Move beyond “slacktivism”
The young woman was feeling positively ecstatic for her wonderful acts of benevolence. "I just raised $2,000 for earthquake victims in Haiti," she enthused. Such keen responsiveness to the suffering of others is indeed admirable. But just how did she accomplish this charitable largesse? Where did she find the will and the means to provide for the shattered citizens of Haiti?
"I just texted a special number 200 times," she explained. "Every time you text it adds $10 to the account." At that point her listener interrupted with a gentle question. "You do realize," he intimated, "that the donation money is coming from your account, and it will show up on your next phone bill?"
Alas, it had not occurred to her that the money she was so happily giving away was her own. Her notion of charity was limited to the labour of sending out text messages, an activity in which, no doubt, she'd had plenty of practice.
This story is funny, but it's also rather telling. Many of us have become so tangentially aware of so many things that our grip on the reality of any given situation is apt to be meager. On the one hand, it's never been easier for us to respond to need and register our concern. On the other, the efficiencies of the charitable industry risk trivializing the very distress they seek to alleviate. Activism is being reduced to "slacktivism."
It's a paradox: Technology does so much to strengthen human connectivity; technology displaces the humanity from the connections it pulls together.
Humanitarians and social advocates have been early adapters to technological advances, mining the power of the Internet and social networking software to increase awareness and generate support for their various causes. It is efficient. It's easy to create portals of information and provide response opportunities that can be shared effortlessly with multiple networks. A simple text can produce a donation; a click of the mouse adds a signature to a petition or sends a letter to a politician.
Diminished value
The downside, of course, is that ease diminishes value. A bubble-headed mouse-click does not carry the same weight as an informed letter; a Facebook status update aligning one's identity with a cause is not the same as sponsoring a child. A one-time easy-trigger response can salve a conscience for a lifetime. Like a lapel sticker from a Salvation Army kettle drive collector, we wear the acknowledgment of a two-bit donation like a badge of immunity from further requests.
Our collective attention deficit traits are driving those on the frontlines of meeting human need to increasingly frantic measures to find support for their efforts. Awareness matters, but alone does nothing. Conscience is good only when it's heeded.
Human need is not about to simply disappear. Thankfully, human kindheartedness and the desire to help are also here to stay. Until the day when God's will is done on Earth as it is heaven, this is our reality. This is the human condition and the human situation. Always there are those whose demonstrations of concern for others are largely superficial. For them, any hint of awareness, twinge of conscience and bauble of benevolence is at least a glance in the right direction. At the very least, it's better than full-blown ignorance, self-centredness and apathy.
Yet always—and this is the real mystery—there are those who leap into action with genuine compassion, sacrificial generosity and long-term interest in the well-being of people other than themselves. They contemplate; they care; they give; they act. If the social networking snare lures in a few of these, the charity is certainly well served.
Many are called, but few are chosen.
Dear Readers:
ChristianWeek relies on your generous support. please take a minute and donate to help give voice to stories that inform, encourage and inspire.
Donations of $20 or more will receive a charitable receipt.Thank you, from Christianweek.
