Doing Good and Changing the World

Dearest A,

The topic on my mind as of late has little to do with THE LAW, but much to do with how we approach problems as a society -- which, after all, is what THE LAW is supposed to do, right?

I just finished reading Three Cups of Tea as part of my book club. The book tells the story of Greg Mortenson, a climber who attempted to scale K2 and instead made it his mission to build schools in Pakistan. The idea is certainly a great one, and I admire Mr. Mortenson for conceiving of and following through on his project.

But here's the problem -- this book taps into that one-person-can-change-the-world meme that may actually be counter-productive. Individuals rarely act alone, and, even in Mr. Mortenson's case, it was all the help from individuals in Pakistan who believed in his idea that made his project a success. And Mr. Mortenson only became truly successful when he convinced wealthy individuals to back his projects.

This kind of collective action means that it is institutions, not individuals, who can actually make the raucous, heard-round-the-world change that will make a difference.

Not only is this cult of personality therefore incorrect, it is also counter-productive because it takes the responsibility off of our institutional actors -- governments, in particular. In our spare moments, we may all wish that there are more Greg Mortensons in the world. The fact is that we Americans, collectively, have the potential to make change on a scale much larger than anything Mortenson has accomplished.

But as long as we believe that the answer lies in more Greg Mortensons, then we will never demand such collective action.

This idea is kind of out there, and it got a whole lot of criticism during the book club session, but my gut tells me it's right. Thoughts?

Love,
Sammy