P3+DLeon

Damian Leon Per. 3

How do we distinguish right from wrong, and once we know, how do we, as individuals, confront injustices? As an individual, one is always confronted with the problem of choosing right from wrong. A simple definition of the word right is “Action taken which is socially acceptable by morals and values”. This definition could not be further from the truth. Although most actions which are “socially acceptable” are right, but does that justify the atrocities committed during the Holocaust, through slavery, or even through the exploitation of displaced farmers during the great depression? In each, the people saw it socially acceptable to murder, enslave, and exploit thousands of minorities: the Jews, Blacks and migrant farmers. Therefore an individual must choose right from wrong by first deciding whether the action benefits society as a whole and then considering who will be harmed by the action. If society benefits from the action and no one is harmed, then it can be acknowledge as “right”.

In //The// //Grapes of Wrath//, Steinbeck illustrates the many incidents where the migrant farmer is being wronged. In Chapter 9 of //The Grapes of Wrath//, the men are taken advantage of by the salesman. The salesman believes that what he is doing is right because it benefits him but in reality it does not. The farmers explain this by saying, “We could have saved you, but you cut us down and soon you will be cut down and there’ll be none of us to save you” (Ch. 9, //Grapes of Wrath//). Thus, the salesman harmed not only the farmers, but himself as well. Therefore their action was wrong, not right; they exploited farmers and harmed society. Similarly, In Chapter 19, Americans moved to California, the land of Mexicans, and forcefully took over the state. They were so land-hungry that “they took the land…and guarded with guns the land they had stolen” (Ch.19, //Grapes of Wrath//). Here, again, the wrongdoers believed they were right simply because to them, “possession was ownership” (Ch. 19, //Grapes of Wrath//). They did not care that they had stolen the land from Mexicans. This action on behalf of the Americans was wrong because they harmed society as a whole by creating long-lasting tensions between Americans and Mexicans.

Selfishness is a form of injustice. As explained in Chapter 25, the owners believed that the “works of the roots of the vines, of the trees, must be destroyed to keep up the price” (Ch. 25, //Grapes of Wrath//). This act of selfishness does not benefit society. Men, women and children suffered terribly through starvation as a result to this act of selfishness. Hence, this action cannot be regarded as right. This can be connected to Stephanie Ericson’s, “The Ways We Lie”. In her essay, Ericson explains the concept of lying through group thinking. This type of lie is constantly brought up in //The Grapes of Wrath//. The owners and salesmen, collaboratively lie to the farmers in order to gain the largest profit. This further supports the point that the owners and salesmen were doing wrong even though they believed they were right.

Now leaving the process of judging right from wrong, the individual must ask themselves how they are to confront these injustices. A most effective way of confronting injustices is to join with others and work together to correct injustices. The individual must provide support for his peers and must confront injustice without fear. Confronting injustice takes a great deal of courage; hence anger can facilitate the process of correcting wrongdoings. Each individual must become compassionate and advocate change through possible solutions which will benefit society as a whole, or at the very least, those who are being wronged. Steinbeck also includes his ideas on how to confront injustice in //The Grapes of Wrath//.

Anger can be extremely helpful when confronting injustice. Steinbeck supports this idea in Chapter 29 when women are relieved by the fact that their men had not broken. They believed that “the break would never come as long as fear could turn to wrath” (Ch. 29, //Grapes of Wrath//). The farmer’s anger is channeled into their fight against injustice. In the case of //The Grapes of Wrath//, this anger led to the formation of labor unions. Steinbeck alludes to the formation of labor unions in Chapter 14; “the two men squatting in a ditch … this is the beginning from ‘I’ to ‘we’” (Ch. 14, //Grapes of Wrath//). Labor unions are one way of fighting injustice and as it can be seen in the //Grapes of Wrath//, anger can act as a strong stimulant in confronting injustice. It’s the anger within each farmer that welds them together to fight the injustice done on them.

Dealing with injustice is difficult when the injustice does not have an immediate effect on oneself. That is why compassion is a trait that is necessary in confronting injustice. Barbara Lazear writes, “Compassion must be learned, and it is learned by having adversity at our windows…adversity that becomes so familiar that we begin to identify and empathize with it” (Lazear). Once somebody becomes compassionate it is easier to identify an injustice done on others. This compassion may lead to anger towards those who are unjust like in Barbara Lazear’s, “On Compassion”. She demonstrates how people who are compassionate help the poor instead of chase them away. They help them because society has been unjust to them and now they are in dire need. The ultimate result of fighting this injustice is the hospitalization of the homeless in New York (Lazear). Ultimately, Anger and compassion work together to keep one concentrated on the goal and keeps one away from distractions or break-downs.

Lastly, the individual must be able to use his conscience to decide right from wrong and then decide what action must be taken to correct injustices. Thoreau poses rhetorical questions regarding injustices suh as, "Can there not be a government in which majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience?" (Thoreau). This point is a key aspect of Thoreau’s, “Civil Disobedience: Part 1”. He argues that citizens must use their conscience to identify injustice and then address the problem aggressively. They should not allow government dictate what is right and wrong, says Thoreau. Instead they should judge right from wrong on their own accord based on their conscience. They must use their conscience instead of law to judge right from wrong and then act to correct the injustice, even if it means breaking the law.

As an individual one must use their judgment to separate right from wrong. When an injustice is committed, it is up to the individual to fix the injustice through collaborated action, such as the formation of unions. This is one of the central messages in the novel Grapes of Wrath. As most farmers are being exploited and treated unjustly, they begin to use anger in order to unite and form unions to protest the injustice committed on them. This is the most suitable form of action that an individual can take when confronting injustice. Individuals have the responsibility of correcting injustice through cooperative means. Individuals must always remember that something that is “socially acceptable” is not always right; history has proven it.