The Problem With Wanting to Change the World
One of the immediate problems of wanting to change the world is that you are immediately in competition with a whole lot of people. These people want to change the world, too, but they think their ideas are better than your idea, so instead of thinking, "hey, two really good ideas," they think, "uh, oh, competition. Must destroy the other idea before it challenges mine." That's just from the people who want to change the world. Then you have to compete with the conservatives. I don't mean the Republicans, but conservatives, people who don't want things to change. This is an interesting class of creature that watches a building fall down and then says that we should build another building just like it because change is bad. They see the goodness in doing things as we've always done it, and quite often their argument (sometimes true) is that, "well, I had to do it, so then should you." Or my other favorite conservative argument: "If there was a better way to do things, someone smarter than you would have already thought of it."
Imagine that you have figured out how to make the world a much better place. You recogize the problems, and you realize, after lots of thought, brainstorming and communication with others, just how to fix things. Well, that's where the problem comes in. Nobody cares. Nobody wants to do anything. Everyone is convinced that things will eventually work themselves out because that's how things are supposed to be. It's like the old George Carlin bit about how the world was unable to develop plastic on its own, so it created humans to do it for the planet. Now that it has plastic, it doesn't need us anymore. The detractors are much like the Earth argument here, thinking everything will eventually work itself out because the planet normally figures out what it wants and gets it anyway.
So, how do you convince the naysayers to listen to new ideas? Or more important, how do you get anyone to listen to anything that isn't already considered singing to the choir?
The radicals seem to think the answer is to protest, to throw things around, to resort to anarchist tactics that cause the mainstream to sit up and take notice. But the only notice they really tend to take is that more police with riot gear are needed to bash in a few more heads. I remember during the run up to the war in Iraq, Woody Harrelson climbed the Bay Bridge (think it was the Bay Bridge) in San Francisco and stopped traffic. People were upset. Not about the war. But at Woody for causing a traffic jam during a commute hour. In other words, no one really cared.
So what else can one do? Write articles for academic publication? Who reads that stuff? Other academics. Generally, no one cares about that sort of tripe. Oh, academics will talk about it amongst themselves, and they'll argue some theory over this and that variable, but in the end, unless the person writing is a well known academic with tons and tons of publications and a fan base already, no one cares.
What else can you do? Get a job with the State Department? Not really going to help, unfortunately. In order to work for the State Department, you have to step into a paradigm that already has an accepted mindset. If you do not partake in that mindset, you're not wanted. You don't make the cut. They ask you to leave. If you go into the State Department with the sole purpose of changing it, may as well just start packing before you arrive. You COULD stay in the State Department for 30 years and THEN suddenly spring on everyone your great ideas that you've been holding close to your chest all of those decades. Think about that one for a second. If that was really the case, you'd probably no longer believe what you did 30 years ago; you become a part of your environment. The one who survives with ideology intact in that type of environment was someone who never fit into it to begin with.
So what can you actually do? I'll be honest. I don't know. I don't think anyone wants anything new. I don't think anyone cares. I think the only people who care are the other people who have a "better" idea, and once you try to get them together with other idea-minded people, they become bitter enemies because each one must emerge as the victor in "new" ideas.
So, I'll just leave it at that.
Stumble It!
Imagine that you have figured out how to make the world a much better place. You recogize the problems, and you realize, after lots of thought, brainstorming and communication with others, just how to fix things. Well, that's where the problem comes in. Nobody cares. Nobody wants to do anything. Everyone is convinced that things will eventually work themselves out because that's how things are supposed to be. It's like the old George Carlin bit about how the world was unable to develop plastic on its own, so it created humans to do it for the planet. Now that it has plastic, it doesn't need us anymore. The detractors are much like the Earth argument here, thinking everything will eventually work itself out because the planet normally figures out what it wants and gets it anyway.
So, how do you convince the naysayers to listen to new ideas? Or more important, how do you get anyone to listen to anything that isn't already considered singing to the choir?
The radicals seem to think the answer is to protest, to throw things around, to resort to anarchist tactics that cause the mainstream to sit up and take notice. But the only notice they really tend to take is that more police with riot gear are needed to bash in a few more heads. I remember during the run up to the war in Iraq, Woody Harrelson climbed the Bay Bridge (think it was the Bay Bridge) in San Francisco and stopped traffic. People were upset. Not about the war. But at Woody for causing a traffic jam during a commute hour. In other words, no one really cared.
So what else can one do? Write articles for academic publication? Who reads that stuff? Other academics. Generally, no one cares about that sort of tripe. Oh, academics will talk about it amongst themselves, and they'll argue some theory over this and that variable, but in the end, unless the person writing is a well known academic with tons and tons of publications and a fan base already, no one cares.
What else can you do? Get a job with the State Department? Not really going to help, unfortunately. In order to work for the State Department, you have to step into a paradigm that already has an accepted mindset. If you do not partake in that mindset, you're not wanted. You don't make the cut. They ask you to leave. If you go into the State Department with the sole purpose of changing it, may as well just start packing before you arrive. You COULD stay in the State Department for 30 years and THEN suddenly spring on everyone your great ideas that you've been holding close to your chest all of those decades. Think about that one for a second. If that was really the case, you'd probably no longer believe what you did 30 years ago; you become a part of your environment. The one who survives with ideology intact in that type of environment was someone who never fit into it to begin with.
So what can you actually do? I'll be honest. I don't know. I don't think anyone wants anything new. I don't think anyone cares. I think the only people who care are the other people who have a "better" idea, and once you try to get them together with other idea-minded people, they become bitter enemies because each one must emerge as the victor in "new" ideas.
So, I'll just leave it at that.
Labels: Friendship Over Time, Politics
Stumble It!
posted by Duane @ 11:19 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home