities” to provide us with accurate and relevant news? How often are we presented with non-news by these same authorities? We have “authorities” telling us that medications are safe, that coal is a “clean” energy source, that Jamie Dimon had no idea that his corporation had made very bad bets. Pick your choice, but “authority” had a mixed track record at best.
We rely too heavily on “authority” obviously. We fail to consider the ad verecundiam fallacy or the appeal to authority. We don’t bother to consider the accuracy of what the “authority” says. So in the video above, we have the produce merchant at the beginning appealing to the authority of the government to approve her produce as safe for consumption. This is the same government who told the Japanese two years ago that radiation from Fukushima was contained. The women shopping in the store question the authority’s declaration. They demonstrate a rejection of the appeal to authority. Even still, they assume that the produce labeled from other regions is safe, simply because it isn’t near Fukushima. They have reached a point where they feel they can’t trust the “authorities” to provide them with reliable information or safety. The statistics regarding the low levels of trust in the veracity of the Japanese government demonstrate the horrible contradiction that these people face. They want to provide for their children, but they have no way to verify what they’re purchasing.
Here in America we face similar contradictions. We watch as the government spent trillions to fight a war based on a lie, yet they now claim to have to tighten our belts, while they protect their own pay, benefits, and medical coverage. The stock market is reaching new highs even as more and more people are feeling the crunch of the recession that is “authoritatively” over. We grab “organic” foods from the market without questioning the veracity of what “organic” actually involves. Some “authorities” tell us that “guns kill people” while others say “guns don’t kill people”.
My point is this: our loss of self-reliance has more to do with mental laziness than anything. We don’t spend enough time verifying the sources of our information or the veracity of our “authorities”. We put too much faith in the good intentions of our leaders and authorities. The trust in “authority” has taken away some of our self-reliance. The last posting had less to do with going back to some bucolic, simpler lifestyle than it did with how much we’ve given our trust over to authorities. These “authorities” have abused our trust, and we must find a way to develop alternate ways to establish “authority” whether it is news, security, or justice. I don’t want to attempt to offer the answers to any of these questions or how to resolve the question of “authority”. I will pose two suggestions to limit authority: that it be temporary and rotational. I’ll elaborate more on that in my next post.
