Dave Meslin: The antidote to apathy

Translator: Elina Kivinukk Reviewer: Triin Sinissaar

How often do we hear that people just don't care?

Kui sageli me kuuleme,

et inimesed ei hooli?

Kui sageli olete kuulnud,

How many times have you been told

that real, substantial change isn't possible

et olulised muutused pole võimalikud,

sest inimesed on liiga enesekesksed,

because most people are too selfish,

liiga rumalad või liiga laisad,

too stupid or too lazy

et muuta oma kogukonda?

to try to make a difference in their community?

I propose to you today that apathy as we think we know it

Ma väidan, et seda, mida me ükskõiksuseks peame,

doesn't actually exist;

ei ole tegelikult olemas

but rather, that people do care,

ja et inimesed tõesti hoolivad,

but that we live in a world that actively discourages engagement

aga me elame maailmas,

mis tõrjub osalust

by constantly putting obstacles and barriers in our way.

seades meie teele mitmeid takistusi.

I'll give you some examples of what I mean.

Toon selle kohta mõned näited.

Alustame omavalitsusest.

Let's start with city hall.

Olete seda näinud?

You ever see one of these before?

See on ajalehekuulutus.

This is a newspaper ad.

It's a notice of a zoning application change for a new office building

Teatis uue büroohoone detailplaneeringu muutmise taotluse kohta,

et inimesed teaksid, mis nende naabruses toimub.

so the neighborhood knows what's happening.

Nagu näete, on seda võimatu lugeda.

As you can see, it's impossible to read.

Te peate pool kuulutust läbi lugema,

You need to get halfway down

to even find out which address they're talking about,

et saada teada, mis aadressist jutt käib,

ja veelgi kaugemal on imeväikeses kirjas öeldud,

and then further down, in tiny 10-point font,

kuidas arvamust avaldada.

to find out how to actually get involved.

Imagine if the private sector advertised in the same way --

Kujutage ette, kui ärisektor reklaamiks end samamoodi -

if Nike wanted to sell a pair of shoes --

kui Nike sooviks müüa paari jalanõusid

(Laughter)

And put an ad in the paper like that.

ja paneks ajalehte sellise kuulutuse ...

(Applause)

(Aplaus)

Now, that would never happen.

Seda ei juhtuks ju kunagi.

Te ei näe kunagi sellist reklaami,

You'll never see an ad like that,

sest Nike soovib, et te neid jalanõusid tõepoolest ostaksite.

because Nike actually wants you to buy their shoes,

whereas the city of Toronto clearly doesn't want you involved

Aga Toronto linn ilmselgelt

ei soovi, et te planeerimises osaleksite,

with the planning process,

otherwise their ads would look something like this,

vastasel juhul näeksid nende kuulutused välja sellised -

kus kogu informatsioon on selgelt välja toodud.

with all the information laid out clearly.

Niikaua, kuni omavalitsus avaldab selliseid kuulutusi,

As long as the city's putting out notices like this

et püüda inimesi kaasata,

to try to get people engaged,

ei tule sellest loomulikult midagi välja.

then of course people aren't going to be engaged.

Aga see pole ükskõiksus,

But that's not apathy; that's intentional exclusion.

vaid teadlik välistamine.

Public space.

Avalik ruum.

(Applause)

(Aplaus)

The manner in which we mistreat our public spaces

See, kuidas me avalikku ruumi kuritarvitame,

on tohutu takistus

is a huge obstacle towards any type of progressive political change,

mistahes progressiivse poliitilise muutuse teel.

because we've essentially put a price tag on freedom of expression.

Sisuliselt oleme pannud sõnavabadusele hinnasildi.

Whoever has the most money gets the loudest voice,

See, kellel on rohkem raha, saab kõvemat häält teha,

dominating the visual and mental environment.

domineerides nii visuaalses kui ka vaimses keskkonnas.

The problem with this model is there are some amazing messages

Antud mudeli puhul on probleemiks see,

et on äärmiselt vajalikke sõnumeid

that need to be said, that aren't profitable to say.

mida ei ole tulus välja öelda.

So you're never going to see them on a billboard.

Seetõttu ei näe me neid kunagi reklaamtahvlitel.

