Gina's College Collection

Quotation: “And [Utterson]…brooded awhile on his own past, groping in all the corners of memory, lest by chance some Jack-in-the-Box of an old iniquity should leap to light there. His past was fairly blameless; few men could read the rolls of their life with less apprehension; yet he was humbled to the dust by the many ill things he had done, and raised up again into a sober and fearful gratitude by the many that he had come so near to doing, yet avoided” (p.).

Comment: Everyone, including me, can relate to this quotation.  We’ve all had our regrets and close calls.  And connecting this to an earlier part of the book, this past may be what inspired Utterson to care so much for sinners, as mentioned when he is first introduced.  Yet it is fascinating that even such a forgiving person as he is instantly repulsed, like everyone else, at the sight of Mr. Hyde.  This shows the fear of Hyde comes from the unconscious mind, prompting a fight-or-flight instinct, like every other witness to Mr. Hyde experienced in their encounters with him.  I too have had gut instincts about instances that may have saved me, as when a certain person greeted me uncomfortably when I asked how they were, and I got the sense I shouldn’t bother with them anymore, which proved a good choice.  But like Mr. Utterson, I try to be patient with people and find it difficult to hate for the most part.

Question: Did the author have some major regrets that provided inspiration to this book, and if so, what were they? Or did he know people that appeared to experience sudden personality and temperament shifts?

Due to carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels, the Earth is experiencing a rapid warming that is beginning to affect many aspects of the natural world, such as the weather and ecosystems.  Increased frequency of natural catastrophes and the extinction of organisms that maintain the balance of the environment could then threaten human civilization.  But despite many activists’ attempts to inform the people of this growing danger and encourage them to do something, many remain blissfully unaware of or continue to deny human-caused climate change.  This ignorance needs to end, and the solution can be found when we combine the concepts introduced by authors Barbara Kingsolver and Bill McKibben in the writings we’ve gone over to create an impactful book.  Once this book is well-established in people’s minds, we can then perform a unified act to get the government to do something.

In my blog “The Warming Planet and the Moral Universe,” I go over the differences between Kingsolver and McKibben’s approaches to environmental activism.  McKibben prefers to stand up tall and speak out loud about the actual statistics of the issue, while Kingsolver would rather stay out of the limelight and is more indirect with getting her point across, as she favors writing over speaking.  Both have been successful in their endeavors, but what if we combined their ideas?  I agree wholeheartedly with Kingsolver when she insists that “…lobbing facts over the wall at the climate-change deniers is useless, especially while we’re also saying ‘Look how stupid they are'” (“The Moral Universe”).  This tactic is aggressive and belittling, not to mention annoying!  This is why Kingsolver sneaks controversial problems into her books by centering them around relatable fictional characters’ lives.  However, the downside to Kingsolver’s tactic is it’s too passive; she compares her books to messages in bottles that she’s sending away, and if people don’t read them it’s fine.  But it’s not fine, because the planet is in danger!  This brings us back to McKibben’s more assertive option; he has taken it upon himself to educate the country with straight-up facts and nonviolent protest, not holding back.  Yet this is where we run into the problem with his idea: he’s guilty of the very “lobbing facts over the wall” that Kingsolver denounces, and McKibben has been accused of using “scare tactics” by many, reducing his credibility.  What we truly need right now is a balance between McKibben and Kingsolver’s concepts, something that grabs people’s attention with facts yet doesn’t scream in their faces and make them feel that they’re wrong.  This is why I believe a book that tells the truth directly is the answer, and once enough regular people have read it, the marches on Washington can begin.  Actually, there is such a book that was once used quite effectively to fix an environmental problem: Silent Spring, by Rachel Carson, about the effects of pesticides on natural processes.  This book is what eventually caused the ban of DDT; if one book could have such an effect on a problem in the past, why can’t it happen again?

After that book on climate change is written, for the actual protests to start the movement requires a leader.  Or does it?  In “From Civil Rights to Megachurches,” Charles Duhigg declares that successful movements must have a leader to “…give people new habits that help them figure out where to go on their own” (100).  Followers are provided examples of actions to reflect their beliefs, are inspired to take on leadership in their own communities, and thereby relay the message to even more people.  McKibben, on the other hand, believes these minor leaders, or “little-l leaders,” as he refers to them, can rise on their own and are better than all-powerful “Capital-L Leaders.”  Why?  He writes in his article “Movements Without Leaders” to think of these “little-l leaders” as a “pace line for a bike race” (“Movements…”).  Sometimes they lead overwhelmingly, but other times they revert to the back and allow others to lead; then McKibben explains “…[W]hen that happens you not only prevent burnout, you also get regular infusions of ideas” (“Movements…”).  “Little-l leaders” don’t dominate movements and allow for greater diversity of ideas.  McKibben views this as more democratic, and I agree; a variety of “little-l leaders” can make members of a movement feel more included, therefore we need them more than one overall leader in this fight against global warming.

