Photo Taken From:Corruption and graft among our Pinoy politicians could be stopped completely by eradicating their sons and daughters...to be a bit more formal about it. Might this extreme measure perhaps be the only way?
The killing of sons and daughters for bringing about positive change is easily seen as reprehensible, reckless, and outright barbaric. It could be argued as another example of the "means" not justifying the "ends". Would such acts be better off dismissed as "unimaginable"? Perhaps. Would such acts have been performed in the past? Some tidbits of history seem to suggest so.
Photo Taken From:The Christian Bible itself tells of how "spirit of God" killed all the "firstborn" of the Egyptians--both human and animal--in order to force the hand of the Egyptian Pharaoh of ancient times to release from slavery and bondage the Israelites, God's "chosen people". The story is found in the Book of Exodus in the Bible, and was all the more made popular by the movie "Cecille B. DeMille's The Ten Commandments". Although the truthfulness of the Bible account is debatable, some pre-eminent scholars argue that such an event may have been possible. In any case, it would be hard to imagine the Pharaoh of Egypt not capitulating to demands that the people of Israel be given unconditional freedom after seeing his most favored heir having died.
In this instance, the most dreadful of tragedies seems to have been induced in order to achieve the emancipation of a slave nation.
Photo Taken From:In the modern era, the freedom of a nation also carried the price of having every one of its former leader's progeny, well...neutralized, to put it mildly. Every Pinoy by now knows of the 21st-century story concerning the dictator Saddam Hussein of Iraq. After US forces invaded Iraq under the presidency of George W. Bush, Mr. Hussein was eventually tracked down to his hiding place, and was later subsequently executed by hanging--a punishment brought about by his outrageous "crimes against humanity".
What most Pinoys might not know about is that Mr. Hussein's eleven sons ( and, presumably, his heirs ) were each already dead--most presumably killed--by the time he was captured. On the one hand, something like this could be viewed as tragic beyond all measure. On the other hand, it totally guaranteed against any reprisals for Mr. Hussein's punishment. As anyone can see by now, Iraq might well be free of any Saddam Hussein-wannabe's in the near future.
Photo Taken From:We Pinoys are aware that our country is in the perpetual grip of nearly unfettered corruption and plunder by the officials in its government. Stealing is a criminal act in every way, and yet the mantle of political office protects government officials from any legal sanctions when they perform it. The proposal might seem very radical--and admittedly morbid...and yet, a scenario in which the punishment for any government official found guilty of graft and corruption went so far and so grave as to involve their sons and daughters could be argued as, well, effective.
It would be effective as a deterrent because any official would rather lose money than lose sons and daughters. It would also be effective as a way of recovering the public funds stolen if it were somehow carried out. Any President would absolutely think twice about using public taxes for self-enrichment if the penalty were to go home to a house empty of all his or her sons and daughters.
Photo Taken From:If one were to be matter-of-fact about it, perhaps government officials who steal billions of pesos from the public's own money do deserve to lose all their inheritors...if the trade-off is that the millions upon millions of us Pinoys--the powerless, the disenfranchised, the oppressed--are to enjoy a country free of corruption, which generally ensures a better future for all our sons and daughters.
Hmmmm. Would killing certain sons and daughters be the solution to the problem of corruption? Why or why not?
