Aren't Volunteerism and Activism the Same Thing?

           In the articles, “Volunteers Can’t Solve Our Problems” and “ Soul of a Citizen,” it is interesting and challenging to see the differences between volunteerism and activism.  As I read them both, I tried to spot the “pros” and “cons” of each. I have never thought of volunteerism and activism as being separate entities. I have always believed they work hand in hand, and I still do. From the Volunteer article, I quoted him when he said, “Social change and more personal acts of compassion can feed each other,” because I agree that they do indeed walk hand in hand. (page 1, Volunteerism article) When we speak of choosing wether or not volunteer work can solve the world’s problems, I agree with the author when he says, “Of course we must address the immediate crisis, and try to rescue the children. But we also need to find out WHY they’re falling into the river--because no matter how hard we try, we lack the resources, strength, and stamina to save them all. So we must go upstream to fix the broken bridge, stop the people who are pushing the children in, or do whatever else will address the problem at its source.” (page 2, Volunteer article) I agree completely with that statement. I think it is hard to know how to go about fixing our world’s problems. Do we start by solving what is happening in the moment, or do we let those issues “hang tight” until we find the overall solutions?

         Even though throughout my life I have always been interested in going out into the world and being apart of the volunteerism movements, I still contemplate the idea that perhaps while volunteerism can solve the “surface” issues, it may not go any farther or deeper than that. A question that Loeb proposed in his volunteerism article was, “How do we proceed if we’re inclined to act on a more personal level but also want our individual actions to have an impact on a larger scale?” (page 2, Volunteerism article)

        I agree that we don’t have to be saints and have super knowledge in an issue and be “perfect” in how we express our views to the world in order to make a difference. I think it’s not so much that those activists thought of themselves as saints, but instead that we the people saw them as saints or “heroes.” This view of activists as heroes gives the idea that if you aren’t already perfect in all ways, and if you don’t have much knowledge and have powerful things to say from the very beginning, you can’t and won’t choose to make a difference. I can understand that feeling personally. In Loeb’s “Soul of a Citizen” article, he states, “We often think of social involvement as noble but impractical.” (page 2) I still to this day, am not sure if helping to build affordable houses for families was sustainable, but our contribution would only be apart of “the tip of the iceberg”, so only what we can see as the surface crisis. I don’t know how long those families will be living in those houses, but I know at least for now they will have shelter. I think the majority of us can understand the feeling of not being able to solve every problem, therefore we start wondering if we should bother to be socially active at all? 

         Everyone has a feeling of how deeply they would like to get involved in our society’s economic problems, but the way I see it is that each can be powerful, whether its simply a bandaid and will only last for a moment, at least it was an outcome of active hope. No matter whether its on a big world scale, the hearts of people have been opened and have showed their compassion and concern. For me, I feel that compassion is the start, and that is sometimes all that people feel they can give. Sometimes all we can do is live in the moment, and if in that moment, someone needs shelter for themselves and their children, then I shall be there to help. I’m no hero, and neither are any of our past proclaimed “heroes.” They found their calling and gave their best for the world.