Is It Cultural?

We had an ongoing discussion in my religious studies class when I was in High school. Is there a universal truth? Are there beliefs in the universe that transcend time and place? We talked about man killing man - justifiable homicide, war, capital punishment - but the other side of the coin as well; love, trust and forgiveness. Hefty subjects for seventeen year olds yet they paled in comparison to the important stuff; who’s seeing who and what are you doing Saturday night?

But they were valuable discussions, never answered yet explored and I’m grateful that seed was planted because I’m still wondering. My wonders have expanded since my world expanded and I’m exposed to more ways of being.

A lot of the discussion was around semantics; the meaning s of the words in the context of which we discussed them. What’s moral. What’s ethical. If I recall, we generally agreed that morals were the underlying values to the ethical ‘rules’ we put in place. A code of conduct are the ethics to which a group adheres; lawyers, nurses, teachers, even a whole society and to contravene these rules puts one at risk of expulsion.

We all know we can act legally yet immorally simply selling a car we know to be faulty and not disclosing the fault. The law declares Caveat Emptor! and burdens the buyer with due diligence absolving the seller of moral behaviour. We say to one another ‘ it’s just business’ when we wish to behave badly and gain profit. In fact the ‘laws’ of business meet all the criteria for antisocial behaviour disorder as defined by the DSM (psychiatry’s bible). But I digress.

The question is of universality. Is it just as wrong to steal or behave badly in Cardiff as it is in Vancouver? Is honesty a cultural phenomenon?
A few things have happened since we swapped lives with some Cardiff residents who are now experiencing the Vancouver culture.

The first is that I get robbed a lot here. And while there’s crime aplenty in Vancouver there seems to be greater acceptance of here and worse, that it’s the victims fault for getting robbed. If it wasn’t locked up, if there wasn’t a surveillance camera on it, a fence around it, an alarm system, then I deserve to be robbed. It’s not the thief’s fault, it’s mine for not taking better care of my stuff. The efforts made to prevent crime are having a paradoxical effect. The message thieves receive when they see the camera, the lock or the alarm is that in their absence it’s fair game. It’s reinforced by the school system that bullies children into good behaviour rather than encouraging them to govern their own behaviour. As soon as the teacher-bully is out of the room the children have tacet license to do as they please. And they do.

The other relates to our exchange partners. During our discussions leading up to the exchange we agreed to exchange vehicles. We agreed to sell our respective vehicles to each other for one dollar but remain responsible for repairs. In their eyes, just as I’m at fault for being robbed, I’m guilty of being too trusting. We transferred our car to them but upon arrival they informed us they’d decided to keep their car in their name as it was more “convenient” and cheaper to renew the car insurance. “Whatever” we thought. What could go wrong? Well during the course of our discussions they’d neglected to mention that their car had no heater/defroster and winter was approaching. They hadn’t mentioned that the tailpipe rattled, oil had to be added at every refueling and the headlights weren’t functioning either but those things I could deal with.

When asked about the heater the owner said he was aware of the problem but it was too expensive to repair. So where did that leave us? Both cars were now in their names and they were unwilling to repair the car on this end.

Fortunately we were able to reverse the swap and get our car back and we went out and bought our own repairmobile. While they agreed to reverse the deal, they were incensed that we would break a deal because hey, a deal’s a deal. In their eyes the moral obligation to keep an agreement superceded the moral obligation to provide full information and disclosure when formulating the agreement. But is it cultural?

In a recent email the swapee advised me that he “trusted no-one” and I believe him. I look around in this most surveilled country in the world and I can see why. With cameras on every building, corner and school, trust has evaporated. An article I read recently was written by a psychologist who said that the more the state attempted to control its citizenry through surveillance, the less trusting and more angry they would become. He was writing about a guy that had sent poison in letters to various government agencies. When arrested, this guy said he was angry that his father’s DNA was being kept in a national database in spite of the fact he was cleared of a crime of which he had been accused. There are calls here (mostly by the police, right-wing columnists and the people they’ve frightened) for the database to be expanded to all citizens, that a sample should be collected from every immigrant and every newborn.

There’s not enough information - yet - to determine if the self-serving behaviours of our exchange partners is culturally based. I’m inclined to believe it is simply because of all the people I know in Vancouver, few would feel justified in attempting to deceive someone for personal gain. But that’s not proof; the sample’s too small and my interpretation too subjective. I’ll be talking to more Welsh before we go to get their perspective on this. The asking should be interesting.

My biggest concern, however, is that in the name of anti-terrorism personal rights are being eroded in Vancouver and across Canada and cameras are going up so it may only be a matter of time before we emulate the Welsh. And the time of trust is over.