The American Dilemma and How We Can Fix It

There is a concept that underlies all the theories that the left promulgates.  It is that the individual is impotent, meaningless and essentially an expendable statistic.  We can see that clearly in the movement behind unionization – but it runs throughout all the currents of the polluted waters that they flush through their philosophy.

There is some truth to the general principle that there is “safety in numbers.”  There are also exceptions to that rule.  Lemmings offer a good example.  As do the six million Jews who live in Israel, surrounded by three hundred million Muslims.  That isn’t working out so well for the mullahs – their best efforts to annihilate the Jewish state notwithstanding.

Recently I commented on a piece regarding “global warming/climate change” that appeared in The Huffington Post.  My response was very simple.  I offered the opinion that I didn’t know whether “climate change” was a reality or a fabrication, but I agreed that mankind does make an impact on our environment – the most obvious being in the form of litter and pollution.  I went on to explain that if one accepted that and disliked either litter on our streets or in our air, he or she should take whatever steps possible to reduce or eliminate taking actions which would result in those conditions.  Personally, I think that is a pretty non-controversial statement.  I went on to offer a simple list of ten things which each of us could do now to work to reduce both litter and pollution – until we wait for science to discover the “ultimate solution.”

Although several people checked the “Like” button, the only written response I received was from someone who apparently had a different world view.  He excoriated my naiveté, thinking that “one person could make a difference.”  Of course, he failed to recognize that I do realize that if only one person out of six billion does something positive, that will indeed be meaningless.  His statement was, of course, an expression of his belief that only through the power of government “enlightenment” would we be able to ameliorate “climate change.”  But he overlooked something far more fundamental which I pointed out in my response.

I answered his comment, “Thank you for your thoughtful response.  In fact I do appreciate that one person alone cannot change the world.  However, I also believe that one person may inspire another and those two might inspire several more.  But irrespective of whether or not that good example causes others to do the same is irrelevant.  Doing the right thing is always the right thing to do.”

I received no response to my reply.

Part and parcel of this man’s mindset (and many who think as he does) is an avoidance of taking personal responsibility.  It is part of the “victim mentality” syndrome.  People who hold this philosophy believe that only through the imposition of government rules and regulations can we achieve an orderly society.  And in their absence, they inadvertently feel justified in avoiding taking personal action which, if we all followed a good example, might obviate the need for those government rules and regulations in the first place.

It does seem as though one ordinary person acting alone cannot do much to set the world on a better course.  But if there is no one willing to try, then we must give ourselves up to the hope that somehow fate will benignly accommodate our inherent deficiencies.  And if that is the case, history would suggest that she has been singularly absent from the world stage and the course of human events.



  1. Yes — doing the right thing IS always the right thing to do. And each of us is in complete control of making sure at least ONE person always does the right thing….

    As always…another great post. Thank you, juwannadoright! 🙂

  2. “Can one person make a difference?”

    Yes, of course. At least, to themselves. After all, who would argue that once you’ve determined what’s right…you should ignore doing it? As for the odds of one person doing what’s right stimulating others to follow their example…well, they’re not great. But who would have guessed that no-name characters like Jesus, or Gandhi, or Mandela would have (could have) eventually fueled such a huge change in cultural behavior just by walking their own talk? So, yes, it is possible. But becoming a ‘messiah’ is not the point. Instead isn’t it most important for individuals to do what’s right for themselves…and within the context of not harming others.

    For example, if you were living in California right now (given the current water shortage) wouldn’t it be in your best interest to quit flushing the toilet (every time you pee), or watering your lawn, or washing your car? And would it not also be in the best interest of everyone else living in California if you were to do so? But if you didn’t…because no one else seems to be…well, wouldn’t that simply be wrong…and not only potentially harmful to yourself, but to others as well?

    So…it all comes down to this: If you have the foresight to determine what’s right, and what’s not, regarding your future–as well as that of others–how do you justify not following your own advice…and instead simply spend your time scowling and pointing a finger at others?

    Put simply, nothing is more persuasive (to yourself, as well as others) than to walk your own talk! At the very least you’ll likely feel better about yourself. And that is a disease that’s definitely worth spreading. Yes?

    • Thank you for your terrific comment. To the rational person, of course, you’ve stated the case quite eloquently. But therein lies the conundrum – rationality.

      The person (and I suspect there are many) who follows a course of self-destructive behavior would likely have a different perspective on what is “right” and what is “wrong.” Rather than engage in behavior which we might consider rational, he or she is likely to pursue a course that is self-fulfilling, albeit ultimately possibly terminal. How many people do we see who regularly destroy themselves with drugs who, if we measured their lives only by material acquisitions, fame and wealth, would seem to have it all? Obviously, there is something lacking in their lives and in their minds.

      I would suggest that maintaing some sort of moral balance requires a great deal of thought and some exposure to an actual morally based influence. It requires reflection, introspection and honesty. But with our four million channels of “entertainment,” sporting events and other distractions, it is easy to be diverted from more important things. Isn’t that why the Roman emperors gave the people the spectacles of circuses and gladiatorial fights? They had theirs – and we have ours – in more than abundant quantities and frequency.

  3. I guess change does start with me but obviously is not accomplished by me alone. Hopefully any positive change I exhibit will be catching.

  4. […] via CAN ONE PERSON MAKE A DIFFERENCE? | juwannadoright. […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: