Issue date: 11/10/09 Section: Opinions

Why are activists like Stephen Lewis unable to spur the rest of society into action? Photo: Elijah / Flickr

You are Romeo Dallaire. You are Stephen Lewis. You are Wangari Maathai. You've seen the worst excesses of social injustice and you feel an overwhelming moral obligation to mobilize some kind of popular response. But you're having trouble reaching your audience. When you express the intensity of your thoughts and feelings, people nod politely in agreement, squirm in their seats, and then offer you some more tea.

Why is it so difficult for activists to transmit their sense of moral urgency to the rest of the population? Are activists an anomalous subset of the human species who, due to different priorities and values, simply cannot communicate effectively with the rest of society? Or is it the 'silent majority' which is at fault for consistently choosing convenience and custom over moral concerns?

The armchair cynic or the jaded activist might argue that societal developments have little to do with moral concerns. Under this view, systemic injustices develop and are nourished because they are favourable to the majority, and are only discarded when they have outlived their usefulness. So the close of a specific chapter of oppression is merely a shift in the rational self-interest of the powerful, regardless of the claims of a great moral breakthrough which garnish the process.

Alternatively, we have the more conciliatory argument that any major change takes time to gain traction in the larger population, and that no one is to blame for this unfortunate reality. Activists in the trenches sometimes forget that everyone else is consumed by the demands of raising children, paying off mortgages, planning for old age, and so on. Sure, you might read the newspaper and watch the evening news, but fighting for a cause requires an investment of energy and emotion which not everyone is able to afford.

Finally, we should remember that there are built-in barriers to communication between true-believers and everyone else. Intense experiences do not translate well into the slang of everyday life. For instance, with our poppies out in full force once again this Remembrance Day, we attempt to do honour to the memory of millions of people whose experiences most of us will never truly comprehend. The closest we can come is through the efforts of gifted artists who were there themselves, such as the poetry we have from the grave of Wilfred Owen.

As technology has advanced, advocates and artists have developed new techniques for breaking through this barrier, including photojournalism and documentary filmmaking. But when we consider the sheer amount of effort and talent it took to create a film like Schindler's List, we remember how difficult it is to move people.

An activist reacts to injustice with anger - instead of with pity or guilt - and throws everything she has, and is, into the fight. I am willing to concede that these people may well be the best that our species has to offer, but I don't think that automatically means that everyone else gets blamed for not being one of these people. This is a feeble position to take, but that's OK.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools