Analogies: Who's Responsible?

Let's say you belong to a kayak club. The club is for all types of kayaking: sea kayaking, whitewater kayaking, kayak fishing, even a few surfskiers. You're a sea kayaker. The club was founded by sea kayakers and they still represent the majority of the club. One of your buddies is a whitewater kayaker and he mentions one day that the club isn't very fair to his kind. Huh?

He points out that the officers in the club are almost all sea kayakers. That the club has arranged for discounts with sea kayak manufacturers, but nothing for whitewater kayakers. The club's big summer party is always scheduled on the same day as a popular whitewater release so they have to choose which one to attend. The club offers discounts on sea kayaking courses and actively recruits new members at sea kayak events - even offering a discount for people who own their own sea kayaks (but not for whitewater boats).

You never really thought of it, but he has a point. Your defense is that all those decisions are voted on by the club, so it's only fair to represent the majority. He points out that the club charter states it's a club for everyone and explicitly states that every type of kayaking deserves the same club benefits. You don't really have an answer for that.

You say that he should bring this up at the meetings. Maybe he should run for the board and try to make some changes. He says he and his whitewater friends have been asking for changes for years. They do run for the board but the sea kayakers always elect sea kayakers. Whenever whitewater folks bring up these issues they get ignored. Most sea kayakers, like yourself, never even think about such things. They have tried to make a change but they don't have the power.

But you do. You are part of the majority. If you think the situation is unfair, your voice carries more weight than theirs. Your friends (the other sea kayakers) are the ones who serve on the board and make the decisions. The only way the situation will change is if enough of the sea kayakers recognize the unfairness and are willing to sacrifice to make it better - sacrifice meaning giving up their unfair privilege. They will have less control of the board, maybe get less financial support from the club for their own events. They might end up with more whitewater kayakers (and others) in the club. They might even lose their majority. But you know what's right and you want to be fair. The question is: what are you willing to do about it?

If a situation is unfair, who has the responsibility to change it? The people who are disadvantaged and lack power? Or those who have the power through unfair means? While we easily accept it's human nature to take advantage of a situation when it favors us, we all really know, deep down, what's right and what's wrong, and who is responsible for fixing it. We're all just one big kayak club.