Note:  In my actual essay I will also be backing up and refuting other ideas, but I found that including these parts would make for a very long post, so what’s written here are just some of the ideas I’ll be looking further into in my essay.

Works Cited

Duhigg, Charles. “From Civil Rights to Megachurches.” The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do in Life and Business. “Emerging.” Edited by Barclay Barrios, 3rd ed., Balford/ St. Martin’s 2016, pg.85-106

Kingsolver, Barbara. “The Moral Universe.” The Sun, March 2014. Web. https://www.thesunmagazine.org/issues/459/the-moral-universe Accessed 1 Nov 2017.

McKibben, Bill. “Movements Without Leaders.” 350. 20 Aug 2013. Web. https://350.org/movements-without-leaders/ Accessed 1 Nov 2017.

Famed environmentalist Bill McKibben speaks of what he thinks can make modern movements victorious in his article “Movements Without Leaders,” which looks at today’s activism in a similar way to how Charles Duhigg analyzes past fights.  The two authors agree that strong ties are needed to begin a movement, and that diversity in perspectives can be beneficial.  Concerning the former, McKibben tells readers that the fight against the infamous Keystone Pipeline was only able to begin because he’d “…gotten a dozen friends…” (“Movements Without Leaders”) to join first, much like Duhigg’s mention of the Montgomery bus boycott starting with Rosa Parks’s close friends sticking up for her.  As for diversity, both authors find it helpful but in different ways.  Either Duhigg’s idea of diverse weak ties can inform people of opportunities to join campaigns outside their circles of close friends, or McKibben’s idea of diverse groups participating in general can create a stronger “full-spectrum resistance” (“Movements…”) than just one group with which fewer people can relate (or both strategies could work for one movement).  Also, while McKibben don’t mention anything about peer pressure to join the battle against climate change, we can infer that it’s occurred within the diverse groups.

But concerning leadership, the two authors’ ideas become more complex and diverge a bit.  Duhigg claims movements require that “…[L]eaders give participants new habits that create a fresh sense of identity and a feeling of ownership” (87).  He provides a prime example of this when he speaks of Martin Luther King’s inspiring speech to his African-American followers during the Civil Rights Movement about how they must continually forgive their white oppressors, inspiring them to follow his nonviolent lead.  King’s words then “…[C]onverted participants from followers into self-directing leaders” (102), and others followed their lead in turn.  Essentially, through his words, King as the overall leader created more minor leaders to spread his message.

According to “Movements Without Leaders,” McKibben supports the idea of these minor leaders, which he refers to as “little-l leaders,” but dislikes the idea of all-encompassing leaders or “capital-L Leaders,” like King.  He explains that having a single leader can block new ideas from other contributors, and that nowadays “Our attention is dispersed” (“Movements…”) making it difficult to bring everyone together under one person’s guidance in one place anyway.  This is why in the battle against climate change, he encouraged “…24 hours of rallies around the planet” (“Movements…”), allowing for more diverse and distant groups to speak up, rather than taking on the role of leader himself.  McKibben admits that “Communities…will probably always have some kind of hierarchy,” with some contributing to the community/movement more than others.  However, he then asserts that “…these aren’t exactly ‘leaders’…They are not charting the path for the movement to take”  (“Movements…”).  McKibben refers to them as “elders” or “small-l leaders” that are more like guiding figures the rest can either agree with or go against.  Therefore, we can conclude the main difference between his and Duhigg’s approaches are that Duhigg believes one major leader is required to create “small-l leaders” who spread the word in their areas, while McKibben simply believes these more minor figures can rise on their own and are more beneficial as they can still provide structure or advice without drowning out others’ words.

Works Cited

Human-caused climate change through CO2 emissions is a highly controversial issue these days.  Despite much scientific evidence, some still refuse to believe that industrialized society is hurting ecosystems, and thus progress toward a more sustainable life is slow.  Faced with the prospect of humanity soon destroying the planet, environmentalists have tried several methods to open people’s eyes and encourage behavioral change that will be healthier for our world.

