2016 and Beyond (Of human relationships and motivation to action)
There may be several reasons why humans are only capable of having personal, (and not simply casual), stable and interactive relationships with a maximum of about 150 people at any given time. And while Dunbar correlates this to primate physiology (brain size), my own personal belief is that it's a matter of Psychic Survival. It is a defense mechanism that allows us to mentally wall ourselves off from the onslaught of horrors that surround us in a world of 7.4 billion people. Imagine what it would do to your brain if you could feel all of the pain and suffering that goes on around you for even one fraction of a second! Were it not for this ability to erect mental walls, few beyond total psychopaths would be able to make it through the day without wanting to immediately end it all. It's why it takes truly special people to work in human services, nursing or as first-responders, or to be a leader like Lincoln, Gandhi, Dr. King or FDR (their own personal and public failings aside). It also explains to me why otherwise good people can be so seemingly indifferent to the suffering of others, especially suffering that is fully visible and in close physical proximity.
Imagine a shabbily dressed man, standing on a freeway exit, holding a sign asking for donations. How many of us look the other way? How many feel pity? How many feel anger, either because that person is suffering or because that person has exposed you to his suffering and interjected it into your otherwise pleasant day? How many of us give him money, no questions asked, or how many of us don't and use some rationalization like, "He'll just buy booze!" or, "What the hell am I supposed to do about it and why should I care? I don't know this person!" Now imagine billions of people suffering, everyday, all over the planet. Talk about overwhelming! So how does Senator Sanders and this election fit into the limits of our ability to maintain personal relationships and our need to mentally wall ourselves off for psychic survival?
I have great respect for Bernie Sanders. He has recognized the times for what they are and stepped up to become the face of these times. He recognized that while people are certainly capable of feeling empathy for suffering people they do not personally know (i.e. victims of wars, natural disasters, horrific and sensationalized crimes, the shabby man on the corner with the sign asking for money, etc.) they are only truly spurred into lasting and meaningful action when that suffering is borne by people they know personally or by themselves. And while that may sound like selfishness, for the vast majority of us it is not; it's just how we are wired. Now consider the issues that Senator Sanders has made the core of his campaign: Income inequality, living-wage jobs, outsourcing, the high cost of college, student loan debt, crumbling infrastructure, gender pay equity, access to affordable and reliable healthcare, discrimination of all kinds, and the pervasive feeling that we just can't do anything about all of the above. These are issues that affect a great majority of Americans, independent of their race, religion, where they live, or of their self-identified political affiliation (and that is the part that truly scares the holy hell out of the plutocrats and their willing puppets in Washington D.C.). The fact that we are personally affected or have a personal relationship with somebody else who is affected, and that there are millions of people just like us at this same time and place, means that we, together, awakened by this realization by Bernie Sanders, are more likely to engage in lasting and meaningful action to do something about it. Bernie Sanders understands this; it's why he repeatedly says that this election is not about him, but us, and that this movement is about more than just one election...
I still believe that Sanders could be the nominee. After all, it ain't over 'til it's over. However, we may lose this battle, this one election, and that realization is devastating to me personally, because I and people I know personally will be affected by the outcome. However, there is so much more left to do and accomplish beyond this one election (as there would be if Sanders does end up winning.) We lit this fire, he dipped his torch in it and raised it high for all to see, and we were swept up in the possibilities he shined his light on and the hope it engendered within us. Now it is up to us to carry it forth. There will be great victories, and soul-crushing defeats along the way. And it will take a long time, more time than some of us have left. But I do believe that we can make great progress if we never give up and never stop believing in the power that we all have collectively over those who would say that our struggle is in vain. And while there are millions of us, and we can't possibly know each other personally, for all of us this struggle is personal...
Comments
Not a Tip Jar...
...will blog for food...
I want my two dollars!
For me in a lot of ways that will accumulate FAST
this election is survival or death under a bridge.
******************************
Muerte al fascismo. Muerte a la tiranía. colapso total de los que promueven tampoco. A la pared con el unico porciento%
Applause!
Great essay.
Too bad the time is running out on us.
"You can't just leave those who created the problem in charge of the solution."---Tyree Scott
A sense of solidarity
Solidarity is pretty much missing today. Decades of Horatio Alger; the Hollywood myth of the lone Marshall; demonizing democratic socialist countries as collectivist; the lie of pioneer America; the concerted attack on organized labor, all fit the capitalist script of isolating people so that action taken together doesn't happen. Alone we're sitting ducks waiting to be picked off.
Now there's plenty of collective action to benefit the wealthy and bail them out when the economy is trashed and there's the military and State Dept to open up new countries to exploit, but for the wage earners and subsistence farmers - zilch.
Poverty is a behavior not an economic occurrence ( to paraphrase Thatcher and Reagan).
"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"
I reject Dunbar's Number aka the Monkeysphere
The Monkeysphere at Cracked.com is where I first ran across it. It's true in terms of tendencies, but it is not fate. We can mentally expand our sense of "we."
We human have the ability to imagine, to abstract and symbolize. We may tend towards tribes of 150 or so, but with mental work, we can be more inclusive.
It's a matter of scale. People can go the opposite way and consider only themselves important. That's called a sociopath. People can go too far the other way and become ungrounded and lose their sense of self completely. That's called Borderline Personality Disorder, I think.
We can learn to love one another on bigger and bigger scales without losing ourselves in the process. Empathy, compassion, joy in others' victories and concern for others' defeats. It's possible, and I think it's the only way to save ourselves and the Earth.
All I need are some tasty waves, a cool buzz, and I'm fine. -- Jeff Spicoli
Other research has proposed various numbers...
...and all that I have encountered are less than 500, far fewer than the population of even the smallest nation-state. I think it's meant more as a generalization, a standard distribution, if you will, where 95% of the population falls within three standard deviations of the mean, with either of the tails represented by 2.5%...
I want my two dollars!