Good Name, Empty Hands

[slapper]

There's this idea in economics about the way countries used to have what they called "moral capital". Basically, their reputation as being good or neutral or humanitarian gave them actual protection in the world. And like, you could not simply bully them since they had this invisible protection in terms of respect and trust. And that shield is fading away too, and it is forcing me to reevaluate all the ways that value works.

ICRC cut thousands of jobs because the donor countries decided to spend money on weapons instead. The entire purpose of the organization was to help people in the war zones, and they've been doing it for over a century. And none of it made a difference when the money ran out. The moral capital that they'd built for generations couldn't pay salaries or fund operations. It just evaporated.

From this, I relized that I've been running the same calculation in my life all wrong. I've been developing reputation, good will, trust, expertise. All these intangible things that are supposed to protect you and create opportunities. And I still think they matter, but I'm starting to understand that they only matter as long as the other side values them. The second someone says your reputation isn't worth anything to them, it is worthless. You can be the most trusted person in your field, but your reputation goes down with it if the field ceases to exist or cease to be profitable.

This change occurs rapidly, ironically. One year, being known as reliable and ethical is your greatest asset. The next year fast and cheap is all anybody cares about. You didn't change. The world shifted its value system and suddenly all that you built is obsolete. People who spent decades cultivating respect and relationships getting passed over for people who just offer a better transaction right now. The long game ceased to work, but no one declared it.

If reputation and moral capital can simply disappear that fast, what is actually of value? Is it just raw leverage - to be able to walk away, the thing other people need that only you've got? Because that is cynical but it play out everywhere. The people with leverage end up getting what they want. The people with just reputation are squeezed until they either get leverage or go irrelevant.


The Ambassadors (Holbein), Hans Holbein the Younger, 1533

[Alpha Marine]

All that matters these days is who's got the money, power or authority. Nothing else matters. Values don't mean anything. There is no line people cant cross for what they want. People have no principles or guidelines anymore.
But I don't believe you have to be just like them to survive in this world. You can have values and principles and lines you cant cross and still be successful in that field. You may not be as successful as they are, but you're not in a competition with them.

My country had an election where the sitting candidate lost, and people expected him to fight because it was assumed that the election was rigged, but he didn't fight; he gently stepped down, and till this day, people call him weak, but not to me. There would have been so much bloodshed of innocence if he had decided to fight, and he doesn't want that on his conscience, and that is something I can respect, especially from a politician. He moved on to better things today simply because he held on to his values and never crossed the line he set for himself.
So we don't need to be the way society or the world sets for us, we can be different.

You can do things differently from the way the world expects of you. You might not win, but if it makes you feel better and have peace within, then it's worth it. Having a conscience doesn't make you a weak man; it makes you a human being.

[AmaGold70]

Having a good name means that you are probably popular for being a noble person but you have nothing else attached to your name, no cash reward for having a good name and I ask if it's really worth it. If having a good name is going to leave me empty handed then I don't want it because the world only understands what they see around you and not what you stand for, a bad politician with a bad name but fully loaded hands is exactly what the people thrive and understand and is it Worth it? For some people it is and for people like me I want a good name but not the popular type and still be successful.

[Ucy]

The other side does not have to value your reputation and moral before they matter. What really make them matter is that they help keep society healthy, strong, powerful, "intelligent", fruitful, blessed, etc. You don't need to work too hard  to get these things, apart from holding strongly to your integrity.. And this benefits means you are not left empty handed unless you consider only people with money to be wealthy enough. And no matter how much you have that can buy whatever you want, you will be too blind to buy the good things that come "naturally" in the land of the upright.  You will consider the most attractive things as the better ones


By the way, it's better to live with people like yourself in a system where reputation and moral are constantly enforced so that certain people don't break the rules to gain undue advantage over people who refuse to do thesame thing. This will make the upright ones to remain at the top of the game and in business.
And there is this not-so-correct belief that more enforcement or regulation will slow down pace of progress .Well, that could only happen in  the wrong economic model, while in the right one, like those based on Bitcoin open, permissionless participation in developments, where everyone is allowed to contribute and get rewarded with good reputations based on how well their contributions are, they will be able to use that to get more permissionless opportunities to quickly competie with other reputable people and produce the right things

[DiMarxist]

OP going through your post I can sense that you are gradually coming to the realization that the world is fast changing and that has even affected the normal way of doing things. Looking critically at society in my country those who play by the rules and regulations that society sets for them are actually the once struggling, what is the essence of of having a good name when you don't have money to back it up. In today's world which is gradually been taken over by war and tensions all over no nation will be willing to donate money for charity work. Because you have to secure your country first before talking about a good name.

