During Lunchtimes, I usually didn’t do much but hang around in the library. I didn’t find any interest in physical activities, and today was like the others.
I entered the library, casually exploring the non-fiction section of the bookshelves. Unlike the last time where I could not find any books to grasp my attention, I suddenly came across a title named United States: an over-rated nation by R.K.Stevenson. As an avid United States supporter, I immediately reached out my hand to discover about what he had to say.
Oxymoronically, the modern world has its biggest weakness in its strongest nation, he wrote, The United States have been, for quite a long time, the leader of the globe. Only a few stop to think what this may mean for the world. As you may have noticed from the Global Economic Crisis of 2008, where we only narrowly missed a recession, the world have become too reliant on this single country for far too long. Although many argue that having a focal point is important to direct the world towards a single united future, I refute this by stating the obvious: it is not safe to invest all your hopes and security in one place. Also, it needs to be pointed out that the US is not morally correct in many of its doings, it is fundamentally a nation, and it only works in the interests of its own people. To cite some examples…
The story went on. As with many stories of such nature, it was not without opposition. The most vehement adversary to Stevenson’s comments was a liberal-democratic political activist, Andrea Clerk. She became famous with her open remarks about the need to have the U.S taking a more prominent role in the functioning of the world.
“Mr. R.K.Stevenson has only ever provided us with half the details in his new book United States: an over-rated nation,” she said on 60 Minutes, “It is obvious that unfavourable details have been omitted in a deliberate bid for his audience to believe him. However, any who have done some basic research into the political system of the United States would realise that it has the most ideal and efficient system in the world. I would want to ask his readers if they agree with me that it is perfectly safe to rely on the U.S. He does mention some events where U.S have made political mistakes in the past, all I ask for him is to consider the status quo and not to dwell too much into what happened before. The U.S have learnt from its errors and the U.S you know now is different from the U.S years ago.”
She also had some comments to make about Stevenson’s other views.
“Many who have read Mr. Stevenson’s A Crime does not justify another Crime would remember his antagonistic views on capital punishment. I would like to take this opportunity to recall a recent event where a notorious convicted serial rapist and murderer George Singer have broken out of his prison cell and now poses a great threat to the society. Had he been executed when arrested, the witnesses and policemen involved his capture would not be shivering in fear right now.”
The two were constantly debating over every thing that each other did. It was very interesting to see one making a statement and the other immediately making an opposing comment.
At this moment in my chain of thoughts, the bell signaled the end of Lunch and the beginning of School Assembly.
***
The assembly was quite interesting. At every assembly, we would have a guest speaker come and speak to us about a topic that he is enthusiastic about. Today, a Princeton University academic named Christian Exalski spoke to us about his role in the Green Enterprises.
“I have an important role as the Principal Researcher in Genetics Department of the Green Enterprises,” he said with an aura of knowledge surrounding him. “I do get paid quite a bit”, he added, which was followed by laughter, “but that is not the real reason that I am working there. I would like to talk to you, the future leaders of our community, about the need for a change in the way we treat ourselves.
“Currently, it is politically incorrect to voice the must of a new revolutionary system of education and employment tailored to suit the individual needs. I am not talking about eugenics – there is quite a stigma in this word due to its use during the Nazi regime in World War 2. However, I am talking about the benefits to be gained in increasing our efficiency by distributing our resources according to what is best for all. Mentally handicapped people should be given education according to what is the best return, and not be forced to learn beyond their capabilities.
“Suppose $100,000 can get a person with IQ of 30 to learn how to read so that he or she can get a decent job at a supermarket. Compare this with investing the same amount to a person with an IQ of 130 who will go on to discover the cure to cancer. Which is more efficient?
“Of course, I recognise that not all people with an IQ of 130 are going to be successful and not all with IQ of 30 will be less useful to the society. Nevertheless, in overall, let’s say from a sample of a thousand candidates – you’ll agree with me that those with IQ of 130 will yield better results than those of 30. I should emphasise that it would be a much greater return.”
His voice echoed throughout the hall, filling the students with this surprising insight into our world.
“My son-in-law,” he continued, making a hand gesture towards a dark Latin-American looking man sitting on the stage. “is an example of this efficiency. I found Dilawar Perez in the war-torn nation of Afghanistan when I was visiting the country. Born of a Spanish soldier father and an Afghan mother, who both died during the war, he had exceedingly high mental capabilities. I noticed this when I asked him for direction and heard him speak very fluently in both Spanish and English. He was ten back then. Later, I took him in and gave him the best education possible, and since then he had made significant contributions to the medical field.
“Just for your information, he is happily wed to my daughter, Mercedes Hershin-Exalski Perez, who is also renowned for her role in discovering 90% fuel-efficient methods of burning fuel.
“My personal experiences should be enough to exemplify my point. What if I spent the same money I spent on those two to two other people who are mentally handicapped? They would only have ended up marginally better than if I had just left them alone. They wouldn’t have contributed much to science, and their life would end as aimlessly as it started.”
***
Mr. Exalski’s talk, how outrageous its contents were, still received applause from the audience as part of the ritual of any guest speakers. He did make his mark, and many of the teachers and students were left dumb-founded. As for me, I heard but didn’t take too much notice. What would one fanatic be able to do, I thought.
I was yet to realise how significant his position at the Green Enterprises was…