One of the most famous cases of environmental campaigning is the “350” program, created by Bill McKibben, author of one of the first books on climate change, “The End of Nature.”  In 350’s “Do the Math” movie, Van Jones, CEO and co-founder of the program “Rebuild the Dream,” summarizes 350’s mission when he states “…we’re going to take [the] money away from the problem-makers and give it to the problem-solvers” (31:09).  McKibben goes on a tour around the country, informing people of climate change statistics, and directly inviteing those who come to take action by lobbying with peaceful protests to move money from polluting and controlling fossil fuel companies to cleaner renewable energy.  His focus is on taking down the corporations, and he’s taken on the responsibility of leading the charge in a very direct way.

On the other hand, activist Barbara Kingsolver has taken a subtler approach.  As a writer of many novels involving major issues, including climate change, she influences people more with her written than spoken word.  In journalist Jeanne Supin’s interview with her, entitled “The Moral Universe,” Kingsolver explains that she is an introvert, but she doesn’t keep her work to herself because she recognizes the importance of her subjects. Because of her shyness, Kingsolver gets her point across not with open talks but by incorporating issues into the contexts of the lives of relatable, fictional characters in her stories, and that’s what draws people towards her side.  Rather than really pushing her ideas like McKibben does, however, she more ambiguously believes “…people can conclude whatever they please” (Kingsolver), and later analogizes her work to sending messages in a bottle that her readers may or may not pay attention to: “I think of throwing my books out on the water, and they float away, like messages in bottles, and I don’t know where they’re going to end up.  I love when people find those bottles and do something meaningful” (Kingsolver).  She’s simply setting out an option, stepping back, and letting her readers decide what they will do with the information; if they remain unaffected or disagree, that’s sad but still their choice.  Yet this strategy of encouragement without force has changed many of her readers’ perspectives and lifestyles. From this, we can see that while Kingsolver is more reserved in how she encourages social change, both she and McKibben have been quite successful in using their different strategies to get people to care more about remedying global warming.

Works Cited

Kingsolver, Barbara. “The Moral Universe.” The Sun, March 2014. Web. https://www.thesunmagazine.org/issues/459/the-moral-universe Accessed 25 Oct 2017.

McKibben, Bill. “Do the Math.” 350. 2013. Web. http://act.350.org/signup/math-movie/ Accessed 25 Oct 2017.

Charles Duhigg claims successful movements grow by utilizing a three-step process involving strong and weak ties, as well as the provision of new habits.  In “From Civil Rights to Megachurches,” he cites several examples of victorious movements that practiced his ideas, but interestingly, none of them occurred after the connections of social media appeared.  How would social media impact the effectiveness of the strategy?  In my opinion, this technological advancement can help and hurt.

In terms of benefits, social media encourages the weak ties Duhigg praises, as it links people over long distances and thus brings diverse perspectives.  Elaborating on the importance of this, Duhigg quotes Harvard student Mark Granovetter, who discovered in a study that people often receive much help from acquaintances during job searches: “As Granovetter wrote, ‘Individuals with few weak ties will be deprived of information from distant parts of the social system…'” (91).  Essentially, people that stick to a small group of close friends can be somewhat isolated and may miss opportunities to join new parties as they don’t receive much peer pressure from outside their bubble; the globalization social media brings about prevents this. Online links can also help with the third part of Duhigg’s strategy: having leaders give people new identities through examples of what they should do to reflect their beliefs.  After reiterating the story of pastor Rick Warren expanding his church by getting parishioners to stick with certain habits, Duhigg concludes, “For an idea to grow beyond a community, it must become self-propelling.  And the surest way to achieve this is to give people new habits that help them figure out where to go on their own” (100).  Once people know what to do, they feel more confident in leading the charge themselves, and others will follow suit.  Social media may assist this self-propulsion by providing a quick way to reach a larger audience for the leader’s ideas.

Unfortunately, where social media promotes weak relationships and the spread of new habits, it also prevents the formation of strong ties. People nowadays tend to gravitate towards their phones and away from actual interaction.  Without her direct, close relationships created through volunteering and club participation, Rosa Parks wouldn’t have received the support needed to start the bus boycott in her name, of which Duhigg writes.

In conclusion, social media is both a blessing and curse to social change.  It can help the spread of activism through weak ties and leadership, but discourages the crucial step of strong bonds.

Works Cited

Duhigg, Charles. “From Civil Rights to Megachurches.” The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do in Life and Business. “Emerging.” Edited by Barclay Barrios, 3rd ed., Balford/ St. Martin’s 2016, pg.85-106

Hallward, Epstein, and Duhigg’s writings provide examples of major social change in various areas, from discrimination against those who are AIDS-positive to the push for African-American rights.  All are instances of  movement toward a brighter future for these groups.  Yet at first glance, to those who didn’t participate in such movements, these issues seem distant.  They may assume because they aren’t in these groups, social change that occurs doesn’t influence them.  It’s true that the majority typically aren’t the ones being freed from the oppression of stigmas or granted new rights.  However, they can be affected by the new ideas brought about, as the concepts may lead to behavior changes, even in neutral or opposing parties.