[EluguHcman]

From this, I relized that I've been running the same calculation in my life all wrong. I've been developing reputation, good will, trust, expertise. All these intangible things that are supposed to protect you and create opportunities. And I still think they matter, but I'm starting to understand that they only matter as long as the other side values them. The second someone says your reputation isn't worth anything to them, it is worthless. You can be the most trusted person in your field, but your reputation goes down with it if the field ceases to exist or cease to be profitable.

I get your points. In some what journey of life someone who actually understand the reason we are created here is to live a life not just to how it will suit us but also considers it influence with the people around us.
Some had also believe life is garbage in and garbage out with the tunes of vanity upon vanity with the whispers of not suffocating others who had not made achievements up to your level.

Some would have the obligations to just fix human errors and instead of the people to be appreciative for such humanitarians, they would  show their dubious and jealous life. So to an extent, some people are just ungrateful in life and does not deserve humanity favour with their selfish and evil minds full of envies.
So if you fall on the categories that portrays humanity, you should be careful because even those you feeds and teaches how to fish will somewhere want to bring you down.

A lot a just ingrate.

[Accardo]

Some would have the obligations to just fix human errors and instead of the people to be appreciative for such humanitarians, they would  show their dubious and jealous life. So to an extent, some people are just ungrateful in life and does not deserve humanity favour with their selfish and evil minds full of envies.
So if you fall on the categories that portrays humanity, you should be careful because even those you feeds and teaches how to fish will somewhere want to bring you down.

Ungrateful people are to be ignored by all measures for their pessimistic, negative, and dry attitude, no goodwill of substance comes off their thoughts or innermost mind, in as much as they'll try to be happy the few minutes after help or assistant is issued to them, they still go back to default after sometimes and blame the benefactor in a way or another, or complain about how little the help was compared to the wealth of the giver.

[Die_empty]

The problem is that priorities in the world have changed. The reputation of an individual or organization is no longer an edge. Money and political power are now the driving forces of the world. We saw how Elon Musk influenced the US elections using his financial strength. Voters didn't care about the character of the candidate because they were influenced by financial gains.

Building a good reputation in some areas is seen as foolishness. People now value financial gains and don't care about the source of the money. I am not surprised that these important international organisations are lacking funds. The world is losing its compassion because the focus is now on territorial expansion and mineral exploitation.    

[rodskee]

There's this idea in economics about the way countries used to have what they called "moral capital". Basically, their reputation as being good or neutral or humanitarian gave them actual protection in the world. And like, you could not simply bully them since they had this invisible protection in terms of respect and trust. And that shield is fading away too, and it is forcing me to reevaluate all the ways that value works.

ICRC cut thousands of jobs because the donor countries decided to spend money on weapons instead. The entire purpose of the organization was to help people in the war zones, and they've been doing it for over a century. And none of it made a difference when the money ran out. The moral capital that they'd built for generations couldn't pay salaries or fund operations. It just evaporated.

politics is now involved and when you have been kind, you are not feared you are not adorned you are not powerful but instead you are seen as a weakling and other bigger countries will try to take advantage of the resources you have

in the real world, you need to bring tangible products to the table or else you will not receive anything in return

From this, I relized that I've been running the same calculation in my life all wrong. I've been developing reputation, good will, trust, expertise. All these intangible things that are supposed to protect you and create opportunities. And I still think they matter, but I'm starting to understand that they only matter as long as the other side values them. The second someone says your reputation isn't worth anything to them, it is worthless. You can be the most trusted person in your field, but your reputation goes down with it if the field ceases to exist or cease to be profitable.

well value creation is subjective depending on the industry yes like the one example with countries having to be valuable in terms of actual materials

this can also be applied with jobs like someone who is a good cook will not be respected in the it industry simply because he can not do what others in the field can do so therefore he is worthless to those in the it industry

[Bluedrem]

Advancement of good name is available in many cases. For example, if I talk about the very beginning, you will see that if everyone in your colony knows you as a good person, then when you need something, your neighbors will come forward to help you to meet your needs, but if you have a bad name (bad behavior), you will not see many people coming forward in times of trouble. The same is true in economics and it is very useful in business too. If you go to take a loan from a bank to do business, you will see that the bank is willing to give a lot of money to those who have brand value, but when those who have financial assistance to start a business demand a loan from the bank, they refuse to give a very large amount of money to them.

