|
|
|
by Caleob King |
| My grandfather is quite a man. A Navy man during WWII, a lifelong democrat, and a fierce advocate of zoning laws in our small rural county; I agree with just about none of his politics. In fact not a Christmas or Thanksgiving goes by that I don't hear that there ought to be a law about something or another. I'd probably say something if my mouth weren't full of pie. But one or two times a month he straps on a strange uniform, picks up his sword (that's right a sword) and goes to participate in a wonderful hold over from a bygone era of social responsibility. He goes to his lodge meeting. Years ago Grandpa tried hustling me into this mysterious organization. "It'll be good for your career!" he said and I was horrified. I didn't want nepotism and special treatment – I wanted to rise on my own merits. "We take care of each other, and you never know when something might happen." Come on Gramps, isn't that what the government is for? So I left it at that. So years went by. I registered as a democrat just like dad, grandpa, and granddad… ad absurdum. I read a little, learned a lot, and followed that winding and personal path that leads rational individuals to a profound faith in voluntary association. And now that I'm here, I can't help but wonder if the old dog accidentally got something right. I've seen several stories lately about resume fraud. You've probably seen them too - bold outright lies about a person's skills and experiences. How is an employer to guard against these types of incidents? It is now nearly impossible to get reliable information from references due to the litigious environment we live in, and even if they could give a negative report there is no reason to suspect that the truth is any more important to them than to the prospective employee. The crux of the problem is, and always has been, a question of character. What was being promised me was not special treatment as I had thought. I was being offered a reputation by a group that had an established reputation of its own. What implications might this have for a free society? As pointed out by many other excellent columnists on this site, one of the prime methods to maintain order non-coercively is through ostracism of one sort or another. This has been accomplished in the past in various ways but in a modern society there are special problems to address. We today involve ourselves in so many dealings that the medieval traders, who used this system to enforce arbitration agreements, would be put to shame. This would be even truer in free society where more services would be purchased. What is needed when dealing with strangers, and what would be a very valuable service, would be a group willing to vouch for the character of its members. This is precisely the role fraternal organizations have played in the past. The charity work they are usually involved in is a natural outgrowth of this function. It enhanced the reputation of the organization in the community and through it the reputation of its members. What I at first regarded as special treatment was, in fact, the treatment anyone would be given once his good character was known. In such a system no one could run from his or her past. If a mistake were made of such severity to warrant expulsion from an organization, no other group would risk its good name by vouching for the criminal. This might not necessarily mean total business ostracism but it would certainly make life more difficult for the offender. On the other hand, someone pushed out by politics or on a trumped up charge would find his dues welcomed by other organizations within the community. Finally, anyone who did make a mistake, but took the necessary steps to atone (as defined by the rules of the organization) would once again be able to proudly regain the status of "member in good standing." With such a prestigious history and bright future, I might take Grandpa up on his offer. After all, I always wanted a sword. June 11, 2002 |
| Caleob King is an mechanical engineering student at the University of Kansas. He labors under the false impression that he will eventually convert his statist wife to the cause. |