Unrealistic Expectations

Yet another round of Catholic priests who either abused children or ignored allegations of such child abuse. This time there even seems to be evidence of Pope Francis having his hands dirty in “rehabilitating” one such tainted Cardinal. Inevitably we hear a few (naïve) people ask how Francis can survive this. The same question arises in the US as more and more of Donald Trump’s top guys get implicated in one thing after another. Surely Trump will get impeached now, they say (hope?).

Such people seem to still be living in a time that Santosh Desai describes below:

“We have over the centuries, successfully built institutions that help manufacture collective trust. The judiciary, media, bureaucracy, academia- these were among several institutions that we reposed our faith in to act on our behalf. We believed in these institutions.”

But now is a different time, a time where “attributing motives to institutions” is the norm. And with that, out goes their credibility:

“One ‘s ideas become seen as a product of either one’s interests, ideals, or background, and thus have little legitimacy beyond that… An idea becomes attached to its address rather than its destination.”

Desai is honest to acknowledge that some of the criticism is valid:

“The voice of a significant number of people has been delegitimised as being regressive or backward.”

So why then do so many people still feel that the likes of Francis and Trump will be taken down, asks Alan Jacobs:

“I think the assumption that many people make about both men is that they can be brought to heel by the force of political norms — that they will see, or those associated with them will see, that the violation of important norms makes their position unsustainable.”

But therein lies the reason why nothing will happen, continues Jacobs:

“Norms are created by institutions, and we live in an age of weak and despised institutions.”

Even more problematically:

“(People) applaud leaders who scorn and seek to tear down the whole edifice. And if those leaders make their disdain known in sufficiently charismatic ways, few will notice when they are guilty of the very sins they decry. Moreover, when people see the sheer size of the institutions at which they’re so angry, they despair of any real change happening, and are content with listening to leaders who channel their own frustration.”

All this leads to a circular situation, writes Jacobs. A weak and despised institution cannot enforce anything, which in turn enables corruption by politicians and priests alike. The leader(s) of these institutions, now being the beneficiary of power with few checks, then have no incentive “to repair their corrupt institutions”. And so, concludes Jacobs:

“All the products and enablers of corruption are safe.”