On John Green's Latest Video

In his latest video John Green talks about the just-world fallacy and that apparently whoever has an advantage isn't only prone to fall victim to it, but will also behave in pretty much the same way. Which makes him question the concept of power and whether or not someone in power is actually wielding it or wielded by it. Now there is undeniably some truth in there, but the problem with this short and oversimplified way of presenting it, is that it leads to possible misconceptions. For one thing, the reception of study results and the validity of statistics is a can of worms that I'm not even gonna open up here.

The thing I'd like to suggest is rather that the concept of anyone wielding power is actually more of an illusion, because nobody can ever achieve or even hold any level of power all on his own. It always takes the support of a whole bunch of other people and organizations, who in turn need people and organizations to provide their power. The thing is, these structures are not as linear as you might think, but complex and interconnected. They are a whole network of relationships. Power, then, is not anything that can be wielded by any one person or organization. I'd say it's rather a complex global system of interests that does provide different limits and obligations for everyone involved. Power therefore is almost as unpredictable a machinery as the weather. One thing is for certain, however, that change from top down is something that just doesn't really happen. Even if it might appear like it's coming from the top down, it has always been spurred by mechanisms that go much deeper and involve a number of elements to support it.

Now this might be disheartening for some people and make them believe that it doesn't really matter who is on top, but that is actually not the case. While any specific person might not be all that significant, the network of connections and interests behind them actually do matter a great deal. That is why, when voting in an election, knowing the supporters of any given party or candidate will probably be a much better indication of their agenda, than their promises or personal conduct.

As to how one might enact change in this system, I'd say you'd have to create a sufficient level of interest. That naturally has a lot to do with money. But that doesn't mean you necessarily have to be rich in order to change the world. Rather, I'd say, that if you manage to spread an idea far enough, it will gain monetary interest all on it's own. And spreading ideas today is much easier than it has ever been. The Internet provides so many tools for you to make yourself heard and to inform people in so many different ways. Whether you're better at expressing yourself verbally, artistically or in writing, you can easily and with minimal expenses make a difference and/or help others to do so. This is what makes me rather hopeful for the future. I'd like to believe that focusing on all the little things you can do, will in the end make much more of a difference, than rallying against the things that you really can't change.