Compensation

 

Subject: Compensation

Where did the word compensation come from. We know what it means but why in all but exceptional cases is it assumed to be part of the deal we undertake when purchasing a service or goods. Where is 'our' responsibility in all this, where are the checks and balances which we should perform before parting with our cash.

In a 'rights' culture we expect to be allowed to proceed with what we wish to do but proclaim our right to compensation when something goes wrong. We determine our own actions and then shrink from them when events spoil it all, we never consider taking our own responsibility if we decide to push out our comfort envelope a go trekking in the jungles of Borneo, or risk money purchasing things "sight unseen" when, not many years ago, the more sensible amongst us would have questioned why. 

The name on the packet, the name of the area or the exercise we wished to take part in gives clues as to risk and whilst I fully support risk takers,  risk takers, by implication accept risk and would brush aside thoughts of compensation as a guarantee against that that very risk.

I'm amazed at the ease of the process of returned goods when for some inexplicable reason you are encouraged to return the goods. People take advantage of the opportunity and order maybe clothing for a night out and having worn it send it back the next day. It seems that ethics plays little part in our deliberations these days and the system of buying online only encourages it.

There was a time when we took complete responsibility for our actions. If we tripped up on an uneven pavement our response was "I should have looked where I was walking". Today in our blame culture, everyone else is to blame and we expect protection even if we have been stupid. This to my mind is an unhealthy state of affairs since except where the authorities, or others are woefully negligent we should have recompense but one should always consider our own actions first to see if in actual fact we weren't the negligent ones. Our willingness to judge ourselves as less than perfect and assume responsibility was in the 1950s the mark of a person, it gave us a measure of the persons character, not to see the world around as tailor made for them but rather a rough and ready landscape over which we had to be careful. 

It's all part of the of the esteem we used to hold ourselves a sort of quid pro quo with the rest of society. We judged ourselves in small human things like politeness and punctuality, thrift and kindness, not the size of the car, (we probably didn't have one) or the post-code we live at, (we didn't have post codes either in those days). Our world was close by, amongst people like ourself and we were't constantly reminded that all cultures are equal. We were't put through a psychological hoop to constantly remit things we internally felt are wrong or at least to belong to others and not ourselves using some sort of collective holism In which the variables are far too wide to bridge.

Language, dress, humour, taste, food and music were all a shared diet and without the need to review ones pallet, we looked like one another and talked like one another. If we wanted to see the exotic east we went there on holiday. 

Today exotic is all around and the only thing missing is a traditional pie and chips !!!