The Process of Change: Can We Make a Change, Essay Example

When talking about the process of change, it is vital to mention that change is inevitable and has to take place in order to provide new opportunities and open new horizons. Nowadays, thinking of the possible changes to be made, I support the idea that one of the most urgent and necessary changes are needed at the macro-level, meaning on the national and global scales. One may argue that an individual has nothing to do with the macro-level changes, but just by understanding and making an effort to bring awareness to the public, I think it is possible to contribute and make a difference.

In my opinion, the importance of global changes is established for a couple of reasons. First of all, as long as the huge financial, economic and social gap continues to widen between developed and third-world countries, poverty, overpopulation and resource-scarcity will hold their positions as threatening worldwide issues. Nowadays, only a combined and mutually beneficial effort of countries’ and world leaders can act as an engine for finding possible solutions and helping those in need. Secondly, the threat of environmental collapse and developing terrorism movement leave no choice for the nations but to cooperate and together provide opportunities and take actions on the way of establishing and maintaining peaceful, environmentally friendly and conflict-free surrounding for the citizens of the planet. And finally, to my mind, the increased number of military conflicts, invasions and wars in the recent years leave no choice but to make a difference. It is unacceptable and unethical to allow so huge numbers of lives to be wiped out and so many inhabitances and homes to be destroyed. The global leaders today have forgotten their primary functions. It is in their power to influence, to negotiate and to improve. People have chosen them as valid representatives and there are truly not that many to be named that are putting their best effort in working towards peace, equality and prosperity of the whole world community and not just a specific part of it.

As far as I can judge, the most problematic aspect of making a macro-level change, apart from the understandably large size of the involved area, is the already established social and international positions. In a rush for taking the position of the world superpowers, developed countries are using all imaginable and possible ways of influencing other countries and building coalitions or so-called unions. Those countries, being in charge of the majority of the world financial and natural resources, use manipulation and appealing proposals to countries in need, which basically results in “buying” support on the global arena. So, when disagreements or conflicts arise, alias support each other, standing on the view point of the “friend” country and rejecting all ways of negotiation or compromise. In the majority of cases, in the situations where a combined global decision is able to save thousands of human lives, opponent countries, finding their ideas as the only appropriate ones, lack the shared ability to give up imaginary, as I would call it, boundaries and stereotypes and cooperate on the behalf of the humanity.

The need for macro-level change is desperate but will be impossible unless the financial and business interests are made the secondary priority. Money was the main identifier in the global market until the current financial crisis hasn’t stepped in. One can hardly find a country that is not experiencing the consequences or echoes of the crisis and it is the need for the combined effort that can make the difference. As soon as the leaders world wide will be willing to negotiate and put aside whatever judgments they hold for each other, it will be possible to find solutions or at least identify ways of solving on-going problems, the further development of which might sometime in the future result in the destruction of the place for global and national negotiation – the destruction of the Earth.