Kardec was a fierce critic of the habit that newspapers had, and still have, of highlighting crimes and vulgarities of all kind committed by people. It seems to us that propagating the bad deeds practiced by others is a “sport” with many followers. Trying to understand, in case it happens to us, what makes us like this type of news, I believe it is fundamental for our process of intellectual-moral progress.

In the pages of the Spiritist Magazine (Revista Espírita), to make the force against evil and always occupying the role of main actor, Kardec brings examples that, according to himself, make the heart more serene and emphasize what people can do good, helping others, a more interested look at the pain of others and such things.

In 1863, in the October edition with the title of "The anonymous benefactors", Kardec publishes newspaper clippings that publicize good deeds and takes the opportunity, again, to talk about the disposition that these vehicles have to report only the evil.

Relying on the vast bibliography left by Kardec through the pages of the Spiritist Magazine, it is in the year of 1868, coincidentally in the month of October, that the subject referring to the dissemination of evil is raised again, but now in a forceful way comes the promise to better develop the subject relevant to the protagonism given by newspapers to the bad examples practiced by people. The title of the text is: “Beautiful example of evangelical charity” and it is at the very end that Kardec utters an inspired phrase: “The example is contagious”. And starting from this line of reasoning comes the invitation: “Why is good not put in evidence instead of evil?”

Unfortunately, Kardec was not able to fulfill his promise to work better on this theme, since, as we know, he disincarnated a few months later, in March 1869.

However, this was an issue that Kardec was concerned with, defining it as a matter of public morality. As Spiritism has the main objective of promoting moral advancement, and if the example is contagious, it is evident that in Kardec's thinking the preference for the press to the most scandalous themes,

which emphasize the sad side of the human being, clashed with the Spiritist proposal, this is the reason why, in the aforementioned Spiritist Magazine, Kardec did the necessary and important counterpoint of emphasizing the good.

Better, for Kardec, talking about good things, good examples, highlighting the good and the beautiful, sensitivity and love so that we are infected by the examples and, then, we start to repeat them, in a kind of chain of good.

In Kardec's understanding, this repetition, line by line, of human wrongdoing hinders our progress.

Let's go to another text inserted by Kardec in the Spiritist Magazine, with the title: “The Koenigsfeld Commune, future world in miniature”. In the publication it is clear that Kardec wants to show all readers, yesterday and today, that happy worlds are possible to be built. When reading the publication, we all want to be part of a world of this level, where everyone respects each other, there are no crimes or offenses and things work as orderly as possible. It is a stimulus for us to seek to improve, through our actions, the place where we are inserted. In short, a challenge: if they did it, why can't we, too?

Through the publicity of good examples Kardec tries to awaken hunger in the reader of the Spiritist Magazine to satisfy the peace, harmony and respect that only exists in more advanced worlds.

Kardec's intention is always to level the moral level of men at the top, showing that it is possible to advance, so much so that the moral beacon chosen by Kardec and the Spirits is precisely Jesus.

In Kardec's conception, if a place with few inhabitants can represent “a pinch of heaven on Earth”, why would the same not occur in places with a greater number of inhabitants?

To doubt this, he says, is to doubt the law of progress.

Of course, it becomes more complex to reign peace in an environment with a greater number of people. Different ideas, ways of seeing life and the experience accumulated during different reincarnation journeys make each individual unique in their thinking, forming a thick broth of differences that can, in a way, offer obstacles to peace. Differences, when not well digested and taken in an immature way, become power plants of conflict, but behold, this is an important challenge for civilized men to face and prove that they can live together in a harmonious way.

By the way, this coexistence is not an impossible mission, and it will occur as soon as we seek to face our ghosts and, finally, advance morally. It is a process that starts from the individual and has a strong impact on the collective. When a man overcomes a bad tendency the world he lives in advances; by the way, probably, we do not immediately see this advance, but it does occur and there is no setback.

The example of the small town that lives in harmony can indeed encourage the inhabitants of large centers to follow their example and also turn the metropolises into corners where respect prevails.

Such a result, of course, will depend on the effort of each citizen, however, Kardec's idea of ​​awakening people to moral improvement through the dissemination of good examples can be seen throughout the texts published in the Spiritist Magazine, which will undoubtedly be good fuel to help each individual in this unique task of overcoming himself.

And we have reached the 21^st century today, with a greater number of good deeds being produced than in the past, but unfortunately we still find the "garbage spreaders", who refuse to recognize the steps already taken by us towards moral improvement. They try to stop the wind of progress, they spread evil, but the strength of progress makes us continue to count advances, despite the difficulties.

Is there nothing good happening in the world right now that deserves our most powerful disclosure?

What advantage do they have in spreading only evil?

Honestly, we don't know, but the fact is that they at least see some advantage in this, otherwise they wouldn't do it. Perhaps financial advantage, perhaps we still prefer the darkest aspects of human behavior. Maybe it's a way to feel better knowing that others also practice the evil and also make mistakes.

There are several hypotheses raised that may or may not be correct, but which, I think, are worth analyzing all these points raised and, also, the reasons why we are so interested in evil and give little or almost no rating to the good, contrary to an idea logically exposed by Kardec that the example is contagious.

For Kardec, good brings good, it calms down the heart when we read news that speak of human sensitivity.

However, we are just in theory, but what do you think about trying, in practice, to find out if Kardec is right or not?

Let us go on:

Let's do a simple test: let's read and watch things that touch our heart more tenderly, let's look for good examples scattered all around and after a day or two in this practice we will record in a journal how we are feeling.

Will we become lighter, more sensitive to the pain of others, more likely to do good?

After the first part of the experience, we will move on to the second stage, which consists of the reverse exercise. In other words, if in the first part our attention was focused on the good examples, this time we are going to the bad procedures.

Let's focus on sensationalist, crime and absurd news, let's turn on the TV, tune into these police news newspapers, anyway, there's a lot out there, and after two days we'll record in a diary how we're feeling.

Will it be more agitated, pessimistic?

Once the two steps are completed, it is enough to make the comparisons, be honest with yourself and, obviously, as intelligent beings, make our decision regarding the world we want to live in and what food we want to give the soul.

Is Kardec right?