Deterrence for whom, and support for whom?

The following paragraph appeared in yesterday’s article: Those who lack a musical ear will never become another Mozart. Consequently, the indicator of a society’s level of awareness is not its form of government, nor the number of places of worship, nor the number of believers, but rather the extent to which this society is genuinely in need of deterrence institutions, internal security forces, and the like. The less it needs them, the stronger the evidence of its progress in awareness. * * * I wrote the above paragraph and recalled an incident that occurred to me in 1970, when I became the manager of the Gulf Bank branch on Fahad Al-Salem Street. In the second week of my tenure, I received a large envelope bearing the stern warning: “Confidential and Secret, for the attention of the Branch Manager only.” It turned out that the envelope contained the annual performance reports, which were required to be filled out and returned to management, to serve as the basis for decisions regarding promotions, salary increases, and other matters. I read the report carefully and, for the first time after years of working at the bank, understood what management expected from an employee—something I had always strived for but had only succeeded in achieving at that moment. Therefore, I decided to share the contents of that report with all bank employees, so they would have a clear idea of what senior management expected from them, which is their right. This was especially true regarding the final paragraph of the report, in which the manager must answer questions concerning the extent to which an employee requires supervision and monitoring; rarely did one who claimed minimal need for supervision fail to receive a higher grade. These are the individuals to whom Professor Saveliev’s description generally applies: those possessing free, triadic thinking, which enables them to take conscious positions regarding everything happening around them. Consequently, they do not need deterrence, police, or strict laws to compel them to comply and behave properly. By nature, they will not harm or oppress anyone, due to their high sense of responsibility. Such individuals are rarely pursued by the police, and they can be entrusted with various tasks, which they will usually complete correctly. Just minutes after distributing copies of the annual report to the branch staff, the news reached senior management, and I received a call from the British Deputy General Manager, who reprimanded me for my actions. I explained my viewpoint to him, and it seems he was convinced by what I said; he thanked me for what I had done and ended the call quickly, leaving the East as the East and the West as the West. * * * Decades later, after I had voluntarily decided to relinquish control of my commercial interests to my son, I told him: “I have no advice for you, and I will not ask you to preserve my reputation, which I sacrificed much and gave up even more to protect. Instead, I ask you to fulfill one request, and nothing else: When you find yourself, on a pitch-black night, returning home, feeling exhausted and drowsy, and you encounter a U-turn that is illegal, do not use it, even if the next legal turn is ten kilometers away. Do this even if the street is devoid of lighting, people, police, or even surveillance cameras, and it is late and raining. Let your conscience guide you and act as your monitor, not fear of a traffic signal, a police officer, or anything else. Do only what is right, in all circumstances, and you will live peacefully, unafraid of anyone knocking on your door.” Ahmed Al-Sarraf