[imthegreat]

Snip

It all depends on the society you live in. If you live in an underdeveloped country, then force and pressure on others will be valued above all else. After all, in such countries, fear is a means to power, and if you're not one of them, you'll try to exploit your success in the shadows and flee the region. But if you live in a developed country, then the ability to find win-win advantages will be valued. There'll be no one to pressure with fear, so you'll need to find mutually beneficial relationships. But overall, I'm glad we live in the internet age because you can seek success in other countries through the internet.

[Gentle_Soul]

Having a good name means that you are probably popular for being a noble person but you have nothing else attached to your name, no cash reward for having a good name and I ask if it's really worth it. If having a good name is going to leave me empty handed then I don't want it because the world only understands what they see around you and not what you stand for, a bad politician with a bad name but fully loaded hands is exactly what the people thrive and understand and is it Worth it? For some people it is and for people like me I want a good name but not the popular type and still be successful.

You are right on this to some extent I agree with the part where you say probably want a good name and still be successful yeah it's possible to have a good name and be successful, the ideal thing is to separate the both being a good person and being a successful person are two different things. If you want to be successful you should know what to do to attain success and if you want to be a good person then do the right things always and maintain being a good person.
There are no two ways about it, your being a good person should not be focused on the fact that people you do good to will help you to become successful because that might not be the case and you just discover that you are a good person  but at the same time not a successful good person.

[Fortify]

There's this idea in economics about the way countries used to have what they called "moral capital". Basically, their reputation as being good or neutral or humanitarian gave them actual protection in the world. And like, you could not simply bully them since they had this invisible protection in terms of respect and trust. And that shield is fading away too, and it is forcing me to reevaluate all the ways that value works.

If reputation and moral capital can simply disappear that fast, what is actually of value? Is it just raw leverage - to be able to walk away, the thing other people need that only you've got? Because that is cynical but it play out everywhere. The people with leverage end up getting what they want. The people with just reputation are squeezed until they either get leverage or go irrelevant.

Surely this shows that you cannot let your guard down and it is the responsibility of each person in these so-called "advanced" economies that revolve around democracy to educate themselves, plus be on guard against a constant external threat from authoritarian regimes. Trump has highlighted how quickly once proud and historic institutions can be gutted by a tyrant, but that does not mean we should not continue to try to uphold the things that many generations have claimed to hold dear. Social media, extremely partisan news organizations and abusive algorithms designed to bait us into all kinds of traps are a bit of a curse on humanity - because the only incentive that made them the way they are is money (or maybe just protecting the mega rich who already have far more than their fair share, it keeps the peasants fighting for scraps.)

[tygeade]

In today's world, the good name is abused a lot, whereas it wasn't back in the day, that's the difference. Let me give you a good two examples so you understand the difference very well. In 15650 in some castle, if the lord says that there will be gold arriving, then they will keep getting wine and food and other needs from merchants, and all the workers will keep on working, none of them receiving anything, but then the gold does arrive eventually and everyone gets paid, this happens over a dozen times, so they get used to it.

In today's world, some rich factory owners gives you a check for 45 days, so you can cash in after 45 days, you see them as this big factor owner, so clearly they have millions and won't bounce a few thousand, and then you go to bank and it doesn't cash out. Would you work again? Of course not. That is the difference between old days and today.

[abhiseshakana]

If reputation and moral capital can simply disappear that fast, what is actually of value? Is it just raw leverage - to be able to walk away, the thing other people need that only you've got? Because that is cynical but it play out everywhere. The people with leverage end up getting what they want. The people with just reputation are squeezed until they either get leverage or go irrelevant.

I think the world now is the phase that usefulness principles is more appreciated than morality. Deep inside everybody heart admited that morality and good character is the most precious thing in social life. it will be something rare not only because it is disappear but also because many people think be idealist is good but the most important matter is be realistic.

When we talking abourt money and power, moral capital will be next consideration after money, networking, expertises. It is show how bad moral degradation happen in our society. For a country, the first priority always national interest especially economic and power before humanity. when the topic is about national existensial or securing national interest, moral capital will less considered comparing with influence,power, natural resources and wealth which bring direct effect for a nation. Actully this is old issue but in this VUCA world such action occurs quickly, in massive scale and tolerable.

