Tuesday, December 21, 2004

The Means ... ?!

Thank you for your post, Nicholas. I have read 1984; it paints a frightening picture, indeed.

Ultimately, the smaller-scale change progressing to a larger-scale impact appears to be a more feasible way of ameliorating certain conditions (although I agree that forming cults might yield some undesirable consequences, to say the least). In this context, I think that the concept of the social entrepreneur is one that is very powerful - social entrepreneurs work within the confines of the system that organizes society to make the system and society better.

The question is: how can social entrepreneurs accomplish this most effectively?

Furthermore, how should (could?) we define "effectively"? I am tempted to say that this would mean in a way that distributes wealth more equitably; does not diminish unrenewable resources; and limits negative externalities. But I think that this is only scratching the surface.


Blogger Nicholas said...

It really depends on what in society you want to change. Then, how to go about doing it. Of course, who should be the one leading the change? After all, you don't want someone like Stalin leading the change. But the one's who lead the most effective change tend to be the ones with the most wealth and they may not always be supporting the "right" cause.

Depends on what you mean by effectiveness. "Effective" change could come so minute, it could be seen as a failure. Then again, the more time it takes, the more time to fine

1:21 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home