Paul F. Delespinas
My entire career as a political scientist and journalist has focused on the idea that if more people think systematically about political issues, they will act more rationally to promote their own well-being and overall well-being. It was based on the assumption that
But this assumption was based on something more fundamental. In other words, what happens in the world can be changed by the intentional actions of individuals living in that world.
But what if this fundamental assumption turns out to be wrong? What if major global events don’t? What if it’s like the weather, which, at least in the past, everyone talked about but no one could do anything about?
(These days, of course, many of us act on the hope that if we can get enough people to replace hydrocarbon fuels with solar energy, we can prevent catastrophic warming of the world. speaking About the weather. )
Now it’s clearly possible for people to make Several Changes in the world around us. The question is: Will the small changes that individuals can make add up to make a difference on a global level, or will these small changes disappear and world events proceed reasonably happily?
Large ocean liners have a large amount of inertia, making it difficult to turn them around. Similarly, social and political institutions have immense inertia and are highly resistant to change except in exceptional circumstances.
But are there ever exceptional circumstances?
The old political question was whether “great men” could change history. When I heard the word “great,” I think people were thinking of people like Napoleon, Hitler, Karl Marx, George Washington, or perhaps Albert Einstein. My answer was that such people can certainly change history, but the changes they bring about are usually not what they intended.
Perhaps history is like a gyroscope. If you push it in one direction, it will move at right angles in a completely different direction.
Therefore, I, and my idealistic friends and acquaintances who were also trying to reform the world through their work, are guilty of arrogance, “losing contact with reality, overestimating one’s abilities and achievements.” I think it’s possible that I’ve committed a crime. or ability. ”
I would like to think that the situation is not so bad, and even if we cannot make the world a utopia, it is possible to make the world a better place with our individual efforts. For example, in my own lifetime, I have seen tangible progress in addressing the continuing problem that the era of slavery left us with: America’s original sin.
And so far, we have avoided triggering a nuclear war that could make the Earth uninhabitable or close to it.
But large-scale wars in Ukraine and Israel, the continued deterioration of the climate, and the rise of demagogue regimes make it clear that humanity has not yet brought large-scale social events under proper control. It is shown in
Maybe we never will.
It is clear that we are doing some good, such as helping each other on a small scale.
As a famous saying of unknown origin goes, “It is better to light a candle than curse the darkness.”
But we may never know whether our pursuit of large-scale political goals will have any positive effect. Still, we must continue striving for significant improvements, while recognizing that the challenges are beyond our capabilities.
The alternative is to let go, focus on your personal life, pay little attention to world events, and see where you’re going once you get there.
I remember seeing a funny little passage explaining why you shouldn’t get carried away with useless emotions.
“If futility is really my credo…
Stating that fact is an act
That would effectively negate my beliefs. ”
“Move on!” I say. Go higher and higher!
— Paul F. deLespinasse is Professor Emeritus of Political Science and Computer Science at Adrian College. He can be reached at pdeles@proaxis.com.