The other day I happened to read an article in which Klaus Schwab – the founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum – insisted that “companies ignoring climate change will be on the wrong side of history.”
After reading this rather hubristic and revealing quip, I began to mull over the nature of history and what it means to be on the wrong side of it. I quickly arrived at the conclusion that history is inherently malleable, like clay. Skilled historians, publicists, scholars, researchers, propagandists and the like can knead, throw, form, shape, and spin history with the same talent and finesse master potters employ when working with clay.
When a historian has succeeded in giving an appropriate, perhaps even attractive, form to the history he has labored over, he can fire up his kiln and add an extra dimension of permanence to his creation by solidifying it so that it cannot be re-formed. The historian’s “piece” can then be put on display for the whole world to admire and accept as a factual and moral truth.
The right and wrong sides of history are crucial elements of the factual and moral truth the historian’s work presents. But like a fine piece of porcelain, history is an innately fragile thing. The historian’s version of the right and wrong sides of history remain valid only until it is knocked from its pedestal and sent crashing to the floor. In its place, another historian’s creation – one that depicts an expanded or an entirely transformed interpretation of history and its two sides – is placed on the pedestal until it too is upended and sent toppling.
Returning to Schwab’s declaration, being on the wrong side of history entails a moral judgement that hinges on the passage of time. This implies that the actions of historical figures involved in some past event were supported by the moral conventions of that past time. This means most people of the past probably believed they were on the right side of their respective present, which would then be preserved and extended indefinitely into the future, securing form them a permanent place “on the right side of history.” I’m sure historical figures such as Christopher Columbus or the Founding Fathers felt assured of this during their lifetimes. But which side of history are such historical figures on now?
The old adage about winners writing history contains a great deal of truth, particularly when it comes to classifying who belongs on history’s wrong side. The Allied powers of the Second World War certainly regarded Hitler as being on the wrong side of nearly everything, but they were careful not to imprison him on the wrong side of history until after they defeated him because they knew that if Hitler won the war, it would be they – the Allies – who would end up on the wrong side of history, not Hitler.
Schwab is not burdened by such prudent considerations. As far as he is concerned, he and the Establishment have not only won in the present, but will continue to win perpetually into the future. Our current totalitarian overlords are convinced that their policies and practices represent the peak of enlightenment and progressiveness. As a result, they do not simply regard people who challenge or refuse their enlightened, progressive policies and practices as out of touch or behind the times – they regard such people as immoral, unconscionable, and deplorable. As Schwab indicates, the Establishment will regard any objection to its schemes as unforgivable on purely moral grounds!
Hubris aside, the arrogance Schwab and his ilk are currently displaying is not unwarranted. For all intents and purposes, they have won and they do control the given world, which implies that they will control who ends up on the right side and who ends up on the wrong side of history.
Of course, the given world the Establishment rules over does not discount the overarching cosmic reality of Schwab and his associates willfully and actively positioning themselves on the wrong side of God and Creation; and it is here that our awareness, discernment and consequent efforts and choices must focus.
The choice simple – go with Schwab and his crew and your place on the right side of history in the given world is assured. But do keep the following in mind – this choice will entail forfeiting your place on the right side of created world – of your place on the side of Creation
The choice is fundamentally a spiritual one: Do you want to be on the right side of history or on the right side of eternity?
Being on the wrong side of history in Schwab’s given world will ensure any memory of you is damned and sent to the given world’s faux equivalent of hell.
Being on the right side of Creation will ensure your mortal life in the created world continues to brim with purpose and meaning. It will also ensure salvation and everlasting life within Creation where the very concept of being on the wrong side of history is not only unimaginable, but literally impossible.
Note added: I highly recommend Bruce Charlton's recent post on entropy versus creation on earth, which provided me with some of the inspiration for this post.
After reading this rather hubristic and revealing quip, I began to mull over the nature of history and what it means to be on the wrong side of it. I quickly arrived at the conclusion that history is inherently malleable, like clay. Skilled historians, publicists, scholars, researchers, propagandists and the like can knead, throw, form, shape, and spin history with the same talent and finesse master potters employ when working with clay.
When a historian has succeeded in giving an appropriate, perhaps even attractive, form to the history he has labored over, he can fire up his kiln and add an extra dimension of permanence to his creation by solidifying it so that it cannot be re-formed. The historian’s “piece” can then be put on display for the whole world to admire and accept as a factual and moral truth.
The right and wrong sides of history are crucial elements of the factual and moral truth the historian’s work presents. But like a fine piece of porcelain, history is an innately fragile thing. The historian’s version of the right and wrong sides of history remain valid only until it is knocked from its pedestal and sent crashing to the floor. In its place, another historian’s creation – one that depicts an expanded or an entirely transformed interpretation of history and its two sides – is placed on the pedestal until it too is upended and sent toppling.
Returning to Schwab’s declaration, being on the wrong side of history entails a moral judgement that hinges on the passage of time. This implies that the actions of historical figures involved in some past event were supported by the moral conventions of that past time. This means most people of the past probably believed they were on the right side of their respective present, which would then be preserved and extended indefinitely into the future, securing form them a permanent place “on the right side of history.” I’m sure historical figures such as Christopher Columbus or the Founding Fathers felt assured of this during their lifetimes. But which side of history are such historical figures on now?
The old adage about winners writing history contains a great deal of truth, particularly when it comes to classifying who belongs on history’s wrong side. The Allied powers of the Second World War certainly regarded Hitler as being on the wrong side of nearly everything, but they were careful not to imprison him on the wrong side of history until after they defeated him because they knew that if Hitler won the war, it would be they – the Allies – who would end up on the wrong side of history, not Hitler.
Schwab is not burdened by such prudent considerations. As far as he is concerned, he and the Establishment have not only won in the present, but will continue to win perpetually into the future. Our current totalitarian overlords are convinced that their policies and practices represent the peak of enlightenment and progressiveness. As a result, they do not simply regard people who challenge or refuse their enlightened, progressive policies and practices as out of touch or behind the times – they regard such people as immoral, unconscionable, and deplorable. As Schwab indicates, the Establishment will regard any objection to its schemes as unforgivable on purely moral grounds!
Hubris aside, the arrogance Schwab and his ilk are currently displaying is not unwarranted. For all intents and purposes, they have won and they do control the given world, which implies that they will control who ends up on the right side and who ends up on the wrong side of history.
Of course, the given world the Establishment rules over does not discount the overarching cosmic reality of Schwab and his associates willfully and actively positioning themselves on the wrong side of God and Creation; and it is here that our awareness, discernment and consequent efforts and choices must focus.
The choice simple – go with Schwab and his crew and your place on the right side of history in the given world is assured. But do keep the following in mind – this choice will entail forfeiting your place on the right side of created world – of your place on the side of Creation
The choice is fundamentally a spiritual one: Do you want to be on the right side of history or on the right side of eternity?
Being on the wrong side of history in Schwab’s given world will ensure any memory of you is damned and sent to the given world’s faux equivalent of hell.
Being on the right side of Creation will ensure your mortal life in the created world continues to brim with purpose and meaning. It will also ensure salvation and everlasting life within Creation where the very concept of being on the wrong side of history is not only unimaginable, but literally impossible.
Note added: I highly recommend Bruce Charlton's recent post on entropy versus creation on earth, which provided me with some of the inspiration for this post.
RSS Feed
