why do people let things happen?

[the_river_styx]

Was Orwell correct in hinting that bad things happen because people let them? Do the characters in the book shut their eyes and their ears to the turmoil? Maybe things are just too subtle for them to comprehend. Also, how much of this is applicable to everyday life, and current events? I'm curious to know why people are eternally gullible and/or ignorant, or if this is incorrect, what other people's thoughts are.

[The Atheist]

Was Orwell correct in hinting that bad things happen because people let them? Do the characters in the book shut their eyes and their ears to the turmoil? Maybe things are just too subtle for them to comprehend. Also, how much of this is applicable to everyday life, and current events? I'm curious to know why people are eternally gullible and/or ignorant, or if this is incorrect, what other people's thoughts are.

Usually attributed to Edmund Burke, this is a truism:


All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing

Apathy is the enemy.

Why is that? I'd venture that it's because we've evolved to be selfish, which means that "I want" will always trump reality.

[buckeye12]

I believe people do let bad things happen, but these happenings are based on the gullible mindframe and lazy mindset of humans today. A perfect example of this is within politics.

Every campaigner creates lies and promises which when elected, the lies come out and the promises aren't kept. During election time, just like the past few weeks in the U.S., we see commercial after commercial and hear a recorded phone message after message. We know they are all mostly shaped with deceit yet we sit on our a**es and do nothing to look further into the candidates stories and proposals. We take what is right in front of us and call it "good enough." You could almost call that the slogan of the upcoming generation. I hear that phrase everyday whether I'm using it myself or hear other people using it.

We are not however, shutting our eyes to the turmoil. We are just taking an easy way to what we hope will turn out better, but either has no change or ends up worse. We hide in our houses using some kind of social network on the computer or we sit on the couch watching TV or playing video games instead of getting up, out and involved in the world today. We've got to live in the present, not worry about the future, and keep the past in the past but not too far back to where we don't have something to compare with how we are today.

[gazebo]

I do believe that people let bad things happen . People often just accept things the way they are they dont want to take a stand for fear of having the eyes on them .Why say anything im perfectly safe were i am . How many things have happenned because people sat back and pretended like they had no clue as to what was going on ?

[The Atheist]

How many things have happenned because people sat back and pretended like they had no clue as to what was going on ?

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

Martin Niemöller, January 1946.

[Delta40]

I think also we are good at delegating invisible lines of authority and power. for example, the non-interference of child sex abuse within families - who do not wish to bring it out in public vs a tacit public presumption that such things do not happen to us or around us and if they did, we would speak up.

[MarkBastable]

I think this is one of those "it's a small world" things. People say that, but it means nothing unless you have some kind of pre-existing idea of the size worlds are expected to be. If it's a small world, what would be the effect of bigger or smaller worlds?

Similarly, if you say that people "just let things happen", you have to ask what it would mean if people did do something - because the implicit assumption in the question is that we can ignore all the things that people quite obviously do do.

That would mean that we've discounted, to quote some large examples of people doing things, the organisation of movements to insist on acceptance of homosexuality, the emancipation of ethnic minorities, the liberation of women, the provision of aid to Africa, the opposition to apartheid, the raising of awareness of the effects of AIDS, the donations ordinary people make to charity and medical research, the establishment of shelters for domestically abused women and the homeless and the abandoned. And we've also dismissed as not worthy of inclusion the thousands of small local initiatives, in which people mobilise themselves to do something about gang culture, corporate indifference to local communities, environmental issues, the care of the elderly, the raising of money to support schools, social centres, the victims of crime, social deprivation and disease.

So I think my response would be, if people 'let things happen', are the endeavours I've listed categorised as 'things happening' or are they categorised as 'people not just letting things happen'?

[The Atheist]

I think also we are good at delegating invisible lines of authority and power. for example, the non-interference of child sex abuse within families - who do not wish to bring it out in public vs a tacit public presumption that such things do not happen to us or around us and if they did, we would speak up.

Yes, very good point.

I can't imagine how people can even suggest keeping it quiet, but that's humans for ya!


Similarly, if you say that people "just let things happen", you have to ask what it would mean if people did do something - because the implicit assumption in the question is that we can ignore all the things that people quite obviously do do.

Trouble is, there is demonstrable evidence that people do just "let things happen".

Ask any cop. Or child abuse worker. How can people not try to investigate the constantly-bruised child, or the screams for help? Christ, I can give one quick instance of a piece of filth beating up his pregnant girlfriend. Only one witness - me - of several dozen bothered even calling the cops.

It's not universal, but people are sufficiently self-centred (or -absorbed) that they can ignore anything if it suits.


That would mean that we've discounted, to quote some large examples of people doing things, ...

I don't get your point here.

Why do those things get discounted? And by whom?

I think you've got the wrong end of the discussion - we were asking why bad things happen and you listed a load of good things.

[MarkBastable]

I think you've got the wrong end of the discussion - we were asking why bad things happen and you listed a load of good things.

No, I think I've got the right end of the stick. Bad things happen - and some are stopped by people and some are allowed to happen by people. 'People' do both, so the implication of the question - that people let bad things happen - needs to be questioned.

The question was 'why do people let bad things happen' and my argument was, 'well, they don't always'. It doesn't make any more sense to make that generalisation than to say 'why are people so generous and caring?'

[the_river_styx]

The question was 'why do people let bad things happen' and my argument was, 'well, they don't always'. It doesn't make any more sense to make that generalisation than to say 'why are people so generous and caring?'[/QUOTE]


and that was also what I was asking. what other people's thoughts were. I think you make an excellent point. sometimes we do tend to persevorate on the negative and ignore the good things that are being done by people and for people all around us

[Delta40]

Ask any cop. Or child abuse worker. How can people not try to investigate the constantly-bruised child, or the screams for help? Christ, I can give one quick instance of a piece of filth beating up his pregnant girlfriend. Only one witness - me - of several dozen bothered even calling the cops.

I would say a perfect example of this is the bystander effect in the Kitty Genovese case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Kitty_Genovese

[The Atheist]

No, I think I've got the right end of the stick. Bad things happen - and some are stopped by people and some are allowed to happen by people. 'People' do both, so the implication of the question - that people let bad things happen - needs to be questioned.

The question was 'why do people let bad things happen' and my argument was, 'well, they don't always'. It doesn't make any more sense to make that generalisation than to say 'why are people so generous and caring?'

No, they don't always let bad things happen, but pretty much all bad things that happen would be avoided if everyone took part in stopping them happening.

Very few drunk drivers get in their cars without someone else noticing; very few child-murderers haven't abused their victims in the past; Bernie Madoff did not start with billion-dollar scams.

That people are doing good does not absolve them from trying to limit harm.

[MarkBastable]

No, they don't always let bad things happen

That's all I was saying, in answer to the question. I think the qualifications both you and I made thereafter are valid - the difference is that you seem dismayed by how much bad stuff is permitted to happen, and I'm encouraged by how much bad stuff is prevented.