Time To Care
What can I hope for? For years, I was guided by this question and its implicit promises. Every hope for change is dependent on the flexibility of its context. This is why, when this unprecedented global pandemic started, I assumed it would create chaos and, in this chaos, new dynamics that would then inform substantial systematic change.
But instead, it seems as if the exact opposite is the case. This crisis exposed a network of economic ties that is so firmly established and maintained that its disruption doesn’t even become a significant part of current discourses surrounding the possibility of change.
We live in a world of sufficient resources and information that could, assuming their ‘appropriate’ distribution, provide dignifying conditions for each one of us. I believe this is why we are (and rightfully so) blaming governments, with their limited resources, for the lack of distribution measurements:
While the majority of these resources is hoarded and protected by an insanely small global majority. As of today, the 5 richest men (!) in the US are in possession of more than $400 billion. To compare, the U.S. Congress just approved $349 billion loans for small businesses that could have been completely paid for by less than 5 US individuals.
And yes, although distribution and liquidity are complex determinants in this equation, it is that simple!
Accordingly, most, if not all, governments are largely dependent on this 1% that is able to determine global finances by individual decisions. Such as those made by Gary Cohn, former Goldman Sachs CEO and 11thDirector of the US National Economic Council. And this is only one example.
Meanwhile, Bill Gates, celebrated for his humanitarian efforts and insights, uses his incomprehensibly large amount of wealth to invest in private institutions, support unequal intellectual property rights and conduct unethical drug testing across India and Africa.
How is 99% of our society not in a position to hold this 1% accountable? Why are we supporting governmental support for ‘struggling’ industries (e.g. 2008) that will maintain an economic system designed to disadvantage most of the human population?
In search for answers, I have had conversations with individuals from different sectors, backgrounds and ideologies.
What became apparent in all of these conversations is that nobody is emotionally supporting our current system. Not one person of this sample did not become an advocate for change when asked about the lack of ethics or morality in our current world order. Yet, I highly doubt that any of these conversations will lead to just one person adjusting their path, aspirations or behavior. I wondered about the why.
Why do we live in a world of apparently shared beliefs and values that are directly opposing those informing our political and economic system? I believe there is no good answer. Because it simply shouldn’t be that way. Most people believe their job security to be of highest importance, regarding less of the impact their work might have. This is understandable, but it won’t lead to change.
This is an advocacy for everybody to be the change they want to see in this world. Make ethical decisions when possible and hold those accountable that do otherwise. Right now, each one of us is struggling but there are some that struggle much more substantially than others.
And there are uncountable ways to change this:
Volunteer, if you can, with organizations such as NY Cares or Invisible Hands.
Value yourself and those who commit to change by joining advocacy networks such as Divest Invest or The Fight Inequality Alliance.
Vote, if you can, for someone who will represent your interests and not their own.
Wonder. Worry. Walk the talk. And maybe, just maybe, this world will become a different one.
