“Do you think you could eat on $6 or $7 per day?”
I recently received a donation request from our local food bank. The accompanying letter stated that they can provide 30 healthy meals for $10.
Years ago (in the late 1970s), my family and I were food stamp recipients. We were well-fed. Beans, rice, and oatmeal were inexpensive foods I could resort to if necessary. But it never became necessary. Maybe the allowances have been reduced since then, but we had no trouble affording good meals.
In this community, several privately operated food banks are staffed by volunteers. The supermarket where I shop solicits cash donations and has a bin for food donations; it is often filled. The store itself donates food. I could cite endless community efforts to feed those in need. The idea that “nobody cares” is absurd.
“…why you think that coercion is at the root of getting people to change…”
I can change how I relate to people, and you can change how you relate to people. We can only change ourselves. We can set an example for others by how we behave. We can urge others to change. Coercion is not at the “root” of getting people to change. If, despite our efforts and examples, some people stubbornly refuse to change, either they could be forced to change (which I am not willing to do), or their refusal could be accepted.
Dr. King was a remarkable figure, but he was operating within a larger context of conditions and circumstances. There had been riots that rival the severity of the 2020 ones. There were other activist organizations. It was a “good cop — bad cop” situation. King was the “good cop”; some of the others were the “bad cops.” One could work with King or deal with the others. I wouldn’t minimize the influence of Malcolm X, who was also brilliant.
“Of course social change is a low priority in your life because most of the things that are truly horrendously wrong in the world don’t affect you.”
It doesn’t surprise me that the people most affected by a particular problem are the ones who are most actively seeking to reform it.
“… social change is a low priority in your life…”
Radical social reform is a low priority. Correcting misguided practices and injustice is a slightly higher priority. I don’t conceive of injustice and misguided practices as encompassed in one comprehensive system. You apparently do. That is a fundamental, unresolvable difference in understanding between us.
What makes you think that I don’t experience any injustices? If patriarchy harms men, that is something wrong that affects me personally. If I am not free until everyone is free, and not everyone is free, then I am personally impacted; I am not free.
“…valued and lauded…”
I’m not sure where you get the idea that ruthlessness and manipulativeness are “valued and lauded.” I don’t know of anyone who values and lauds those characteristics. In my experience, ruthless and manipulative people are reviled and shunned.
“You can say this stuff is “human nature”…”
There are only two things that I attribute to human nature. The first is a predisposition to interact. Another is a potential for benevolence and generosity competing internally with a potential for selfishness and a need to balance the two. They are balanced according to the conditions and circumstances the individual experiences and to which he must adapt.