From ICRC case we realize that moral capital can be work as long as a donor country has stable surplus economy, when economic reality hit and security interest squeze, budged on moral and donation will be cut first and alocate for national security spending. So change happen on global priority not the global value. From big country action against other in the name of national security threat, what the most valuable previledge now is control on power structure legitimation. World put leverage first before legitimation which left reputation on history or as a last point of consideration. Government diplomacy must be clever in converting morality and reputation to be leverage in economy, politic and global communication. If they can't, morality capital and reputation aset will be useless.]

[Cryptomultiplier]

There's this idea in economics about the way countries used to have what they called "moral capital". Basically, their reputation as being good or neutral or humanitarian gave them actual protection in the world. And like, you could not simply bully them since they had this invisible protection in terms of respect and trust. And that shield is fading away too, and it is forcing me to reevaluate all the ways that value works.

If reputation and moral capital can simply disappear that fast, what is actually of value? Is it just raw leverage - to be able to walk away, the thing other people need that only you've got? Because that is cynical but it play out everywhere. The people with leverage end up getting what they want. The people with just reputation are squeezed until they either get leverage or go irrelevant.

Surely this shows that you cannot let your guard down and it is the responsibility of each person in these so-called "advanced" economies that revolve around democracy to educate themselves, plus be on guard against a constant external threat from authoritarian regimes. Trump has highlighted how quickly once proud and historic institutions can be gutted by a tyrant, but that does not mean we should not continue to try to uphold the things that many generations have claimed to hold dear. Social media, extremely partisan news organizations and abusive algorithms designed to bait us into all kinds of traps are a bit of a curse on humanity - because the only incentive that made them the way they are is money (or maybe just protecting the mega rich who already have far more than their fair share, it keeps the peasants fighting for scraps.)

Gone ard the days of 'a good name is better than riches, because in these days we see riches better than a good name or a honest living.'
A good name these days has underlying payments and transactions that has been done and when the praise is being sung like in the U S elections, those who stand to benefit more do more and many of the times, the law is bent to favor the rich, no matter the source of income as long as it is flowing and touching hands.

[Josefjix]

Nobody has power, fame and money by exactly been morally standard, that's just an illusion. If you can look further in the wealth built many big names, you'll notice there is a bit of fraudulent money that supports business from the beginning and makes it stand stronger. Elon musk wealth started by been immorally behaved, maybe, but you can't find the source of these information.

You can't actually request for what you need and be given freely, you have to use guns and force to actually grab what you want.

[bitgolden]

I am sorry to say this but moral and reputational power is nothing and will never mean anything. Rome had reputation, they had morals too, they seen themselves as the "correct" way and others all heathens and barbaric, what happened in the end? Did it saved them?

This is why it's quite easy to say that in any time of history, when someone trusted their own moral reputation for being good, they ended up going away after a while. This is why it makes sense to be stronger and not rely on peoples perception of you.

[Makus]

Having a good name means that you are probably popular for being a noble person but you have nothing else attached to your name, no cash reward for having a good name and I ask if it's really worth it. If having a good name is going to leave me empty handed then I don't want it because the world only understands what they see around you and not what you stand for, a bad politician with a bad name but fully loaded hands is exactly what the people thrive and understand and is it Worth it? For some people it is and for people like me I want a good name but not the popular type and still be successful.

They say that a good name is better than riches meaning that with all you think that you acquire what matters most is your integrity. But no one is going to come and give you a cash reward for being a good person or having a good name doesn't mean that it should getinto your head and not allow you to take steps to get money. if you are worried too much about what people would say then you are not ready to make it in  life. you need to be able to do anything legitimately possible for you that can put money in your pocket

[Darker45]

In the end it's all about strength and power. Whether you choose peace or morality doesn't preclude the need for maintaining a certain amount of strength. There are parties that simply don't give a damn to your moral standing. In both world wars, neutrality was always violated, and for various reasons. The history of colonization has countless stories of desecrated goodwill and good faith of natives.

This made me remember a number of proverbs. In Kung Fu philosophy, "it is better to be a warrior in a garden than a gardener in a war". And who isn't familiar with "si vis pacem, para bellum"?

Indeed, your moral capital can simply disappear that fast. So you should be discerning enough when to drop the pen and pick up the sword.