Why would someone who was initially not part of a movement or against it change their behavior?  Duhigg writes “[A movement] endures because [its] leaders give participants new habits that create a fresh sense of identity” (87), and later explains that this “new identity” can spread to others who initially weren’t part of the movement as they follow by example, both during a protest and afterwards (if it’s successful). This phenomenon is due to the other part of Duhigg’s argument, the power of “strong ties” between friends and “weak ties” among acquaintances combined.  These encourage the idea of “if they’re doing it, I should do it too in order to be accepted,” which is increasingly common in today’s more globalized society; we’ve all felt the pull of peer pressure.  Epstein actually provided an example of a behavior change among the “common folk” when she observed how in Uganda, the personal talks about AIDS, “…[P]ersuade[d] Ugandans to come to terms with the reality of AIDS, care for the afflicted, and change their behavior” (116).  This proves that anyone, including those not belonging to the subject group, can be influenced to alter their beliefs and ways.

Works Cited

Duhigg, Charles. “From Civil Rights to Megachurches.” The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do in Life and Business. “Emerging.” Edited by Barclay Barrios, 3rd ed., Balford/ St. Martin’s 2016, pg.85-106

Epstein, Helen. “Aids Inc.” The Invisible Cure, “Emerging,” edited by Barclay Barrios, 3rd ed., Balford/ St. Martin’s 2016, pg. 109-121

For a push towards societal reform to be victorious, activists must change their behavior to make themselves more vulnerable to their oppressors.  Charles Duhigg explains a successful example of this: the aftermath of Martin Luther King’s speech to the members of the bus boycott on how they shouldn’t fight back against their enemies.  In “From Civil Rights to Megachurches,” Duhigg writes “Embedded within King’s philosophy was a set of new behaviors that converted participants from followers to self-directing leaders…the protest became a movement fueled by people who were acting because they had taken ownership of a historic event” (102).  King’s disciples had been inspired by his faith in this tactic of constant kindness, and wanting to follow his lead, regrouped to protest peacefully despite danger of attack.  Others seeing their apparent fearlessness garnered support, strengthened their fight, and spread it around the country. Psychiatrist Anne Hallward, in her TEDx Talk “How telling our silent stories can change the world,” also believes that facing fears and making ourselves vulnerable can bring about change, though she looks at its use in the medium of sharing personal stories rather than direct protests.  She agrees with the concept when she states “…[S]hame is at the heart of our suffering, and if we go to it, it’s at the heart of our healing, especially if we bring it out…where we can share it with other people.  And it becomes ultimately a force for social change” (9:53), and later elaborates on how it creates change by asserting “acts of courage are contagious” (10:24).  Hallward is essentially saying rendering ourselves defenseless through telling our uncomfortable truths is awe-inspiring to others in similar situations, getting them to be more open, band together, and push harder for reform.  Thus, both Duhigg and Hallward support my thesis, albeit in different contexts, that intentionally becoming vulnerable is courageous, and this bravery motivates others to do the same, making the group more powerful.

Citations

Duhigg, Charles. “From Civil Rights to Megachurches.” The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do in Life and Business. “Emerging.” Edited by Barclay Barrios, 3rd ed., Balford/ St. Martin’s 2016, pg.85-106

Hallward, Anne. “How Telling Our Silenced Stories Can Change the World.” TedxDirigo. 8 December 2014. Web. www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dMlsnrLN9U Accessed 8 October 2017.

Reporter Charles Duhigg speaks about the ability of close bonds to ignite change in his book The Power of Habit.  I find this similar to Epstein and Hallward’s praise of forming relationships with people who’ve had similar experiences.  However, Duhigg actually claims diverse friendships are more important to movements, as he explains while reiterating Rosa Parks’s story.  Her varying “‘strong ties’-firsthand relationships” (Duhigg 89) got Parks enough support to start a bus boycott. In further contrast to previous readings, according to Duhigg, “when the strong ties of friendship and the weak ties of peer pressure merge, they create incredible momentum” (92).  “Weak ties” refer to distant relationships between acquaintances within social groups, and peer pressure arises when people are expected to support these distant relations, or their reputations will suffer; this explains activism’s expansion.  One famous instance of this cited by the selection was when many African-Americans in Montgomery joined the boycott after assuming “everyone was doing it.”  In other words, Duhigg believes although change must begin with close-knit support groups, the perceived need to conform furthers participation.

