There’s a broad understanding of
what civic engagement entails. According to Adler and Goggin, “Civic engagement
describes how an active citizen participates in the life of a community in
order to improve conditions for others or to help shape their community’s
future.” This definition only provides a general criterion rather than a
comprehensive list of what an active citizen is able to do. Because of this,
many people are not as inclined to civically engage as others are; not that
they are lazy and choose not to be involved but that they are ignorant of all
they ways they are able to contribute and make a difference according to their
situation.
I like to think that the world is
ideal, that if there was a way for all of us to contribute to society we will
move forward and take a first step towards making a change. Although it may be
silly to say, I believe everyone has a heart but not everyone has the open
mindedness to use their heart to reach out in support for a cause if they don’t
have to. One example that Peter Singer posed in his TED talk "The why and how of altruism", he tells us the story of a two year old girl run over by a van and was ignored by three people as she bled to her death. He asked the audience if they would help her, almost everyone raised their hands. When he compared that situation to a website about malaria and said that many kids are dying from malaria and people were not donating. He essentially chided the audience and told them that there were many ways to donate, and no one had the open-mindedness to look up charities that would have saved lives. When you show people a video of an impoverished town being torn apart,
they will cringe at the musty situations of these towns and almost none will
criticize the town’s inability to sustain themselves. In this instance, people
would be more likely to extend a hand than to question the efforts of the
government (which is also another way of helping the town). We people don't thoroughly research and that makes us ignorant of all the possibilities.
Many people don’t know how to
engage themselves in the community because they believe that there is a certain
guideline to being active and being active so that their efforts are
worthwhile. When David Campbell posed the question, “What is civic engagement?”
there was never really a unanimous answer.
This is because Civic Engagement transpires through the different
knowledge and experiences gained as a people become more involved with the
society. Civic engagement is what you
make of it, in the long run, someone will always be watching and someone will always appreciate a helping hand. Although there are better alternatives to civically engage, there are
no right or wrong civic engagements; there are no bad improvements or bad
contributions.
It’s a very simplistic idea.
Actions speak louder than words. I think that we all need to be less critical about
the work that is being done to improve and more critical of the work that isn’t
being done. We have to think more of the other chances provided to us; less of the changes we have already made but more of the little changes we can make in the future.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteLillian-
ReplyDeleteI really like how you summed up your point by saying "we all need to be less critical about the work that is being done to improve and more critical of the work that isn't being done." I can definitely relate and agree that this is one of the biggest problems with civic engagement. In my sorority I hold the position as philanthropy chair. When I ran for this position one of my main goals was to try and get people to be more involved in the work that we do, however I didn't realize until later on that people were contributing way less than I had imagined. One of the constant battles I am facing with my sorority sisters is that they like to do as little as possible to get by, not just with philanthropy events, but programming events (which are meant to be fun). To tackle this task I question if it is even possible to get people involved because if we can't get people to attend an apple picking event, how will we ever get them to be involved in community service events. As a member of our e-board and co-chair of our largest philanthropy event of the year, Greek God, I found it my responsibility to get people engaged somehow. I implemented a mandatory three hours of service that each member is required to complete by the end of the semester. Although forcing people isn't a great way to get people involved, it is the best solution we could come up with. I have learned that people don't always hold the same values that I like to think everyone in our class holds and that that is why it is so important to try and get people to understand why being involved is important. Some of the younger girls in my sorority had no idea that our Greek God event revenued $30,000 last year and once they had been informed of the impact it made they were more compelled to help out. I think the first step to civic engagement is getting people interested and making them want to help out. The major problem isn't that people are doing work we don't necessary think is most productive, but any work is better than no involvement at all. I liked the Peter Singer example you used about the child who got run-over because although most of us would raise our hand to helping the child, it really is hard to say who would step up in desperate situations. I feel there is some secret code or system that needs to be discovered to help solve this lack of engagement issue, but until then we must be grateful for the work people are doing and focused on how to get more people to be involved.