WE CAN JUDGE A TREE BY IT'S FRUIT.
If the fruit is rotten, then the tree itself is rotten.
While we know this principle to be true, when we see 'bad fruit', we are unable to discern that this actually is bad fruit. In this metaphor, the tree is a person and their behaviour their fruit. We may also see politicians as the fruit of the governance tree. And our choices. We are often unable to discern which are good or bad leaders, because we choose our leaders based on our personal interests and not on their capacity for ethics and virtue. As a consequence, we the people, have chosen some very bad leaders to guide us.
Applies to how we each use our individual knowledge and skills to vote for our leaders, and to the rationale by how the leaders we choose, make decisions, by, of and for the people.
A lack of discernment usually occurs because we do not possess the knowledge with which to make a comparison between the best (human) practice and our own actions. We can't begin to know how we can become human right, until we take the time to learn from history, how we have been human wrong.
THE STORY OF HUMAN RIGHTS
In a project led by United States former First Lady, Eleanor Roosevelt, at least 5000 years of global wisdom was distilled from across all cultures, into a declaration of Human Rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 10 December 1948, was the result of the experience of the Second World War.
This came into being as a result of the findings of the Nuremberg trials, from incidents like the atrocities of Auschwitz and war crimes committed by the Nazi Party.
It took almost fifty years for human rights to become a voluntary international law called the HUMAN RIGHTS ACT.
To this day, in my 52 years of life, I have not ever seen a politician that has ever been able to recite (or refer to) the 30 human rights. No one I have ever met has been able to recite the 30 human rights. No one. Government departmental rules are not based on human rights. They are based on departmental rules, filtered by lawyers who have filtered out human rights. Were this not the case, the world would not have such ongoing pain and suffering through moral corruption.
Here is an example. This is from the manual on the LOAC. LOAC = Laws of Armed Conflict.
We have been at war on terror for 19 years. Since 2001.
The LOAC (Laws of Armed Conflict) and the war on terror reduce the legal requirement to uphold the Human Rights Act by up to 90%. When Obama demanded that his Field Commanders to uphold the LOAC, a human rights lawyer, Obama was actually asking them to uphold a very substantially reduced set of human rights. It is no surprise then, that private contracting firms were able to commit atrocities. And even less surprise that Trump has pardoned those who committed atrocities. Clearly, if US Presidents, who represent the pinnacle of Democracy, which is based on Human Rights, can not uphold the 30 human rights during their governance, what hope do we the people have to ensure the dignity of humanity? And it is no surprise then, that we do not see people upholding Human Rights, Ethics and the covenants of democracy, because they do not know them.
Human Rights have been largely removed from our governance by brilliant people, who took advantage of chaos and conflict so that the value of the many could continue to go to the few. As a consequence, we have even wider inequalities, with the welfare of the many, being subjugated to the interests of the few. This is not a functional democracy. No civilisation can thrive while it is corrupted by self-interest.