zlacker

All of those people you mention had something where they could physically and practically do something about the problem. My comment addresses the vast majority of instances a human learns about a problem where that isn't the case.

Your sphere of concern and your sphere of influence are two different things at the end of the day. If you've decided some social problem is within your sphere of influence, then by all means, take whatever helpful action you can - just do not pretend that this encompasses all problems, or for that matter that the number of problems is not infinite.

Down that path lay depression and burnout.

>>Karuna+(OP)
You get to pick which problems you want to work on, just don't pretend you can't work on them.

>>tehjok+i9
Don't pretend you can. What would you suggest I do about North Korea's or China's human rights abuses, for instance? These are the kinds of problems I'm talking about.

>>Karuna+p9
That's going pretty far afield. I would recommend following the rubric I learned from Scahill and Greenwald which is pay attention to things happening domestically because you can do something about them.

I don't pretend there aren't infinite problems, or ones difficult to access, but I strongly caution against treating political problems as something that are immovable.

>>tehjok+i9
That is very consistent with the stance Karunamon has.

>>Karuna+p9
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boycotts_of_Chinese_products