Gestalt: Understanding the ‘Manipulation of Law’ Cycle and Its Impact
As America’s great experiment with Democracy proceeds past toddlerhood, growing pains are inevitable. It is incumbent upon all participants in a Democratic society to understand the ‘overall’ as opposed to any singular social issue - failing to do so will yield predictable, quite vivid, results.
In Camden County, New Jersey, the failure of that county’s residents to understand the overall impact of their governmental representatives has led to the deaths of four people - three of them children - and the rapes of three women. Seven lives sacrificed to the gods of political corruption and government largesse. (See note at the conclusion.)
Democracy, in this vulgar case, morphed into a spectacular failure that remains ongoing.
But, philosophically, the affair is predictable. It can happen anywhere. And it will happen again if the ‘gestalt’ of Democracy is not understood by society.
Lawyers, as you shall see, are not often the best people entrusted with educating the public. The interests of any given ‘client’ may not be the best interest of ‘society’. Although poorly understood even by the legal profession, law is nothing more than a careful balancing act. One maximizes the freedom and creativity of the individual while, at the same time, protecting society from the harms that freedom and creativity might create. And the converse is true. One maximizes the freedom and creativity of society while, at the same time, protecting the individual from the harms that freedom and creativity might create.
President George W. Bush’s frolic with the Foreign Surveillance Act Court is a succinct example. At a singular pen stroke, the individual was negated in favor of society.
It is an ultimate chicken and egg dilemma, one entity can be momentarily expendable in favor of the other. When and how one becomes expendable is an arbitrary ‘moment to moment’ thing left up, at any given moment, for individuals or society to decide - as President Bush’s foibles with the Foreign Surveillance Act play out. But singular pen strokes operate both ways - individuals can do much the same as President Bush (effectiveness is merely a haggling argument): The ability to sue.
But what happens when the froth and elation of ‘accomplishment’ and ‘success’ of these pen strokes wear off?
Unfortunately, the curse of any Democracy is that law becomes prone to manipulation. The Foreign Surveillance Act was designed to protect individuals from the excesses and harm of a government momentarily blinded by zealousness. The point should not be understated: Any law is prone to manipulation. Avarice, greed, even good intention, can morph into harmful impact - either to society or the individual, sometimes both as the racial Civil Rights struggle in America aptly demonstrates. The ‘Civil War’ began in 1861, and as many attuned citizens in America will tell you, some 145 years later the closing skirmishes are still very much being fought. Equal access to employment, despite skin color, is one such battleground. A recent case lost by the Philadelphia School Board illustrates that racial equality has nothing to do with any given skin color - four Caucasian purchasing agents successfully invoked the same exact equal opportunity laws traditionally used by minorities.
Not exactly a surprise, lawyers for the Philadelphia School Board referred to those employees as "crackers" in a public courthouse elevator after the verdict. So much for entrusting lawyers, at any given moment, to look out for the larger interests of society.
One must be careful to remember: the Civil War racial issue is not unique to America. The basic conflict is generic to Democracy as a whole and it has nothing to do with race. Adopting a ‘law’ is one thing. Enforcing it, squeezing social justice out of it in any pragmatic way, is quite another thing - usually attained long after the law initially was adopted as the cumulative Civil Rights Acts, spanning more than 100 years from the 1860s to the 1960s, eloquently suggests. Adopting law is easy - making socially benevolent use of it is quite another tumultuous thing, hence the Philadelphia School Board case. And the behavior of its legal counsel.
Two wonderfully contemporary examples are the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act - more than 3 decades after the former, and fifteen years after the latter, neither act substantively means anything if you are injured and looking for employment. Sadly, the United States Constitution does not guarantee any ‘right to work’ although, curiously, much of federal legislation, regulation - and even the two above Acts - are predicated on a ‘required’ duty to work. The ‘duty’ vs. ‘right’ to work sleight of hand is still not addressed in America - much to major financial impact and chagrin. If you are an injured veteran in America, one lives dangerously - if one lives at all. Homelessness is normative.
