We currently reside in the midst of a seemingly chaotic world, where the only constant often appears to be social entropy. The host of global issues currently before us includes the Ebola virus, the fight against ISIS, the battle for democracy in Hong Kong and continuing tensions between Ukraine and Russia—to name just a few. Keeping aware of the news and current issues can evoke heart-wrenching emotions in us that can be taxing and overwhelming.
It is difficult to mentally synthesize all the problems and injustices occurring in so many different areas of the world simultaneously. Even more difficult than this is properly navigating those emotions within us that are aroused. The emotional responses to injustice and tragedy arise from a benevolent place and are natural to our humanity. Unfortunately though, this natural reaction often leaves us in states of paralysis.
This paralysis emerges from that fact that we often prioritize and idealize global issues over the issues in our lives, therefore becoming slower to act in the local matters that we can actually control or influence. This paradigm is described as near versus far morality. Robin Hanson, an associate professor of economics at George Mason University, said “since we are more idealistic in far mode, our ideals favor and admire far more than near.” Another economist from George Mason, Adam Gurri, calls this desire to focus on the far “telescopic morality.”
This proclivity to telescopically concentrate on the far over the near is not only lacking in pragmatism, but also awareness. Need, tragedy and injustices exist everywhere in this world. We don’t need to look far to find them because, unfortunately, they are not scarce. Granted, the degree of these injustices is as diverse as their locations. Yet comparing them does no one any benefit. One injustice happening in Hong-Kong or Ukraine doesn’t negate the validity of an injustice happening here in North Carolina. Does the fact that people are dying of the Ebola virus on the African continent negate the lack of proper reparations for North Carolina families that were victims of its forced Eugenics program?
In the current world of technology and seemingly increasing globalization, we often forget the degree to which we still live our lives locally.
Gurri states, when we make “our morality telescopic, we trivialize the choices that do matter.” Sadly, this trivialization of one’s locality has damaging effects. While the last few years have brought a great degree of injustices abroad, questionable things have also happened here in North Carolina. We have watched as the NC legislature has worked to curtail our ability as North Carolinians and students to get out and vote. Do you remember what we as a campus did in response to this attempt at curbing our democratic right to vote? Funny, I don’t remember anything either.
We watched as financial aid was cut for future years in North Carolina. We watched as this university’s administration concealed details of the Hofmann Forest sale. How effective can we be at addressing global issues from our current location when we clearly struggle to even muster energy against those we face locally? Perhaps we ought to begin by asking ourselves what can be done here. What do we passively allow to happen near and locally while we become enamored and overwhelmed with the far?
By no means ought we to become globally unaware or unsympathetic individuals. Emotional responses to any form of injustice, whether global or local, are natural and deserve attention and respect. It is key to understand, though, that emotions need to be grounded by a relationship to action. Otherwise, awareness of the far will only serve to make individuals apathetic and inactive in their local spheres.