{"id":4005,"date":"1989-05-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1989-05-01T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/vol-70-no-3-may-june-1989-the-scope-of-responsibility\/"},"modified":"2022-11-27T02:31:00","modified_gmt":"2022-11-27T02:31:00","slug":"vol-70-no-3-may-june-1989-the-scope-of-responsibility","status":"publish","type":"rbc_letter","link":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/vol-70-no-3-may-june-1989-the-scope-of-responsibility\/","title":{"rendered":"Vol. 70 No. 3 &#8211; May\/June 1989 &#8211; The Scope of Responsibility"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"layout-column-main\">\n<p class=\"boldtext\">Are people less responsible today than they                     were in times past? It&#8217;s debatable. But one thing is sure:                     responsibility is more vital than ever in this interdependent                     world&#8230;<\/p>\n<p> Anyone who watches those nature programs on television might                     conclude that responsibility is an instinctive quality. Animals                     of all kinds can be seen bringing food to their young and                     protecting them against predators at the risk of their own                     lives. In some species parental &#8220;responsibility&#8221; extends to                     showing the young how to hunt and evade attack, in much the                     same way as human parents conscientiously pass on the lessons                     of their experience to their children. Responsibility in the                     natural world appears to follow an immutable cycle, with each                     generation taking it up as its members reach maturity.<\/p>\n<p>Among the species generically known as man, a sense of responsibility                     would also seem to come naturally. In the few primitive societies                     left in the world, children begin participating in the care                     of their younger brothers and sisters at an early age. They                     assume one duty after another as they move up the scale of                     roles in their tribes until they are able to meet the full                     obligations of membership. They grow into responsibility as                     unconsciously as they grow in height and weight.<\/p>\n<p>Even in western countries a few generations ago, responsibility                     looked like a gift of God bestowed on most, if not all, good                     Christians. Indeed, in the average middle class household,                     God had a big part to play in it; a person&#8217;s ultimate responsibility                     was deemed to be owed to the all-seeing and all-knowing deity.<\/p>\n<p>For true believers, this had the effect of making virtue                     into a necessity. The attitude of 19th century American author                     Lydia H. Sigourney was typical of her era. She thought of                     earthly life as a probation. &#8220;Every hour assumes a fearful                     responsibility when we view it as the culturer of an immortal                     harvest,&#8221; she wrote.<\/p>\n<p>The great majority of people then lived in a rural setting;                     children were brought up doing essential chores and gradually                     taking over tasks from their fathers and mothers until they                     reached the stage of doing everything on their own recognizance.                     Whether on a farm or in a city, boys followed in their fathers&#8217;                     footsteps, working for a living, getting married, heading                     a family. With no questions asked, girls were groomed for                     the responsibility of raising children and looking after a                     home.<\/p>\n<p>The transformation in behaviour since then should cause                     us to reconsider the idea that responsibility is an inborn                     trait whose development can be taken for granted. That may                     be so in nature, but most of us no longer live in anything                     resembling a natural state.<\/p>\n<p>Since horses and carriages roamed the streets, our attitudes                     have changed just as radically as our urban landscape. Yet                     the assumption persists in our schools, businesses and public                     agencies that responsibility is something that simply comes                     to normal human beings as they go along in life.<\/p>\n<p>It is rare to find anyone outside of a prison or other rehabilitation                     institution actually teaching someone else how to act responsibly,                     as a person might be taught how to drive a truck or read a                     balance sheet or play tennis. True, the subject is touched                     on indirectly in such courses as social studies, religion,                     philosophy, and management: otherwise, educators and trainers                     appear to believe that it is learned by example alone.<\/p>\n<p>It is worth wondering whether this offhand approach is sufficient                     for the present day, considering the evidence of widespread                     irresponsibility that glares out of the statistics on crime,                     drug and alcohol abuse, runaways, vandalism, family breakups,                     etc. Perhaps the time has come to start looking at responsibility                     &#8211; or the lack of it &#8211; as a public concern.<\/p>\n<p>It is, of course, supposed to be nurtured in the privacy                     of the home ; these days, however, it is not easy to instil                     it in children even in the best-regulated of families. Family                     life has changed as business has become busier, divorce and                     separation more common, and more mothers have taken outside                     employment. The American psychiatry professor Dr. Harold M.                     