What happened to the intent of these laws? The same thing that happened after the initial Civil Rights Acts in the 1860s. Laws are illustrious goals of society. Once passed, and past, they often become illustrious templates for financial exploitation. Incentive shifts from achieving ‘social benevolence’ to ‘how can I make or save money off of this law’ - it is a basic tendency of human nature in any free market society. And lawyers tend to represent the wishes of their clients in their pursuit of money as long as no law bars the cause. Impact on ‘non-clients’ is not relevant. Hence, the lowest common denominators - which maximize the highest profits - are rabidly pursued under a basic human tendency towards ‘economy of effort’. Economy of effort is a innate biological phenomena, or foible, as social scientiest are learning and it plays itself out quite often in Democracies and free economies. Hence, law should - and often does - anticipate this weakness.
But, just as often, law does not.
Hence, fifteen years after the American’s with Disabilities Act passage, virtually nothing has changed for injured American workers. Eloquent arguments, statistically verifiable, can be mounted that previous injured American workers are more ‘pariahs’ in society today then they were when the ADA was passed in 1990 - exclusion from employment is massive with up to 85 percent never working again, swelling the demand on social services, and creating a tax demand cycle that defies lunacy.
Lost tax revenue from the previously injured is most likely in the billions annually. On just one individual in the State of New Jersey, the federal government has lost an excess of $250,000 in tax revenue - more balanced assessments place the figure closer to $500,000 since the federal government declared that individual ‘disabled’ in 1989.
Yet, virtually every attempt by that individual to work continues to be thwarted by the Federal government. The Treasury Department, on one hand, loses revenue while the Social Security Administration, on the other, quietly publishes that person’s medical history to any potential employer - and it does so to every former Social Security and Veteran’s Disability recipient. So much for ‘privacy’ or ‘privacy law’. The resulting non-employment is hardly a surprise in light of insurance realities.
So you can see the dilemma - that ‘philosophical’ balancing act inherent in any Democracy is a very real thing that plays itself out in very individualistic ways. In daily life, one often is blinded to the overall. In a Democracy, momentary blindness can have major impact.
The solution for any good individual living in a Democracy is to constantly remember ‘gestalt’ - the sum of the unique parts often creates a unified reality that looks nothing like the parts. A series of ‘beautiful’ paintings can be arranged imperfectly in a garish display that is the ultimate epitomy of ‘ugly’. And the reverse is quite true as a gentle browsing of Jackson Pollock’s artistry will atest. Simply remembering to pay attention in an on-going way, once the painting/law is finished, yields an on-going achievement of the original intent: Beauty/social benevolence. Which is exactly what Mr. Pollock did in painting - he paid attention to the foibles of his own process in an on-going way to create beauty - the end product was far greater than the messy parts.
Fail to pay attention in an on-going way and one achieves, generally, an ugly mess. Whether painting or Democracy, that reality is simple.
As always to the Citizens of Philadelphia, where Democracy in America was born, the presence and life of Robert Gorbi at the corner of 4th and Chestnut streets is an all too human example. Procedurally ‘disabled’ but substantively no less able to contribute to America, economically or otherwise, than any one else, Mr. Gorbi is homeless and unemployed.
Mr. Gorbi lives in the heart of America. And he is the very heart of Democracy... and the very heart of what happens when participants in Democracy fail to pay attention to law once it is adopted, to make sure ‘larger socially benevolent desire’ is applied on an individual basis. To protect the individual from the harms of society, to strike an ongoing balance. It is, afterall, the very heart and soul of what good law ‘is’.
Mr. Gorbi ‘is’. He lives less than 100 yards from Carpenters Hall where Democracy in America was first contemplated. Eloquently, he also is just one block away from where America decided to do so something about that contemplation. Life. Liberty. The Pursuit of Happiness. For all.
- Qi
Note: A young woman was kidnapped and murdered on PATCO property owned, in part, by agencies operated by Camden County and its political parties. Instead of providing funding for security, the money went elsewhere. In 2005, three children suffocated to death in a car while police officers, under supervision of the Camden County Prosecutor's Office, stood around outside the car in which the children were trapped. No one bothered to look in the trunk. Money to properly train the police officers was spent elsewhere. And three women were raped on or adjacent to Rutgers University property in Camden when both Rutgers Police and Camden County officials knew that the 911 system covering Rutgers University did not operate properly - the system tranferred calls to Philadelphia and Delaware County in Pennsylvania, and often provoked a 25 to 45 minute lag times in response. The ineffectiveness of the 911 system was so well known that street criminals were more than likely aware of its shortcomings, hence, broad daylight rapes in the heart of Camden City's business district.
