Activism Today: Learning from the past or looking toward the future?

History is often used as a tool for gaining understanding about the present. In wake of the election and what’s come with it, many are using the past as a warning that we may be moving in a dangerous direction. Articles are being written everyday comparing Trump to Hitler, and many were quick to point out the irony that the Muslim Ban executive order was signed on Holocaust Remembrance Day. Lots on infographics and other posts comparing our political situation to the past have also been circulating, presumably to inspire people to action.

I've been seeing this one float around Facebook

However, I have to question the effect that these comparisons make. While learning from the past is crucial, it does not directly lead to action. This is where prospecting, envisioning, and goal-setting become vital tools.

In my opinion, the most successful activist movement engage in prospecting, envisioning, and goal-setting. The Women’s March on Washington is a great example (critique aside) of a well-organized movement with a clear vision. Their website has a clear set of goals for the future regarding ending violence, reproductive rights, LGBTQIA rights, worker’s rights, civil rights, disability rights, immigrant rights, and environment justice. Furthermore, they have in place a First 100 Days campaign that outlines specific actions to take toward accomplishing those goals.

Prospecting, envisioning, and goal-setting have been integral to building our society. We need to continue to collectively engage in these practices to ensure a more just and sustainable future.

I love this.

Here are some resources with clear vision and goals! I know there are others, but this is what I came up with off of the top of my head. Feel free to comment with other action-oriented resources.

https://www.a2datarescue.com/

https://5calls.org/

https://100daysaction.net/

https://www.womensmarch.com/100/

http://blacklivesmatter.com/getinvolved/

http://www.nodapl.life/

For those who can afford it: take a minute to read this

Learning about hedonistic versus eudemonic happiness in lecture makes us think that there’s an obvious choice: eudemonic happiness is the way to go! It’s longer lasting and will bring you more happiness in the end. It becomes almost too easy to mentally condemn those who focus on hedonistic happiness.

Before I get too far into this – I want to point out: I do agree that we need to shift societal values towards eudemonic paths and that addressing environmental problems (shifting behavior towards more local living/pro-environmental behavior) is a way that we can achieve that goal. But I wanted to address the thing that’s been itching at the back of my mind: there are very valid reasons why someone might not be able to pursue many eudemonic paths.

The fact is, we’re not in that society that fosters eudemonic happiness very well yet. For those people who can afford to invest – time, money, or mental effort – into those paths, it could boil down to that simple choice of eudemonic vs hedonistic. But for many, there isn’t really a choice as it is today. And unfortunately, those are usually the people who can’t afford to look past today.

For example, consider a family of five who hover around the poverty line. The parents might be working two jobs each in order to make ends meet. Even if someone were to come to their neighborhood with a great program, maybe one that teaches gardening to foster self-reliance, they might not have the time to attend the lessons – or they might be so exhausted from working and taking care of their kids, they might not have the mental energy to attend the sessions. It becomes even worse if someone needs to invest money in a class like that, even if it seems relatively cheap. $5 can be the difference between having enough for the electricity bill and the water bill or having to just choose one for the next month.

The kicker is that it’s probably these people who have learned to greatly cherish any time they have with their family or loved ones – to figure out what they really enjoy because they don’t get to enjoy much. It’s probably these people that, if their financial situation were to get better, would end up pursuing eudemonic paths to happiness. But without that comfort and wiggle room, can we blame someone for wanting to default to the path that’s a bit easier how it is today?

I believe we’re at a chicken and the egg sort of impasse: how do we promote pro-environmental and eudemonic interventions in our current society? However, without more support and people adopting these behaviors due to limits from our current society, how do we get our society to change?

What are good tactics you’ve come across to help address these issues? 

Motivation and the Spectrum of Behavior Change

With the start of the new year, there are a lot of people who are attempting to change something about their behavior, whether it’s being more grateful, a new diet, or exercising regularly. Many of these people will fail in their resolutions. According to the Statistic Brain Research Institute, only 9% of Americans actually felt that they were successful with the resolutions they made at the start of the new year.1  

If we look to the material from class, Dr. De Young presented behavior change on a scale. Attitudes, declarative knowledge and procedural knowledge are listed on the labile end of the scale and values, character strengths and world views are on the stable end. According to this breakdown, many of our current approaches to behavior change focus on the labile end of the scale, and have a weak association with “enduring and growing behavior.” In this summary of behavior change, it is difficult to see how one approach may move through these different relationships. However, in thinking about how to move from one end of the spectrum to the other, we may be able to alter or improve our current approaches to incorporate more relationships on the stable end, instead of focusing on incorporating brand new or uncommon approaches.

Motivation is very important for behavior change as well and fits into relationships all along the spectrum. Addressing a person’s motivation for their actions or their desire for behavior change may allow an avenue to move smoothly from one end of the spectrum to the other. Methods like motivational interviewing, a counseling approach used to change behaviors by helping clients examine their motivation for their actions, may be a good place to start.2  While focusing on attitudes, a motivation-based approach can help a person examine how their action fits into their values, and can in the process, possibly even help to change those values.