Voth traces a decline in familial influence on character formation                     to &#8220;75 years of events &#8211; wars, industrialization, inflation,                     materialism, etc. &#8211; [which] have assaulted the family unit                     to such an extent that for several generations the developing                     young have been deprived of continuous parental input.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>The technological changes that have taken place during that                     time have mainly been aimed at making life easier. So have                     the social changes, although they have been less reliable                     in their effect. In this age of physical ease, a psychological                     climate has arisen in which we subliminally seek to avoid                     anything that is uncomfortable or inconvenient. And often                     there is nothing more uncomfortable or inconvenient than discharging                     a responsibility.<\/p>\n<h3>To help children grow up strong, keep adding                   to their responsibility<\/h3>\n<p>In the old days life was hard not only physically, but psychologically.                     The constraints of convention could be heavy to bear. One                     of these constraints was strict parental discipline. It used                     to be imposed partly by sanctions, but mostly by the implicit                     understanding that parents had a God-given right to be obeyed.<\/p>\n<p>Though youthful rebelliousness is as old as the human race,                     a distinct breaking-point came in the 1960s, when young people                     in large numbers began to question the authority of their                     elders. The youth movement helped to give impetus to a number                     of other movements to secure greater human rights.<\/p>\n<p>In one sense, the loosening of parental controls and absentee                     parenthood have made present-day young people more responsible                     for their own wellbeing than any generation before them. The                     corollary is that parents should take more care than ever                     to provide guidance and encouragement to whatever extent they                     can.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Few things help an individual more than to place responsibility                     upon him, and let him know that you trust him,&#8221; said the pioneer                     American Black leader, Booker T. Washington. The way to help                     children grow up strong is steadily to increase the amount                     of trust placed in them.<\/p>\n<p>There are some quite simple ways of cultivating responsibility,                     including having children share in the care of younger siblings,                     carry out regular chores, handle their own money (&#8220;when your                     allowance is spent, don&#8217;t expect any extra&#8221;( and take part                     in family decisions. The idea should be imparted that they                     are full participants in the family, and as such they must                     do their share in ensuring the welfare of the family as a                     whole.<\/p>\n<h3>Freedom &#8211; but never freedom in any                   way from responsibility<\/h3>\n<p>This may be easier said than done at a time when individual                     rights occupy such a prominent place in the public scale of                     values. The drive for rights has meant that people are no                     longer automatically cast in roles according to their age,                     sex, class, religion, ethnic origin, marital status, or other                     personal characteristics. They have been largely set free                     to go their own way in hopes of finding themselves.<\/p>\n<p>In the process, popular attitudes in a country like Canada                     have become more tolerant, understanding and forgiving. No                     longer are men and women expected to live with the consequences                     of their errors and shortcomings until the day they die.<\/p>\n<p>This is a good thing in principle, but it is not without                     its undesirable side-effects. It has opened up psychological                     loopholes through which people can wriggle out of their legitimate                     responsibilities.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;No doubt Jack the Ripper excused himself on the grounds                     that it was human nature,&#8221; A. A. Milne observed. The &#8220;non-judgmental&#8221;                     approach to conduct allows transgressors to shift the responsibility                     for their actions from themselves to their psychological condition,                     peer pressure, upbringing, or whatever other excuse comes                     readily to hand.<\/p>\n<p>With all the standing orders against irresponsibility gone,                     one would think that it might be rampant. Indeed, when we                     look at the current state of ethics, there is much to persuade                     us that the principle of responsibility is being ignored.<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, there has recently been a revival of                     public concern for ethical standards. At the same time, people                     seem to be taking a more &#8220;caring&#8221; attitude towards their personal                     relationships and showing more concern for public issues such                     as peace and ecology.<\/p>\n<p>It could be said that, after some serious lapses caused                     by the shock of having a great deal of freedom lavished on                     them all at once , people are learning to live with that freedom.                     