In Camden County, New Jersey, the failure of that county’s residents to understand the overall impact of their governmental representatives has led to the deaths of four people - three of them children - and the rapes of three women. Seven lives sacrificed to the gods of political corruption and government largesse. (See note at the conclusion.)
Democracy, in this vulgar case, morphed into a spectacular failure that remains ongoing.
But, philosophically, the affair is predictable. It can happen anywhere. And it will happen again if the ‘gestalt’ of Democracy is not understood by society.
Lawyers, as you shall see, are not often the best people entrusted with educating the public. The interests of any given ‘client’ may not be the best interest of ‘society’. Although poorly understood even by the legal profession, law is nothing more than a careful balancing act. One maximizes the freedom and creativity of the individual while, at the same time, protecting society from the harms that freedom and creativity might create. And the converse is true. One maximizes the freedom and creativity of society while, at the same time, protecting the individual from the harms that freedom and creativity might create.
President George W. Bush’s frolic with the Foreign Surveillance Act Court is a succinct example. At a singular pen stroke, the individual was negated in favor of society.
It is an ultimate chicken and egg dilemma, one entity can be momentarily expendable in favor of the other. When and how one becomes expendable is an arbitrary ‘moment to moment’ thing left up, at any given moment, for individuals or society to decide - as President Bush’s foibles with the Foreign Surveillance Act play out. But singular pen strokes operate both ways - individuals can do much the same as President Bush (effectiveness is merely a haggling argument): The ability to sue.
But what happens when the froth and elation of ‘accomplishment’ and ‘success’ of these pen strokes wear off?
Unfortunately, the curse of any Democracy is that law becomes prone to manipulation. The Foreign Surveillance Act was designed to protect individuals from the excesses and harm of a government momentarily blinded by zealousness. The point should not be understated: Any law is prone to manipulation. Avarice, greed, even good intention, can morph into harmful impact - either to society or the individual, sometimes both as the racial Civil Rights struggle in America aptly demonstrates. The ‘Civil War’ began in 1861, and as many attuned citizens in America will tell you, some 145 years later the closing skirmishes are still very much being fought. Equal access to employment, despite skin color, is one such battleground. A recent case lost by the Philadelphia School Board illustrates that racial equality has nothing to do with any given skin color - four Caucasian purchasing agents successfully invoked the same exact equal opportunity laws traditionally used by minorities.
Not exactly a surprise, lawyers for the Philadelphia School Board referred to those employees as "crackers" in a public courthouse elevator after the verdict. So much for entrusting lawyers, at any given moment, to look out for the larger interests of society.
One must be careful to remember: the Civil War racial issue is not unique to America. The basic conflict is generic to Democracy as a whole and it has nothing to do with race. Adopting a ‘law’ is one thing. Enforcing it, squeezing social justice out of it in any pragmatic way, is quite another thing - usually attained long after the law initially was adopted as the cumulative Civil Rights Acts, spanning more than 100 years from the 1860s to the 1960s, eloquently suggests. Adopting law is easy - making socially benevolent use of it is quite another tumultuous thing, hence the Philadelphia School Board case. And the behavior of its legal counsel.
Two wonderfully contemporary examples are the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act - more than 3 decades after the former, and fifteen years after the latter, neither act substantively means anything if you are injured and looking for employment. Sadly, the United States Constitution does not guarantee any ‘right to work’ although, curiously, much of federal legislation, regulation - and even the two above Acts - are predicated on a ‘required’ duty to work. The ‘duty’ vs. ‘right’ to work sleight of hand is still not addressed in America - much to major financial impact and chagrin. If you are an injured veteran in America, one lives dangerously - if one lives at all. Homelessness is normative.
What happened to the intent of these laws? The same thing that happened after the initial Civil Rights Acts in the 1860s. Laws are illustrious goals of society. Once passed, and past, they often become illustrious templates for financial exploitation. Incentive shifts from achieving ‘social benevolence’ to ‘how can I make or save money off of this law’ - it is a basic tendency of human nature in any free market society. And lawyers tend to represent the wishes of their clients in their pursuit of money as long as no law bars the cause. Impact on ‘non-clients’ is not relevant. Hence, the lowest common denominators - which maximize the highest profits - are rabidly pursued under a basic human tendency towards ‘economy of effort’. Economy of effort is a innate biological phenomena, or foible, as social scientiest are learning and it plays itself out quite often in Democracies and free economies. Hence, law should - and often does - anticipate this weakness.
