Mass movers and Mavericks

During one of those nights when we were belting against the rain late in the night, I got to talk to a fellow human whose hobbies include dramatics, movies and changing the world. As usual, we got talking about the state of the nation, and the world as a whole and compared our positions on a variety of issues. While talking to him, something interesting stuck me.

Though our intentions were the same, he and I (and if I dare to generalize, everyone with similar intentions) belong to two different kinds – The mass movers and the mavericks.

The mavericks

• Work on the belief that people are inherently lazy and stupid. In other words, given to themselves people would love to live in the rot and things would never change. You have to force change to make them understand the benefits of the utopian world (think Communism).
• Work top-down – in the sense that, they first change the top and let change disseminate to the grass roots.
• Believe that the best way to correct the problem is to abolish the existing faulty system and create a new one, the basic logic being that it’s foolish to work within the same rules that you want to change.
• Make their plans with them in the center of everything – like they becoming the director, the prime minister or whatever and initiating change from the center.

And then there are the mass movers who,

• Work on the belief that there are lots of people who are discontent and want change. But what they need is direction and leadership – someone who can create initiatives that satisfy their needs and appeal to their intellect so that they can take forward.
• Work bottom-up. Change starts at the grass roots and this awareness develops in concentric circles and soon people reach a point where change at the top happens naturally, or even if forced is at a point when people can react to and accept it.
• Work within the existing system and do delta changes so that change happens gradually.
• Don’t necessarily have to be in the center of power to make things happen. They are definitely not averse to leadership or power – but their changes are made keeping themselves in mind in the top most chair.

The mavericks obviously enjoy the romanticism that’s attached to a revolution, and have evidence in history where the most dramatic of changes (Russian revolution and the birth of communism for example) happened as a result of a revolution. However, personally I would love being a mass mover than a maverick. I firmly believe that the best way to bring in change is to create ripples in the pond; make changes to the very fabric of the society and let people rationalize and decide their future rather than giving them one and asking them to accept it. Unless everyone understands the reason for change, a maverick system has a single point of failure (coz firstly, it’s difficult to keep the right perspective and secondly, those in the second or third rung many times don’t share the philanthropic intentions of the leader and they are the ones who finally implement the system).

So, rather than starting guerilla warfare, I would concentrate on improving primary education, setting up simple correction mechanisms for pockets of population, set up and efficiently run organizations that channelize purpose and energy of people who want to make a difference to causes that cry for attention. It is extremely time consuming and excruciatingly slow; yes; we end up running in vicious circles; true; One wouldn’t live to find place in history book; absolutely; But I believe that this is the only kind of change that would last.

And before my friend since the age of 4, KP reminds me again – I shall take up the LCCS soon :)