Qui bono (who benefits)
No man is good enough to govern another man without that other man’s consent.
— Abraham Lincoln, 16th US President
This presidential soundbite becomes relevant only if he had extended the thought as to who actually benefits after willingly consenting to be governed.
The ‘heard mentality’ justified by the herd mentality hardly answers or addresses any issues relating to who benefits. News-making media outlets decide public opinion. Everybody hears what they want to hear.
The concept of government becomes a mortifying rhetoric when asked to believe that citizens need to surrender or sacrifice some of their rights in order for obedience to be equated with guaranteed benefits.
When wondering and pondering qui bono (who benefits) the governed cannot help feeling like a lamb shorn, or about to be shorn. That is moral genocide by willing consent no matter which way it is spun.
Thousands of treatises, books, essays and articles pander to the justification of government but they hardly ever approach the question as to who actually benefits. Even Nature is appalled.
The governed seem blasé and uncommitted while government continues its power game. Commitment by the governed becoming evident only during elections is a most disturbing trend.
Recently, six Malaysian states were, once again, euphorically, swayed by election fever. Three states went to the good guys, and three states for the better guys. The talking heads and self-appointed pundits never asked qui bono.
Sir Walter Raleigh’s observation that ‘men well...https://www.newsarawaktribune.com.my/qui-bono-who-benefits/