The chief lesson to be learned is that freedom of action in                     their personal lives does not mean freedom from responsibility                     in any way or to any degree.<\/p>\n<p>Freedom can be an illusory thing &#8211; just when you think you                     have most of it, you may find that you have least of it. For                     instance, people who adopt an addictive habit as a way of                     thumbing their noses at convention may become slaves to the                     habit. More generally, no civilized person is free from his                     or her own conscience. The most painful aspect of letting                     somebody down is the guilty feeling that you have let yourself                     down, too.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;There are two freedoms: the false where a man is free to                     do what he likes; the true where a man is free to do what                     he ought,&#8221; wrote the novelist Charles Kingsley. What one <em>                     ought <\/em> to do may be broadly defined as living up to one&#8217;s                     responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>The standard definitions of the word fail to convey the                     depth of its moral implications; one dictionary, for instance,                     says that being responsible means being &#8220;liable to be called                     to account.&#8221; The same dictionary tells us that accountable                     means &#8220;answerable&#8221; and &#8221; explicable.&#8221; From this, the inference                     might be drawn that, to get out of responsibility, you need                     only to be able to explain yourself.<\/p>\n<p>The emphasis on accountability could also lead to the impression                     that responsibility is strictly a pragmatic matter. This,                     in fact, is the way the subject is often approached in modern                     western society . We practice responsibility because it brings                     us benefits or saves us from penalties. People urge their                     children to become more responsible because if they do, they                     are more likely to succeed; if they do not, they are more                     likely to fail.<\/p>\n<p>Responsibility has always been associated with work. In                     theory, at least, the more of it a person takes on, the better                     the job and the higher the income. Viewed in this light, it                     is likely to be regarded as a necessary evil, to be respected                     not for any ethical or humanistic reason, but to advance one&#8217;s                     career.<\/p>\n<p>It goes without saying that responsibility is imperative                     in business and public life. Still, it can be perceived too                     narrowly. Some tend to associate it <em> only <\/em> with work.                     It is not unusual for people to be paragons of conscientiousness                     on the job, and yet be lax in meeting their obligations to                     their spouses, families and communities.<\/p>\n<h3>In the end, we are responsible for our own                  rights and freedom<\/h3>\n<p>There is a further tendency among career-minded persons                     always to put the interests of their organizations first.                     Actions that may be seen as responsible in the context of                     the organization may be irresponsible in the context of the                     society. Many business and political decisions taken in the                     name of &#8220;enlightened self-interest &#8221; are more self-interested                     than enlightened. They fly in the face of Dostoyevsky&#8217;s dictum                     that &#8220;each of us is responsible to everything and to every                     human being.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>As an educated man of his times, Dostoyevsky was probably                     familiar with the philosophy of Confucius. According to the                     great Chinese teacher, one of the guiding principles of a                     worthwhile life is <em> jen <\/em> &#8211; &#8220;benevolent concern for                     one&#8217;s fellow man.&#8221; The leading interpreter of the Confucius&#8217;                     thought, his disciple Tseng Tzu, likened a well-spent life                     to a long journey with a heavy burden of <em> jen <\/em> &#8211;                     a burden which the bearer &#8220;has taken upon himself&#8221; without                     reference to external accountability. The reason for following                     The Way is simply to become a whole person. A &#8220;person&#8221; in                     the Confucian sense is the centre of a cluster of relationships                     as opposed to an individual separable from anyone else.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of interdependent responsibility is not as foreign                     to westerners as it may appear. It is at the bottom of our                     tradition of democracy. We are responsible to one another                     to ensure that the process works; if it does not work, that                     means that not enough of us are involved.<\/p>\n<p>We cannot really complain (though we often do) that we do                     not get the candidates we deserve to represent us, because                     each of us is free to join a political party and participate                     in nominating candidates, if not actually run for office.                     Every eligible voter is then free to participate in electing                     those who will conduct our public affairs.