Monday, January 28, 2008

bankruptcy

Drained, emptied, insolvent. Ruined, broke, done away with. Depleted, destitute, wiped out. These are some of the devastating realities meant and implied by the fearful word and revealing term "bankrupt". When someone, a company or an institution is bankrupt, this evokes the thought of great misfortune, downright incompetence or gross fraudulence. People wherefore beholding a bankrupt status of someone or something usually harbor the feeling of pity, disdain or anger. Be what it may, an individual, a leadership or an office that is bankrupt, could be anyone or anything that is inspiring to know, gratifying to have, welcome to stay.

Financial bankruptcy may mean many things to many people. But, no matter who or what suffers from such material liability, it means something not only saddening but really abominable, not merely culpable but actually unacceptable—and should be therefore done away with. In the world of business, bankruptcy is one big bad news. It evokes a lot of questions just as it seeks many answers. The primary concern is what to do with those who caused the financial—with the immediate over-riding thought that they have to be dismissed fast and for keeps, if not further held much accountable for the economic catastrophe and accordingly punished as well.

Moral bankruptcy is even very much worst. The moral order is well over and above the financial level that the former precisely governs in terms of what is right, true and just. Thus it is that the failure of morals is clearly more fatal than the mere loss of funds. Bankruptcy in morals can be defined in general as the absence of rational and ethical principles, the dysfunction of conscience in distinguishing right from wrong, virtuous from vicious. Any human agent, office or entity that is morally bankrupt is not only a big shame but also a grave danger to society. Having and/or keeping any of them is a asking for one serious trouble after another, viz., one continuous socio-moral liability that is not only offensive but also destructive of others.

The fact is that the present administration under the leadership of a supposedly learned figure that continuously attempts to have an international stature to no avail has already been expressly and openly declared morally bankrupt. The sorry qualifying pronouncement was met with unqualified approval by people who already long since knew the shameful moral score. They were therefore more inspired and encouraged to openly and publicly express their clear and loud cries asking the principal subject agent behind the moral bankruptcy in governance to please go away, to kindly leave them alone.

There are many reasons to assume that letting go is precisely the very last thing that the said personality would voluntarily do. But this would not mean that those individuals and groups, organizations and institutions that have enough of its moral bankruptcy, would just remain quiet and stay still. There are marked indications that the more they will be emboldened to go to the streets, to express their anger and disgust with but one over-all desire and design: The lead agent and principal cause of the moral bankruptcy in the country has to go. One thing is very certain: In the long run, more than but individual concerned, the people surely have a stronger and longer lasting power. This much is certain—very certain!

+OVCRUZ, DD
28 January 2008