The Critique of Humanity, Phase Two: Now Look What You Made Me Do

All human beings so far begin their lives as babies. That may seem so obvious as to be absurd, but some day it may no longer be true, as will later be discussed.

Early things babies learn are: Bright lights can be nasty–it feels good to eat when hungry–it feels good to warm up when cold, but if it starts getting hot it doesn’t feel good any more–noises can be nasty–it feels good to relieve inside pressure, but doing so sometimes leads to loud noises or bright lights or both–it is fun to fall until there is a hard landing, and then it is scary to fall.

Babies graduate from babyhood when they start making sense of noises, including their own. There is a reason that there are simple, easy-to-say versions of the words for Mother and Father in every language. Interactions begin with Who’s Who and continue with Here’s What I Want, though of course Here’s What I Want is there at some level from the first cry of hunger on.

The first perception of Us and Them grows in complexity quickly. First They are the big ones that make things like food and warm happen. Then They may also be same-sizers or near-sizers who distract the bigger Thems from the provision of food and warm. By toddling time They include playmates, wrinkled dote-creatures, walking furballs, and Not-Us-At-Alls.

Reward and Punishment become more confusing. Rules are imposed. Violation of Rules is not cut and dried. Extenuating circumstances may be argued, and often are, if only as a delaying tactic.

In the fourth grade in the Southwestern United States it is not unheard of for a teacher to observe a child striking another child and, when the teacher begins to take appropriate action, two contradictory assertions made: “No, I didn’t. He hit me first.” Some form of those seven words, false-to-fact basis and all, is present in spirit throughout the history of human confrontational interaction.

The United States of America used to be honest enough to include a Department of War in its government, just as the insurance industry used to be honest enough to offer Death Insurance.

Now we congratulate ourselves on the containment of collateral damage, which is another way of saying we only killed a hundred thousand human beings with whom we had no quarrel instead of the who-knows-how-many-more it could have been. We apologize to the dead by shaking our finger in the face of those we DO have a quarrel with, and say in effect, “You shouldn’t have made us do this.”

Here is a quotation I just learned this week, and have come to embrace: “We must not be frightened nor cajoled into accepting evil as deliverance from evil. We must go on struggling to be human, though monsters of abstractions police and threaten us.” Poet Robert Hayden wrote that decades ago.

Now let us imagine a human being of the future. She has been born and raised to early adulthood with her mind in a virtual world and her body on automatic pilot via basic-functions software. The virtual world teaches her language and history and coping skills without the baggage of conflict. It is all nurture. She is never alone, any more than a person is alone who is making blog posts and receiving comments in real time. All her needs are met because the need for acquisition, for conquest, for superiority, never existed for her. She will never be able to say, “Now look what you made me do,” because she will not be made to do anything. She will make the choices that suit her and the world the best.

Now let us ask: could this happen? Should this happen? If it should not happen, how else may we remain human and build an improving world?