In the new year, we talk a lot about motivation. Why does it disappear? Often, people start with huge goals and fail quickly. Many sources recommended small changes which could then be built on for larger, values-driven and long-lasting lifestyle changes.  It’s important to start on the labile end of the scale and build up to the stable end, because without those smaller changes, true and lasting change will likely continue to be difficult.3-5

Do you think it’s possible to change behavior by focusing on new approaches to address the “stable” relationships end of the spectrum? Have we already done enough to address relationships in the “labile” end?

1. http://www.statisticbrain.com/new-years-resolution-statistics/
2. "Motivational Interviewing: An evidence-based approach to counseling helps patients follow treatment recommendations". American Journal of Nursing. October 2007.
3. http://www.lifehack.org/articles/featured/how-to-stay-motivated.html
4. http://lifehacker.com/5958782/four-strategies-that-build-lasting-motivation-and-how-to-use-them-to-achieve-your-goals
5. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/new-years-resolutions-psychology_us_5862d599e4b0d9a59459654c

The Worth of Fame and Fortune: Celebrities, Happiness, and Consumption

It's easy to think about celebrities in the media as living "the good life." Yet, there wouldn't be stories for major tabloid magazines if famous stars lived perfect, drama-free lives. Indeed, that makes them feel sometimes more or less human to the rest of us. At the same time, a lot of these stories about celebrities tend have roots in unhappiness — addictions, infidelity, disputes over wealth, and mental health concerns are just some of the common tales. Despite vast amounts of wealth and prestige, could it be that celebrities lack true meaning or purpose in their lives?

This example seems like an interesting case of the difference between hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Celebrities are deeply embedded in a world of consumption, wealth, and pleasure-driven fascination. We hear about their multiple vacation homes, party habits, collections of valuable possessions, elaborate trips, and successes in a given industry. We also hear that many of them are not very nice people, lacking the generosity, kindness, and self-awareness we would want and expect in our friends. Some of these celebrities are popular because they are so outrageous and unpredictable. On the other hand, people are often drawn to celebrities described as "humble," "ordinary," or “down-to-earth" because we want to find evidence that they are still dealing with human problems and worries, underneath the layers of fame and fortune. Of course, celebrities come in all types, from actors, to musicians, to philanthropists, to TV hosts and personalities, to politicians, to athletes, to designers, to inventors, to business executives. Additionally, the media is notorious for sensationalizing news to make it more "interesting" and able to sell. So are celebrities really all the same or do some live "better" lives than others?

While I don't know the answer, there are some trends that point to a state of unhappiness among celebrities, resulting from the pursuit of mainly hedonic goals. Many celebrities' fame is the result of others' approval and admiration. They live lives dictated by others, where their primary purpose is to look or act a certain way, or represent a brand as to maintain feeling good. This results in a pressure to be pretty much anyone but themselves, and a life continually in the spotlight is exhausting. To deal with their unhappiness, many stars try to buy their way out. They seek for meaning in empty places, because they can afford it, rather than realizing what they need comes at a much cheaper price. For example, what if celebrities spent more time on their relationships with friends and family, set goals for personal growth, worked for causes that transcended their own fame, and tried to make the world better for the less financially privileged? Some celebrities do, whether it is the nature of their job or a part of who they are as people. It seems like the exception rather than the rule when we hear stars speak out about injustice, get arrested at a protest, or challenge the status quo. I imagine there are few incentives to be better people when many high performing industries are competitive (or cutthroat), status-driven, and time-consuming. These industries are built to motivate people to be the best at something, whether or not they become the best people in the process. This seems especially true for stars who became famous at a young age. Experiencing fame early on can mean less time for personal growth and exploration during critical developmental periods. Too often, these individuals reach a breaking point of questioning who they are. Perhaps they are caught up in a world lacking trust, authenticity, and meaning that is not sustainable or supportive for well-being.

I sometimes wonder what would happen if actors only received a teacher's annual salary, or athletes were not paid by the game, but by their demonstrations of leadership and role-modeling. Or maybe what if celebrities were not paid at all? What if being an entertainer was seen as volunteer time for the public good, rather than something lucrative? We've seen even in the first weeks of class that money only buys happiness up to a point, a point where people can take care of themselves and their basic needs. And "basic needs" really are universal, even though celebrities tell us all the luxury things they have learned to not be able to live without. It is sad to me that many celebrities are paid by industries that don’t seem to care about them as people and only want their image. Celebrities are some of the biggest role-models for younger generations, and this seems like a great opportunity to influence what success, happiness, and living well looks like — separate from the money and fame. We could better appreciate them as complex people and sharing our same goals, and have more examples of the benefits of eudaimonic well-being.

Finally, on MLK Day it is important to remember the celebrity activists who have been long-standing examples of incorporating meaning and purpose into their everyday lives, sometimes because they are fighting for their right to life. The keynote presentation this morning was a good reminder to me of how recently journalists and artists leverage justice and truth to drive their work forward - hopefully these will continue to push others to think critically about their work in other industries as well.

Resources:

• McGregor, I. & B. Little (1998). Personal projects, happiness, and meaning: On doing well and being yourself. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(2): 494-512.    
• http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/27/pat-obrien-celebrities-happy_n_5717815.html
• https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/insight-is-2020/201010/celebrities-are-you-really-happy
• http://www.businessinsider.com/does-being-rich-make-you-happy-2013-12