Though Duhigg utilizes decades-old stories, I believe their points still apply.  Fights for equal rights continue today, and peer pressure appears more prominent than ever in many areas.  I haven’t participated in any movements (though I support equality), but I’ve certainly seen the expansion from “strong” to “weak” ties Duhigg describes, after police brutality incidents, for example.

Besides this present-day relation, another reason I found this article interesting is because I discovered new facts, like how Martin Luther King Jr. himself was roped into supporting the boycott by peer pressure.  I do wonder how much further this peer pressure would have spread if social media existed back then.

My interest in what I’ve read thus far makes me curious about the rest of Duhigg’s activism process, “a movement’s leaders giv[ing] participants new habits…” (87), and I look forward to finishing this passage.

Citations

Duhigg, Charles. “From Civil Rights to Megachurches.” The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do in Life and Business. “Emerging.” Edited by Barclay Barrios, 3rd ed., Balford/ St. Martin’s 2016, pg.85-96

Among all kinds of discrimination, one of the most prominent throughout history has been sexism: the favoring of one gender group, usually men, over another (women).  In the past century, much legislation has been created to augment women’s freedoms, such as suffrage, yet even today, a “glass ceiling” still exists so women continue to be paid and treated unequally, but why?  I believe the answer can be found in the history books and a text concerning a different, but no less upsetting, issue: AIDS.  In the “AIDS Inc.” chapter of her book The Invisible Cure, molecular biologist Helen Epstein speaks of the prejudice against those with HIV/AIDS, and this topic is summarized in the “About the Author” section, where it’s described as “the social stigmas of infected peoples as well as an ‘out of sight, out of mind’ attitude” (Emerging, pg.109).  The mention of this attitude is referring to the fact that people who aren’t directly impacted by AIDS believe it’s of no concern to them and that the people tormented by these stigmas aren’t like them.  This thought process can also be applied to sexism; for thousands of years, through several different cultures and religions, women were believed unintelligent, overemotional, and only capable of bearing children or doing housework.  By forcing women to take on these roles, pushing them “out of sight” and away from important tasks in society such as participating in government, the men kept them “out of mind,” further lessening their understanding of how women felt, and creating a “cycle of social stigmas” (Emerging, 109).  Essentially, these thoughts have been held in society for so long, with women only recently successfully protesting for equal treatment, the roots of this prejudicial weed may never be completely pulled from some men’s minds.  This is why sexism still abounds.

Citations

Helen Epstein, “Aids Inc.” The Invisible Cure, “Emerging,” edited by Barclay Barrios, 3rd ed., Balford/ St. Martin’s 2016, pg. 109-121

Molecular biologist Helen Epstein wrote in The Invisible Cure about the spread of AIDS in Africa and methods to combat the issue.  Uganda found a solution in personal talks about experiences with the disease, a strategy utilizing “social cohesion,” defined as “the tendency of people to talk openly with one another and form trusted relationships” (Epstein, pg.116).  This method caused HIV rates to drop, since it “[P]ersuad[ed] Ugandans to come to terms with the reality of AIDS…and change their behavior” (Epstein, pg. 116).  On the other hand, countries who didn’t explicitly speak about the subject due to close-knit families being separated during colonization, like South Africa, weren’t as successful.

Still recalling Anne Hallward’s TEDx Talk on the benefits of speaking out, I listened to one of her radio talks, “The Unheard Stories of LGBTQ Teens,” in which she spoke to members of this group about being discriminated against and finding support.  I believe this talk is attempting to facilitate Epstein’s “social cohesion” within the group and between gay and straight people.  Hallward and her guest speakers encourage LGBTQ and straight individuals to band together through methods including forming clubs such as a Gay-Straight-Trans Alliance and getting teachers who are part of this minority to “come out,” so that LGBTQ students can openly discuss their challenges at school without feeling threatened.  In addition, support from non-LGBTQ friends and relatives is stressed as important to these teens’ mental health, although listeners are warned by all of the guest speakers to be careful, since not everyone is trustworthy.  Unfortunately, there are inconsistencies; for instance, the fact that some speakers chose anonymity by leaving out their last names goes against the idea of total transparency required for “social cohesion” to work. In dealing with what listeners should do, however, “social cohesion” is completely supported.

Citations

“Emerging,” edited by Barclay Barrios, 3rd ed., Balford/ St. Martin’s 2016, pg. 109-121

Hallward, Anne, “How Telling Our Silenced Stories Can Change the World” www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dMlsnrLN9U