The cost of collective apathy

I’ve often wondered about the cost of individual apathy about the state of the world and the repercussions of this individual cowardice. That simple matter of fact is that we don’t bother about so many bad things that happen in our local communities, let alone at a national level. If we keep ignoring this accumulation of evils, petty or profound, what price we are paying? What’s our duty to ourselves and our fellow people? What can an individual do?

Branko Milanovic wrestles with a version of the same dilemma:

That led me to the following question. I avoided unpleasant conversations with people who absolutely did not care nor know anything about world affairs, and I had uncomfortable discussions with those who cared; what was better? For me personally, it was better to avoid unpleasant topics. But was it good for the world—and was it even pleasing to myself who from Titoist Yugoslavia inherited a huge interest in world affairs—to just ignore whatever is happening in the world? I could have a pleasant time with people who ignored anything of history and of present-day politics, or unpleasant time with people who read or knew something about both. Between the two, I thought, I opted for the latter. Surely, I appreciated as individuals more people who disagreed with me than those who were totally indifferent.

Perhaps we can live nice lives in total indifference of the rest of the world but if everybody does it, in what kind of a world shall we live?

Original tweet.