Social change comes from close relationships and the mutual friends that come with that. In the movie, “Do the Math”, featuring Bill McKibben, he discusses what needs to happen in order for climate change to be suppressed and for things to change socially and economically on a global scale. McKibben states, “If you are a member of a church, you have the ability to work with your fellow congregates to make sure that your church is not investing in fossil fuel companies” (11). He’s saying that ideas can radiate to other people if you’re involved in small groups/organizations because then those close ties you have can spread that idea to their ties and the word gets further and further. Another author that discusses social change discusses how this social change can really be pushed to occur with mutual and close friends interwoven together. Duhigg states, “Strong ties, or close relationships, combined with weak ties, or distant connections, have the power to mobilize large groups toward a singular goal” (85). Duhigg is saying that these connections that cross societal boundaries are what can really push a political and social change to occur. Just like what McKibben said with climate change and the church groups, they can have lots of power and political force because of the different people they can reach. Duhigg ties this up by stating that these strong and weak ties are the driving force in political change.
Month: March 2019
McKibben’s “Do the Math” movies’ strategy for social change it very interesting and he makes a lot of good points. He starts out the film by noting that when climate change is broken down into a very simple 3-part formula its more palatable and people will be more attentive to it because it’s easy to understand. He discusses climate change in the sense that if there’s a clear enemy in the situation and if we know what to do to put down that enemy, we have a moral obligation to do so. Climate change is only getting worse and McKibben suggest that the way we stop it is by encouraging everyone to full their stock and sell them from big oil companies. He suggests that these big competitors choke out smaller, clean-energy companies so that they don’t even have a chance. As students we can stand up to these big companies by encouraging our schools to sell any stocks, they have in these big oil companies. This will choke them of their money and force them to switch to renewable energy or to go bankrupt and let the smaller, renewable energy companies have a chance. McKibben suggests that people don’t naturally have the urge to go out and try to help the world for the better, especially if it’s not affecting them directly. So, it’s important to grasp the simple equation and really understand what it means for our world. This strategy is different from Duhigg’s because it suggests that social change will come from people congregating from complete strangers. McKibben started 350 with a few undergrads and it spread globally to people they didn’t even know. Duhigg suggests that social change comes from more specified strong and weak relationships forming and can only really occur if these relationships exist. McKibben doesn’t specify these connections being needed and more so suggests that social change can occur from groups of people pushing for it. The similarities between these two strategies for social change is that they both only work if a lot of people care and push for what needs to be changed. People taking real action.
Duhigg’s assertion that strong and weak relationships have the power to motivate groups towards a single mutual goal doesn’t totally align with what I think (85). I think this can hold true in some instances. My view, however, contrary to what Duhigg has argued, is that for big social movements to occur you need more strong ties than weak ones. By attaining this you automatically gain more mutual acquaintances and therefore more people who will call in favors for you. The evidence shows that this is what occurred with the civil rights movement and Rosa Parks. Anyone familiar with the Civil Rights movement should agree that what happened with Rosa Parks and not giving up her seat on the bus was pivotal for this movement. Because she had strong and weak ties that went across social groups people were motivated to end segregation. I agree with what Duhigg calls, creating a fresh sense of identity (87). In my opinion, this motivates people even further to work towards that mutual goal that needs to be strived for.
I think that Duhigg has some really good points and after reading this excerpt it makes me want to read his book on the power of habit. I do agree with him when he states that weak-tie acquaintances can be more important than strong-tie friends because of the access it gives us to various social circles that we wouldn’t normally be exposed to. This is especially important while networking socially when trying to get a job. The more connections you have the easier it will be for you to get a job because if you reach out to people, they’ll be more apt to help you. Or they might even reach out to you. I also really liked the example he provided about Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church. It was interesting how he tied social habits and the need for distant and close relationships within the church. This is something I’ve personally had experience with and having smaller groups that meet outside of church definitely gets people more involved and forms stronger relationships with God and the church. If people don’t feel like they belong somewhere, or something isn’t applicable to them they’re more likely to give up on it. Like Duhigg says, “new habits create a fresh sense of identity” (87). This holds true within the Civil Rights Movement and the creation of Saddleback Church. People begin to feel like they belong and they’re motivated to care about things more if they’re acquainted to the people an issue is surrounding.
Recent Comments