2012-07-22

Who's responsible?

Actually allowing someone to take on responsibility is a matter of trust, and we are more likely to trust those we know than those we don't. This isn't necessarily a good thing, but it's the usual thing, so it's the easiest place to start. Oh, I'm sure there are those relatively close to you – that is, people in your own neighborhood or community – whom you don't really trust, but you going to have to give it a try.

If you'll recall a couple of posts ago when we were trying to figure whether we could even get here, I tried to point out that all the discussion in the world doesn't help if you don't recognize your discussion partner as your equal. And this is the real crux of the matter.

As long as "the other" is not your equal, there can be no real discourse. If there is no real discourse, there can be no real decisions. And, if there are no real decisions, then things will just continue to get worse, because in the end it's only the anonymous bureaucrats from somewhere else who will be "responsible". And we know they're not responsible at all. This is one of the biggest challenges you'll have to face. If you can't accept someone you can look in the eye, then forget about all those faceless others whom you'll never meet in your life. You won't care; they won't care. And when nobody cares, nothing gets done because no one's responsible.

Like most people you have long proclaimed the equality of all. We all have, but the time has come to put up or shut up. It's not just that you might be responsible for you, you are also responsible for ensuring that this whole thing gets off the ground, and until you allow the other to be your equal, we won't be going anywhere – fast, or slow.

Yes, think global, drink local, and responsibly … and part of that is acknowledging others at the bar. After all, only alcoholics drink alone.

No comments: