There is one specific tie between Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals and Robin Kirk’s talk with us last week that I have been thinking about over the weekend. Alinksy notes that human life is a constant climb upwards: one issue will lead to another, happiness resides within the pursuit itself, etc. Many of the points Kirk touched on during her fluid discussion with us relied on this concept of life being ongoing and always presenting something new. In her own life she acknowledged that although her job began as writing, which she loved, she was not satisfied with just writing about issues; she was frustrated, and she wanted more. So then she worked to find what the “more” consisted of for herself. She also mentioned that seeing damage isn’t enough, and the way to make people understand and how to motivate people is to show them the damage.
For me, this paints a very large scale picture of how to confront human rights and life issues, and it makes me feel as though the issues are too big to solve, as you will never truly solve issues because there will always be something more to address. Yet, I found it interesting that Kirk said the key to change was based in local action and by making the issues personal. This presents as a type of cognitive dissonance; for example, while many times I personally feel that the issue of climate change is too large to even tackle, I also need to remember that I can make some change locally through activism and conversations. I would have liked to ask Kirk if she feels that local change can be enough to really make a difference, or how much local activism is needed to truly influence an issue.
Alinsky, Saul D., Rules for Radicals: a Practical Primer for Realistic Radicals. Vintage Books, 1989.
