It seems as though there are a lot of men in power in lots of places who have chosen to put their own wealth ahead of their responsibilities. Many of them have come to our attention from the financial disaster they have brought upon us. Some from religious positions they have attained. Others do so from political positions they have attained. Whatever their position, the results of their actions is devastating to others. It is as if their guiding light is to get as much wealth and power as they can, and to hell with the rest of the world. They have succumbed to the Creed of Greed. What brought this to mind has been the news reports about the political and financial strife in the world.
An ancillary factor is the Creed of Blame. Whenever things go wrong it is better to find a scapegoat than to step up and take responsibility for your actions. The scapegoat can usually be found in the closest person(s) who disagree with you and your ideals(?).
For an example, it is interesting, amusing, heartbreaking to read the editorials about the current targets of blame. This has been occurring regularly for quite a few decades in the good old USA. There are plenty of things to vent one's spleen about. (I am willing to consider castigating and removing from power those who are ordering the death of folks just because they belong to a different tribal group.) It would improve things if such diatribes were couched in language that would encourage cooperation rather than insure continued division. Whether a person chooses to be a conservative, liberal, populist, libertarian, etc., each has some good ideas. Put those ideas together and who knows what heights could be reached. It seems much easier to blame others, to point out the "fallacies" in their particular view of the world. (Much like this piece. The difference here? No public/private self-righteous condemnation of specific individuals.)
A former Sociology professor once said. "What is proposed as a political continuum is really a circle. If the parties and the far ends would only turn around they would see themselves." It made a lot of sense when he uttered those words back in 1960, it still does today.
What we need now is a consensus builder. A true consensus takes in the views of all parties to the conversation and does not come to a final decision until ALL of the parties have been heard and truly agree to the outcome. This approach, while a tad bit lengthy, does work. In 1976, Doyle and Strauss published their book, How to make meetings work. (One source for the book is here, or you could try your local library.) It is a useful guide to getting things done. My own experience using their model was extremely successful at the local level. There is no reason to believe that it won't work at "higher" levels.
This concept is not the panacea to rid us of the Creeds of Greed and Blame. It will help us to shape better outcomes for our progeny. The twin creeds of disaster will continue to be with us until folks have an equal opportunity to have an education, meaningful work, food, clothing, shelter, etc.
There just might be another way to look at our place in this world. Maithri has said it much more eloquently than I ever could. I hope you find some solace in his words.
Just a random rant. There may be more later as I give the topic more thought.