<\/p>\n<h3>The threat to human survival comes                   from irresponsibility<\/h3>\n<p>John Rawls, professor of philosophy at Harvard University,                     wrote in his 1983 book <em> A Theory of Justice <\/em> that,                     under our system, we cannot &#8220;shift the responsibility for                     what we do onto others. Those in authority are accountable                     for the policies they pursue and the instructions they lay                     down, and those who acquiesce in carrying out unjust commands                     or abetting evil designs cannot in general plead that they                     did not know better or that the fault lies solely with those                     in higher positions &#8230; The essential point here is that the                     principles that best conform to our nature as free and rational                     individuals themselves establish our accountability.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>According to Rawls, you cannot have liberty without responsibility.                     If members of the public fail to exercise their citizenship                     by voting and making their opinions on issues known, the way                     is open to actual or <em> de facto <\/em> dictatorship. Political                     apathy begets political weakness. To cure the weakness, people                     have proved themselves willing to surrender their independence                     to strong autocratic leaders who promise them stability.<\/p>\n<p>Rawls maintains that a feeling of civic responsibility cannot                     be forced; it does not depend on the threat of deprivation                     or punishment. What is true of the collectivity is true of                     the individual. As psychologist Stanley Milgram wrote, &#8220;for                     a person to feel responsible for his actions, he must sense                     that the behaviour has flown from <em> self<\/em> .&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Milgram went on to comment that it is easy to ignore responsibility                     when one is only an intermediate link in a chain. Ignoring                     responsibility can never make it go away, however. As in other                     aspects of life, political irresponsibility is largely a sin                     of omission.<\/p>\n<p>As the American Roman Catholic Cardinal John Wright pointed                     out, &#8221; evil does not just happen.&#8221; It is not the work of blind,                     neutral forces. People perpetrate it of their own free will,                     and other people acquiesce in it of their free will by allowing                     it to go on.<\/p>\n<p>Cardinal Wright wrote of &#8220;the moral disasters&#8221; which overtake                     mankind. The disasters which threaten us now are both material                     and moral. When scientists talk about the greenhouse effect,                     the destruction of the rain forests, acid rain, water pollution,                     overfishing and the other threats to life on the planet, they                     are talking about irresponsibility.<\/p>\n<p>Irresponsibility is nearly always traceable to people doing                     what they want without regard to anyone but themselves. If                     a person does not do what he or she should do, somebody else                     is left with a burden . Its impact can be immediate, as when                     an employee fails to do what is excepted of him and a workmate                     has to cover for him, or in the future, as when a profligate                     father dies without having provided financially for his family.                     The irresponsible ecological, fiscal and political practices                     now plaguing the world fall into the latter category.<\/p>\n<p>How we all live up to our responsibilities as householders,                     workers and citizens today has a direct bearing on the future.                     Historically &#8211; at least from the decline of the Roman Empire                     on &#8211; the standards of personal conduct have set the tone for                     the standards of conduct on a mass scale. If individuals behave                     carelessly and selfishly, the way is left open to collective                     careless and selfish behaviour. So if the present generation                     is to demonstrate that it will not allow irresponsibility                     to ruin life for future generations in this interdependent                     world, it must overcome its moral apathy.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":79,"featured_media":0,"template":"","categories":[1],"rbc_letter_theme":[],"rbc_letter_year":[76],"class_list":["post-4005","rbc_letter","type-rbc_letter","status-publish","hentry","category-uncategorized","rbc_letter_year-76"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v27.2 (Yoast SEO v27.2) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Vol. 70 No. 3 - May\/June 1989 - The Scope of Responsibility - RBC<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/vol-70-no-3-may-june-1989-the-scope-of-responsibility\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Vol. 70 No. 3 - May\/June 1989 - The Scope of Responsibility - RBC\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Are people less responsible today than they were in times past? It&#8217;s debatable. But one thing is sure: responsibility is more vital than ever in this interdependent world&#8230; Anyone who watches those nature programs on television might conclude that responsibility is an instinctive quality. Animals of all kinds can be seen bringing food to their [&hellip;]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/vol-70-no-3-may-june-1989-the-scope-of-responsibility\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"RBC\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2022-11-27T02:31:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/vol-70-no-3-may-june-1989-the-scope-of-responsibility\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/vol-70-no-3-may-june-1989-the-scope-of-responsibility\/\",\"name\":\"Vol. 70 No. 3 - May\/June 1989 - The