The Bubble Conundrum

I often contemplate the various plights of the world and burden myself with the ever-present load of attempting to rectify what I find wrong. Being a middle-class nobody, this quite often entails discussion and attempts at convincing others of what I see in hopes to spread ideas. In other words, I am a Facebook troll (at least by some definitions). I am kind and courteous, but others do not perceive me that way when I bring up topics that quickly enrage them. This, of course, spews hatred in my direction which often begs the question if I'm doing any good at all or even, perhaps, making things worse.

If my attempts to benefit mankind reap no benefits--and especially if they cause harm--then I would be far better off attempting to do nothing. I come to conclude quite often that I ought to stop which is temporarily relieving, but it rarely lasts as I can't hardly feel like a good person if I am not trying to fix what is wrong with the world. How can I go on my merry way with a cheery smile while so much sucks for so many others? How can that be good? And yet, who am I to think I know what ought to be done? Mind you, I'm thinking from a larger and grander scale. I'm considering the whole of racism and sexism, religion, politics, and more. And from that perspective, perhaps I am even more of a terrible person to assume I could even know enough to attempt to rectify such things.

And so, I am often caught perceiving myself as terrible for trying and terrible for not. Given this self-imposed dichotomy, perhaps what makes the most sense is to focus more on my smaller sphere of influence. I should look at my family, neighbors, and coworkers and try to help them. Not help them understand my grander schemes of the universe, but via the minimum good that I can do while forgetting about the larger scale. I, myself, can ensure that I am not being unfair in my dealings with others and I can stand up when I see unfairness occur around me. While sounding good on paper, my bubble rarely has such terrible occurrences which is supposedly half the problem with the greater issues. It is our privilege to never see the plights of others. My bubble is typically well enough while so many other bubbles are suffering.

If everyone felt a responsibility to their smaller bubbles, then clearly we'd have no problems whatsoever. The pitfall with that philosophy, of course, is that not everyone does nor will feel such responsibility. So in bubbles where this feeling of responsibility is not occurring, who will save them? And yet, if not within the bubble, who are we to even know any saving needs to occur? And even if such saving is needed, if it is not our bubble, can it really be said to be our problem? Given the relativity of everything, there is an obvious flaw in trying to help another bubble from the perspective of our own. Should an advanced civilization truly attempt to improve upon the bubble of a more primitive one? I think history and Star Trek have proven time and again that non-interference is typically a better strategy. 

So where should we draw the lines of non-interference? And what point is it better to say that a bubble is better off learning and growing on its own? This is especially challenging in such a global economy. Is the world one bubble? Is a continent a bubble? A country? State? County or city? Can they be ideological with bubbles of Christian, Muslim, Atheist or otherwise? Political? I think our bubbles are much like Venn diagrams but with too many dimensions to truly comprehend. So again, where does the rule of non-interference take place? We seem perfectly fine in the United States allowing third-world countries and tribal groups to manage their own bubbles and grow, so how would this be any different than, say, allowing ghetto areas to deal with their own problems? They may belong to the bubble of the United States, but does that mean they belong to the bubbles of the rest of us? 

Perhaps the Government should care about ghetto bubbles and yet those of us outside should not? And yet, we vote for what our government does and who is in charge so it could hardly be said that they are not a part of our bubble. Our government also deals with other countries, however, and provides aid to other people. So once again, our bubble has now become that of the world. There must be a better means of narrowing down our own responsibilities. The universe likely has a plethora of sentient species and creatures that can feel pain, but we'd be fools to assume it is our responsibility to minimize the pain and suffering of them all. So where does it end? At what point is it okay to callously shrug our shoulders at the plight of others and pawn it off as someone else's bubble? 

In the end, it truly is all relative. My pain is not the same as another's. My first world problems not those of primitive tribes. Does that mean my pain is meaningless? Of course not. Within my sphere, pain is still pain. Compared with another bubble, the mere bubble itself would be pain to me and yet contains both pain and joy for those within. Not having a toilet is pain for me and yet having a fresh hole for a toilet could be joy to another. The relativity of suffering makes it so much harder to know what is truly worth intervening on behalf of.

And so, I just don't know what is worth fighting for. Without knowing, I can never comprehend how I might be good if I simply enjoy my own life. Thus, my life is filled with misery. Perhaps this is itself worse than the bubbles of those whom I'd otherwise wish to help, but such a thought would likely make me a terrible person.