But, just as often, law does not.
Hence, fifteen years after the American’s with Disabilities Act passage, virtually nothing has changed for injured American workers. Eloquent arguments, statistically verifiable, can be mounted that previous injured American workers are more ‘pariahs’ in society today then they were when the ADA was passed in 1990 - exclusion from employment is massive with up to 85 percent never working again, swelling the demand on social services, and creating a tax demand cycle that defies lunacy.
Lost tax revenue from the previously injured is most likely in the billions annually. On just one individual in the State of New Jersey, the federal government has lost an excess of $250,000 in tax revenue - more balanced assessments place the figure closer to $500,000 since the federal government declared that individual ‘disabled’ in 1989.
Yet, virtually every attempt by that individual to work continues to be thwarted by the Federal government. The Treasury Department, on one hand, loses revenue while the Social Security Administration, on the other, quietly publishes that person’s medical history to any potential employer - and it does so to every former Social Security and Veteran’s Disability recipient. So much for ‘privacy’ or ‘privacy law’. The resulting non-employment is hardly a surprise in light of insurance realities.
So you can see the dilemma - that ‘philosophical’ balancing act inherent in any Democracy is a very real thing that plays itself out in very individualistic ways. In daily life, one often is blinded to the overall. In a Democracy, momentary blindness can have major impact.
The solution for any good individual living in a Democracy is to constantly remember ‘gestalt’ - the sum of the unique parts often creates a unified reality that looks nothing like the parts. A series of ‘beautiful’ paintings can be arranged imperfectly in a garish display that is the ultimate epitomy of ‘ugly’. And the reverse is quite true as a gentle browsing of Jackson Pollock’s artistry will atest. Simply remembering to pay attention in an on-going way, once the painting/law is finished, yields an on-going achievement of the original intent: Beauty/social benevolence. Which is exactly what Mr. Pollock did in painting - he paid attention to the foibles of his own process in an on-going way to create beauty - the end product was far greater than the messy parts.
Fail to pay attention in an on-going way and one achieves, generally, an ugly mess. Whether painting or Democracy, that reality is simple.
As always to the Citizens of Philadelphia, where Democracy in America was born, the presence and life of Robert Gorbi at the corner of 4th and Chestnut streets is an all too human example. Procedurally ‘disabled’ but substantively no less able to contribute to America, economically or otherwise, than any one else, Mr. Gorbi is homeless and unemployed.
Mr. Gorbi lives in the heart of America. And he is the very heart of Democracy... and the very heart of what happens when participants in Democracy fail to pay attention to law once it is adopted, to make sure ‘larger socially benevolent desire’ is applied on an individual basis. To protect the individual from the harms of society, to strike an ongoing balance. It is, afterall, the very heart and soul of what good law ‘is’.
Mr. Gorbi ‘is’. He lives less than 100 yards from Carpenters Hall where Democracy in America was first contemplated. Eloquently, he also is just one block away from where America decided to do so something about that contemplation. Life. Liberty. The Pursuit of Happiness. For all.
- Qi
Note: A young woman was kidnapped and murdered on PATCO property owned, in part, by agencies operated by Camden County and its political parties. Instead of providing funding for security, the money went elsewhere. In 2005, three children suffocated to death in a car while police officers, under supervision of the Camden County Prosecutor's Office, stood around outside the car in which the children were trapped. No one bothered to look in the trunk. Money to properly train the police officers was spent elsewhere. And three women were raped on or adjacent to Rutgers University property in Camden when both Rutgers Police and Camden County officials knew that the 911 system covering Rutgers University did not operate properly - the system tranferred calls to Philadelphia and Delaware County in Pennsylvania, and often provoked a 25 to 45 minute lag times in response. The ineffectiveness of the 911 system was so well known that street criminals were more than likely aware of its shortcomings, hence, broad daylight rapes in the heart of Camden City's business district.
posted by Qi at 12:19 PM
0 comments
links to this post
