In the first part I showed that although the American colonial adventure in Afghanistan ended tragically, it was very successful from the point of view of the individual actors. No one was punished, no one was removed, no one lost a government contract. We can therefore expect similar campaigns to be repeated.
Indeed, we see the same trend in Europe. No major assassination or wave of violence has been followed by the resignation of a minister or a police director or the sacking of those responsible for migration policy or anything else. Not even the disgraceful case of the British Government sending a boat to Libya and bringing in the jihadist who massacred children in Manchester two years later has led to anyone being held to account. No inclusion activist is going to get in trouble when their inmate, labelled a model, commits murder. No judge gets in trouble when he releases someone who then commits murder. Even an expert who recommends it doesn’t lose his job.
No judge gets in trouble when he releases someone who then commits murder.
Those who criticize it get in trouble. It’s a perverse feedback system. The more damage you do, the better off you’ll be.
If we try to analyze this phenomenon, we immediately notice that its basis is lying. This is logical because it has existed in the Western world for decades. Social programmes that worsen the situation of the poor are hailed as successful, continue and their managers are rewarded. In Brno (Czech Republic), a programme that turned a few flourishing quiet safe streets into a ghetto received an international award. And it is not exceptional. Programmes that are demonstrably devastating to the environment are being rewarded, and there are more and more of them. All it takes is for someone to justify that it will bring some very vague and very abstract benefit to the planet. In the name of protecting the planet, millions of batteries full of heavy metals are produced, meadows and fields are replaced by areas of solar collectors, natural fertilizers are replaced by chemical ones, giant propellers massacre thousands of birdsthe soil’s ability to hold water is destroyed…and natural diversity is replaced by dull reforestation. These consequences have been analysed many times and can be read about in specialist journals.
In the name of protecting the planet, millions of batteries full of heavy metals are produced, meadows and fields are replaced by areas of solar collectors…
Is anyone losing their jobs? Are ministers resigning because of this? Will this lead to a halt to other similar actions? Again we see the same combination – lying and perverse feedback.
And let’s not forget that the same principle has begun to apply in the corporate sector. No CEO is judged by whether he or she could really help customers. It’s all about profit. But even with profits, it’s all kinds of things. It’s not rare for a company to be in the red, everything is falling apart, and managers can spend years leading shareholders around, telling them that it’s not their fault, that it’s somehow a success, and they can collect stellar bonuses. In recent years, they have been able to do this quite legitimately – production has stagnated, but diversity has increased and climate impact of company operations have decreased. They get away with this because, among other things, investment fund managers are usually on the owners’ side, and they only want to present good news. The ability to build amazing powerpoint presentations triumphs.
