Last week, we delved briefly into human nature in attempting to understand why people almost instinctively resent and rise to oppose any suggestions about setting up rules.
I wish to thank those of you who raised this issue (and others on the same article) either in person or via email.
Let me elaborate on rules and freedom a little more here. The opposition to controls and restrictions becomes organised and vehement once these rules are actually enacted.
This is because people see rules as restrictions on their God-given freedoms.
Little do they realise that great civilisations of history arose because of the setting up of rules and systems of administration that directed, guided and curtailed human conduct.
Great battles like the Kurukshetra that is covered in the Mahabharata were won because battle plans and rules were used to organise and deploy soldiers and armaments.
Moses was handed down the 10 commandments to organise and guide his people to the Promised Land after they became rebellious, wayward and unmanageable.
It is the same commandments of the Bible that have been used to design national constitutions for countries so that their citizens can live an organised and predictable existence.
The provisions of these constitutions inevitably bestow rights as well as responsibilities. The focus is on guiding and controlling human conduct.
It is in this regard – human conduct – that we moved focus to the fact that the human being has both good and bad in the same one person. E
very manager who deals directly with people has to constantly grapple with this hot potato.
I highlighted for you in some detail why rules are necessary in any organisational setting and how they help in ensuring that the organisation functions predictably and transparently.
In boxing, we have had to set up operational rules for these very same reasons.
By way of an example, predictability means that all stakeholders know that when they want to box abroad, they need to seek clearance from Boxing Commission of Fiji (BCF).
There are sound reasons apart from the legal requirement for this as stipulated in the BCF Act 2015. On the other hand, stakeholders also know that if they try to work around this requirement and box overseas without BCF clearance, there will be penalties.
This is because if this rule is removed, we will have total lack of control over this aspect of boxing and boxers – as well as their teams – are likely to be exploited. We had two recent trips by boxers to NZ, both sanctioned by BCF.
In the first case, the trainer/manager opened the brown envelopes that had the purse of two of his boxers and extracted money while they watched helplessly. The third boxer refused to allow the official to touch his pay.
There is more to this case. The three boxers were housed in cramped accommodation to allow the manager to siphon off the accommodation portion of their allocation. He also controlled their food allowance by deciding unilaterally what they would be fed.
This is very different from a later excursion by two of our promising boxers and their focused and trained manager/trainer.
They were accommodated in a good house with separate bedrooms and all attendant facilities. BCF was directly involved in this case and there was no peeling away from their purses. Their report has been both encouraging and instructive.
It is clear that the greater involvement of BCF is necessary because of the everpresent threat of manipulation and exploitation of our boxers by unscrupulous fight officials.
Despite this, we recently had two boxers participate in Samoa without BCF clearance.
A third (who is both popular and prominent on the fight scene) was dismissive of BCF verbally to those who advised him of the need for official clearance. He was providentially stopped at the airport, but the other two went ahead and fought in Apia.
Action will have to be taken against them. But the bigger issue is that a very well-versed fight personality organised their trip to Samoa. He totally ignored BCF despite being conversant with all these requirements that have been put in place.
This was clearly a manifestation of the dark side of human nature because in the midst of all our efforts to organise and standardise the overseas clearance process, we had this insidious attempt to defeat the system.
Let us probe further into human nature, human conduct, the need for rules and the roles played by rules before moving focus to the next big boxing program that will be held tonight at the Vodafone Arena in Suva.
Human nature
Whenever discussions move to human nature, the focus almost automatically zooms on whether the human being is essentially good or essentially evil. Early philosophers like Aristotle argued that morality is learned, and that we are born as “amoral creatures”.
In other words, the human being is born bad and needs to be taught to become good.
In contrast to Aristotle, Sigmund Freud considered newborns a moral blank slate who were ready to be taught either good or bad depending on the needs of the situation.
The debate moves into much more controversial domains when we start delving into how early in its development the human brain can begin to absorb teachings/learnings.
The Indian epic, Mahabharata talks about a prince called Abhimanyu who learnt military strategies while in the womb of his mother as he (in embryonic form) listened to important discussions which his mother was privy to.
Perhaps the two most famous opposing views on this debate are those of Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Hobbes describes humans as “nasty” and “brutish”, needing society and rules to reign in their natural instincts in order to thrive. Much of this is seen in the Old Testament of the Bible, the life of Prophet Mohammed and the Mahabharata.
There is constant covetousness, conquest and brutal wars that are sometimes hard to fathom. I am well aware of the “had to happen” or “it was so written” or “it had to come to pass” explanations and arguments, but this does not take away from the fact that it shows glaringly the brutish, covetous side of man.
In fact, man has been described as the most cruel of all creatures and quite often it is very difficult to argue against this.
Rousseau openly criticised Hobbes, arguing instead that man would be gentle and pure without the corruption of greed and inequality caused by the class system imposed by our society. Here, the role of the environment directly enters the discussion and we move into the realm of developmental psychology.
Studies in this area show that there may be some natural “good” in humanity (or, to be more technical, that at least children are capable of passing moral judgements at an earlier age than previously thought).
It is this that fuels the Yellow Ribbon movement in the belief that there is always some good in the human being that can be redeemed to reintroduce “fallen” human beings back into the mainstream of society.
The teachings of Jesus in the New Testament, the dawn of Ram Rajya in the Ramayana and the insistence that the Holy Quran is a book of peace are all examples of this belief in the good that resides in every wo/ man.
The conclusion from this perspective is that no matter how bad or misguided a person may be, it is not advisable to totally write him/her off the book of hope. Central to this rehabilitation process is the imposition of respect for and adherence to rules.
This brings our discussion back to the need for rules in order to ensure predictably and transparency in decisionmaking in organisations.
Boxing Fiji has continued to slog determinedly along this path amid tremendous opposition that has simmered down to one source (with a few intermittent breaches here and there) that is presently being dealt with.
It is sad that because of this, Fiji Boxing is currently operating without one of its most active promoters. The only other place we still see breaches in is when boxers go abroad with BCF clearances.
We now have a penalty regime that should help curb and eventually plug this hole. Let me talk briefly about today’s boxing program in Suva as we round off this article.
Big boxing today
Boxing returns to Suva today with Lewis-Hill Boxing Promotions, Rooster Chicken and the rest of their formidable team.
After a long time (13 years), Vodafone Arena will host its first big program after Joy Ali fell short against Joseph Kwadjo at the same venue in 2010.
I flew back from Auckland for that one.
This time, we have a muchawaited heavyweight title fight between rampant reigning champion, James Singh and upcoming explosive challenger, Semi Dauloloma.
This showdown has been building up over the past two years and both have promised an early evening for fight fans. In the main supporting bout, Kwadjo and Isikeli Senidoko lock horns once again to deliver a clear verdict to the public.
The last bout between the two was stopped by the referee amid protests from Senidoko’s corner.
This time, both are determined to refuse third party adjudication. In another eagerly-anticipated match-up, upcoming Mohammed Ali of the Joy Ali clan, takes on a resurgent Ratu Rakuro Daunivavana of Savusavu.
The no-nonsense Makaele Ravalaca takes on Junior Farzan after all others refused to take his offer. Mika is destined for bigger things. So all in all, this is a must-see program for all.
I stop here for now as I prepare myself for this fight-fest.
• DR SUBHASH APPANNA is a USP academic who has been writing regularly on issues of historical and national significance. He is also the chairman of Boxing Commission of Fiji. The views expressed here are his alone and not necessarily shared by this newspaper or his employers. subhash.appana@usp.ac.fj.
