OPPOSING EVIL
Nicolas was busy working on his project in the biology lab when Roger began to taunt him. It was really distracting and annoying Nicholas, but he kept his cool partly because he needed to complete his work which was some days behind, but mainly because Roger was part of the most dreaded gang in school.
As the saying goes, "a man will push his dagger until he meets bone," Roger would not let up.
Finally, when he put his hand on Nicolas's head the breaking point was reached and a fierce fight began between the two. Of all things that Roger could find in his rage was the microscope. He threw it at Nicolas, and it smashed into the wall. Suddenly the insanity of this whole episode replaced his rage with a chilling fear and as fast as a rabbit, Roger disappeared from the lab.
When it was learnt that they were being watched all that time by another classmate from the adjoining room, a few members of the gang warned this witness to say nothing against Roger or suffer serious personal injury. They threatened Nicolas similarly. Nicholas swore that he was not afraid of the gang and that he would tell the Dean exactly what happened. The other witness took courage from Nicolas and decided to also tell what he had seen.
However, when the Dean carried out his investigations the other witness told what he saw. But Nicolas was fearful of the gang. He took the blame for the damaged equipment and was suspended from school for two weeks. As promised, the independent witness was severely beaten by the gang for telling the truth. Sometime later the same student who spoke up against Roger happened to be right on site when Roger was smashing the windscreen of a teacher's car. This time he never spoke a word to anyone about it.
Was Nicolas wrong to take the blame for the broken microscope
Would it have been wrong for the other witness not to give evidence in the matter?
It was said that "the only thing necessary for evil to thrive is for good men to do nothing." Do you agree?
If fighting against wrongdoers may be personally dangerous, is it still our duty to do so?
Should we expect that fighting "wrong" would be easy?
In fighting 'wrong' do we often have to fight against complacency first? How can we fight complacency?
How evil is cowardice? How does it endanger others?
When should we choose to run from, or avoid the one who does evil, and when should we oppose him or her?
Can silence (sitting on the fence) be evil?
Should the other witness tell the authorities what he saw concerning the smashed window?
In a very large construction company, there was a foreman of one crew of workmen, who used company equipment and manpower to do his private jobs. He would often leave his appointed task under the supervision of another senior worker, so he could oversee his private projects. His crew generally had no objection to attending to these private jobs as they would be paid by both the company, and privately, by the foreman.
Tom and Hilary were new members of staff who were put to work with the dishonest foreman. On discovering the abuse of company time and equipment Tom made a report to the foreman's superior. Tom was shocked that he, not the dishonest foreman was handed a dismissal notice the following day. They charged him as being "not a team player." It was only later that week Tom realised that the foreman's superior was a silent partner in the whole illegal setup. Hilary, the other new worker, took note of all that had happened. He did not agree with any of it and swore that he would never be involved in the foreman's fraud. But fearing the sanction that Tom met, Hilary did not feel free to speak about it.
Should one stand on the side of truth and speak against wrong even if one faces sanctions by the authorities by doing so?
How can you deal with corrupt authority?
How important is free speech?
Can there be free speech without courage?
Can there be freedom without courage?
Is true courage the courage to stand up for truth?
It was a rainy night and Andrew was late. The road looked deserted as he sped on in his car. Seemingly out of nowhere, a man appeared in front of him. Andrew swerved and slammed hard on the brake pedal, but that only took the vehicle out of his control. Andrew could only look on in despair as his car skidded straight onto the pedestrian. When the car eventually stopped some 50 metres away, Andrew got out and watched the lifeless body of his victim lying, buried in the crying rain. A cold chill filled the atmosphere as the driver, pursued by fear, hurried back behind the wheel and sped off. The following morning met Andrew struggling to forget the stressful night. This was to no avail as the man on the 9 A.M. news announced the death of a hit-and-run victim. He died in hospital.
Should Andrew have carried his victim to hospital?
Should he now give himself up to the police? Should he give evidence against himself?
Should he stand against the wrongs which he himself did?
Should he try to make amends to the victim's family?
Do you stand against the wrong you do?
Do you claim responsibility for the wrongs you do?
Can you trust a man who has no courage?
Can others trust you?
Activity: Write and perform a calypso or a skit on school violence. You may base it on the first story in this chapter.