We often see the claim that nowadays, it is as if everyone has to be an activist on everything. As for me, I’m content in being that person who pipes up in a conversation to tell people my mind and call them out. Things should change, and I don’t think an especially modern way of thinking, despite the framing of this opinion in the media as being one. In saying this, ‘it’s important to recognise that I, a white, highly educated and well-off girl, is in a position where I have the luxury to care about a huge variety of issues. For others, this isn’t the case; for an unvaccinated 90-year-old in a developing country, unfortunate enough to not be able to access a Covid vaccine, the issue of climate change may have to wait a while. That’s not to say people from all walks of life can only care about one thing, but that in the world we live in, some can care more than others.
The last few years have proven to me that when enough people feel needs to be change in an area, and enough pressure is applied, genuine reform can take place. Perhaps the most striking example of this is climate change. However, I still remember in 2018, walking down the steps to my next lesson in school and hearing the news that the UN had put out a report claiming that the world has 12 years to limit the climate change catastrophe. What was so surprising to me was the fact that, despite the severity of the claim and the reputable source accompanying it, very few people I spoke to seemed to share what I can look back on now as a feeling of dread. There are two factors which I think influenced this seemingly nonchalant attitude to this crisis. Why is this?
Firstly, that climate change doesn’t affect us all on an obvious individual level; as a rule of thumb, the more closely connected one is to an issue, the more they will care about it. Though we may find in the future an influx of climate refugees, this is an abstract threat to the way we live, its intangible, so it didn’t strike a chord with the general public. It got them talking perhaps, but not invigorated. This idea can be sometimes difficult to accept, after all we like to think of ourselves as altruistic, however in pondering this question I have realised this is true. I am passionate about all of these issues, but when reflecting on which of them I have given the most attention to, it is the one I am most connected to. As a white girl I am far more indirectly affected by the current wave of sexual abuse allegations than I am by racial inequality, for example. Looking back, this is the issue I have fought hardest for.
In an article called The Female Existence, that I wrote for Unconquered Peaks around the time of Sarah Everard’s murder, I said, “I think the reason that this story has inspired such an outpouring of rage and sadness, especially among women and girls, is because it is not one alien to us.” When we feel the effects of an injustice, we act. This has implications for the question “Does everyone have to be an activist nowadays?”
The ‘popularisation’ of activism has meant it has become a trend, meaning the perception of an ‘activist’ has been somewhat warped. It is not that every issue is becoming more urgent, though our collective memory may indeed tell us this, it is that there is a much wider appreciation of these urgent issues. Companies now have to be on ‘the right side of history’, and this gives us the impression that we must be vocal in every sphere.
There is a large flaw in this argument; that we can and must devote equal or similar amount of time to these worrisome issues. Relating back to my point about humans caring most about what affects us, this idea then seems unrealistic. In a somewhat Adam Smith-esque way of thinking, I think the most efficient way to create actual change for the better in these areas is for each of us to focus on what is most important to us. The jack of all trades is a master of none; true passion in an area may help one shape the world far more than a limited level of interest in all areas.
However, this does land us with a problem: tyranny of the majority. If no one made any effort to stand up for others unless they were personally affected, we’d simply be left with a world where the largest group gets to dominate what should change. This is where my second idea to explain the indifference to the 2018 report comes in
Chris Priest, a British Novelist and Guardian journalist says, “Cognitive behavioural therapy speaks about how ‘all-or-nothing thinking’ can lead us to depression and inaction.” Perhaps it is this approach that modern activism is perceived to employ that means some people feel they do not have the scope for activism in every sphere. The idea that if we are not championing every single cause that we care about, we are not ‘good activists’, is counter-productive. Personally, I would claim that ‘cancel culture’ is not a real phenomenon, only that twitter and Instagram amplifies the voices of a small group of people who have this, ‘all-or-nothing’ approach. The backlash on this ‘movement’ is then reflective of the push-back against the claim we must all be perfect and champion every area.
However, this does not mean there is not scope for different types of activism in every area. A close friend of mine, who one would certainly call a ‘climate activist’ presented an assembly to the school a few weeks ago, in which she spoke of ‘the power of numbers’. This assembly was in the context of climate change, but in my opinion, this can be applied to all walks of life, including the issues aforementioned. ‘Activism’ does not just have to be leading the fight, for there can only be a handful of these people, if we following the reasoning previously stated. The true power in numbers is that we don’t need a world full of hard-line activists, for if we all do a little, that translates into a lot. This can be seen especially in the fight for racial equality in America in 2020, with the tragic murder of George Floyd. Everyone did what they could to make it clear this death was entirely unjust, and though the fight is far from over, real progress has been made.
In addition, work to help an issue also translates into others. The fight for female empowerment is tied both to climate change to sexual abuse allegations. One of the most vital ways to stop the climate crisis is through female empowerment; when women are educated, they are less reliant on men, so are less likely to get married and have children. This is crucial due to overpopulation. Research also shows that the more women you have in parliament, the better the climate policy. The case for female empowerment helping put an end to sexual abuse goes without saying.
So, to answer the question, “Does everyone have to be an activist nowadays? No, not necessarily. However, ‘activism’ can be small or big, ‘small’ activism is just as vital as ‘big’ activism. We can take of advantage of humans’ nature in caring more about what affects us directly, as then we can have truly passionate people in every single sphere. As I said in my first paragraph “Things should change, and that’s not an especially modern way of thinking…”. So-called Activists have been present in every sphere for thousands of years, the way in which humans try to reform the world around us has never been static, nor should it be.