Scope of Responsibility - RBC\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1989-05-01T00:00:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-11-27T02:31:00+00:00\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/vol-70-no-3-may-june-1989-the-scope-of-responsibility\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/\",\"name\":\"RBC\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Vol. 70 No. 3 - May\/June 1989 - The Scope of Responsibility - RBC","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/vol-70-no-3-may-june-1989-the-scope-of-responsibility\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Vol. 70 No. 3 - May\/June 1989 - The Scope of Responsibility - RBC","og_description":"Are people less responsible today than they were in times past? It&#8217;s debatable. But one thing is sure: responsibility is more vital than ever in this interdependent world&#8230; Anyone who watches those nature programs on television might conclude that responsibility is an instinctive quality. Animals of all kinds can be seen bringing food to their [&hellip;]","og_url":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/vol-70-no-3-may-june-1989-the-scope-of-responsibility\/","og_site_name":"RBC","article_modified_time":"2022-11-27T02:31:00+00:00","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/vol-70-no-3-may-june-1989-the-scope-of-responsibility\/","url":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/vol-70-no-3-may-june-1989-the-scope-of-responsibility\/","name":"Vol. 70 No. 3 - May\/June 1989 - The Scope of Responsibility - RBC","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/#website"},"datePublished":"1989-05-01T00:00:00+00:00","dateModified":"2022-11-27T02:31:00+00:00","inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/vol-70-no-3-may-june-1989-the-scope-of-responsibility\/"]}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/","name":"RBC","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"}]}},"parsely":{"version":"1.1.0","canonical_url":"https:\/\/rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/vol-70-no-3-may-june-1989-the-scope-of-responsibility\/","smart_links":{"inbound":0,"outbound":0},"traffic_boost_suggestions_count":0,"meta":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@type":"NewsArticle","headline":"Vol. 70 No. 3 &#8211; May\/June 1989 &#8211; The Scope of Responsibility","url":"http:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/vol-70-no-3-may-june-1989-the-scope-of-responsibility\/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"http:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/vol-70-no-3-may-june-1989-the-scope-of-responsibility\/"},"thumbnailUrl":"","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":""},"articleSection":"Uncategorized","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"amandeepsingh"}],"creator":["amandeepsingh"],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"RBC","logo":""},"keywords":[],"dateCreated":"1989-05-01T00:00:00Z","datePublished":"1989-05-01T00:00:00Z","dateModified":"2022-11-27T02:31:00Z"},"rendered":"<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"wp-parsely-metadata\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@type\":\"NewsArticle\",\"headline\":\"Vol. 70 No. 3 &#8211; May\\\/June 1989 &#8211; The Scope of Responsibility\",\"url\":\"http:\\\/\\\/www.rbc.com\\\/en\\\/about-us\\\/history\\\/letter\\\/vol-70-no-3-may-june-1989-the-scope-of-responsibility\\\/\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"http:\\\/\\\/www.rbc.com\\\/en\\\/about-us\\\/history\\\/letter\\\/vol-70-no-3-may-june-1989-the-scope-of-responsibility\\\/\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"url\":\"\"},\"articleSection\":\"Uncategorized\",\"author\":[{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"name\":\"amandeepsingh\"}],\"creator\":[\"amandeepsingh\"],\"publisher\":{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"name\":\"RBC\",\"logo\":\"\"},\"keywords\":[],\"dateCreated\":\"1989-05-01T00:00:00Z\",\"datePublished\":\"1989-05-01T00:00:00Z\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-11-27T02:31:00Z\"}<\/script>","tracker_url":"https:\/\/cdn.parsely.com\/keys\/rbc.com\/p.js"},"featured_img":false,"coauthors":[],"author_meta":{"author_link":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/author\/amandeepsingh\/","display_name":"amandeepsingh"},"relative_dates":{"created":"Posted 37 years ago","modified":"Updated 3 years ago"},"absolute_dates":{"created":"Posted on May 1, 1989","modified":"Updated on November 27, 2022"},"absolute_dates_time":{"created":"Posted on May 1, 1989 12:00 am","modified":"Updated on November 27, 2022 2:31 am"},"featured_img_caption":"","tax_additional":{"category":{"linked":["<a href=\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/category\/uncategorized\/\" class=\"advgb-post-tax-term\">Uncategorized<\/a>"],"unlinked":["<span class=\"advgb-post-tax-term\">Uncategorized<\/span>"],"slug":"category","name":"Categories"},"rbc_letter_theme":{"linked":[],"unlinked":[],"slug":"rbc_letter_theme","name":"Themes"},"rbc_letter_year":{"linked":["<a href=\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/year\/1989\/\" class=\"advgb-post-tax-term\">1989<\/a>"],"unlinked":["<span class=\"advgb-post-tax-term\">1989<\/span>"],"slug":"rbc_letter_year","name":"Years"}},"series_order":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/rbc_letter\/4005","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/rbc_letter"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/rbc_letter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/79"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/rbc_letter\/4005\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4005"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4005"},{"taxonomy":"rbc_letter_theme","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/rbc_letter_theme?post=4005"},{"taxonomy":"rbc_letter_year","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/rbc_letter_year?post=4005"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}