Meedia mängib olulist rolli selles,

The media plays an important role

in developing our relationship with political change,

kuidas areneb meie suhe poliitilistesse muutustesse,

mainly by ignoring politics and focusing on celebrities and scandals,

peamiselt eirates poliitikat

ning keskendudes kuulsustele ja skandaalidele.

Ja isegi kui räägitakse poliitiliselt olulistest teemadest,

but even when they do talk about important political issues,

they do it in a way that I feel discourages engagement.

tehakse seda ikkagi osalust pärssival viisil.

I'll give you an example.

See on ajakirja Now eelmise nädala number -

The "Now" magazine from last week: progressive, downtown weekly in Toronto.

progressiivne nädalaleht Torontost.

Siin on kaanelugu.

This is the cover story.

It's an article about a theater performance,

See on artikkel ühest teatrietendusest.

and it starts with basic information about where it is,

See algab infoga, kus etendus toimub,

in case you actually want to go and see it after you've read the article --

juhul kui te soovite seda pärast artikli lugemist näha -

where, the time, the website.

koht, aeg, kodulehekülg.

Same with this -- it's a movie review.

Sarnased näited - filmitutvustus,

An art review.

kunstikriitika,

A book review -- where the reading is in case you want to go.

raamatuarvustus - kus toimub avalik lugemine, kui soovite osaleda.

A restaurant -- you might not want to just read about it,

Restoran - ehk soovite lisaks lugemisele

ka restorani külastada.

maybe you want to go there.

So they tell you where it is, the prices, the address, the phone number, etc.

Niisiis tuuakse ära asukoht, hinnad,

aadress, telefoninumber jne.

Then you get to their political articles.

Nüüd vaadakem poliitilisi artikleid.

Here's a great article about an important election race that's happening.

See on põhjalik lugu olulisest valimisvõitlusest.

Räägitakse kandidaatidest - see on hästi kirjutatud -

It talks about the candidates, written very well,

aga pole toodud mingit lisainformatsiooni,

but no information, no follow-up, no websites for the campaigns,

kampaaniate kodulehti,

no information about when the debates are, where the campaign offices are.

debattide toimumiskohti, parteikontorite aadresse.

Siin on teine hea artikkel

Here's another good article,

about a new campaign opposing privatization of transit,

uuest transiidi erastamise vastasest kampaaniast

without any contact information for the campaign.

ilma ühegi vihjeta kampaania kontaktinfole.

The message seems to be

Järeldus näib olevat see,

that the readers are most likely to want to eat, maybe read a book,

nagu lugejad meelsamini sööksid,

loeksid raamatut või vaataksid filmi, aga mitte ei räägiks oma kogukonnas kaasa.

maybe see a movie, but not be engaged in their community.

Te võite mõelda, et see on väike asi,

You might think this is a small thing, but I think it's important,

kuid minu meelest määrab see suhtumise

because it sets a tone

and it reinforces the dangerous idea that politics is a spectator sport.

ja toetab ohtlikku ideed,

justkui poliitika oleks tugitoolisport.

Heroes: How do we view leadership?

Kangelased. Milline on meie nägemus juhiks olemisest?

Look at these 10 movies. What do they have in common?

Võtame need kümme filmi. Mis neil ühist on?

Anyone?

Kes oskab öelda?

Neis kõigis on kangelaseks väljavalitu.

They all have heroes who were chosen.

Keegi on neile öelnud: "Sind on välja valitud.

Someone came up to them and said, "You're the chosen one.

See on ettekuulutus. Sa pead maailma päästma."

There's a prophecy. You have to save the world."

Ja siis ta läheb ja päästab maailma, sest talle on nii öeldud,

And then they go off and save the world because they've been told to,

koos mõne vähem tähtsa abilisega.

with a few people tagging along.

Minu meelest see seletab,

This helps me understand

why a lot of people have trouble seeing themselves as leaders --

miks paljudel on raske näha end juhtidena.

because it sends all the wrong messages about what leadership is about.

See saadab vale signaali liidriks olemise kohta.

Kangelastegu on kollektiivne pingutus,

A heroic effort is a collective effort,

seda esiteks.

number one.

Teiseks on see ebatäiuslik, see pole glamuurne

Number two, it's imperfect; it's not very glamorous,

ja see ei alga järsku ega lõpe sama kiiresti.

and doesn't suddenly start and suddenly end.

See on elukestev protsess.

It's an ongoing process your whole life.

Aga kõige olulisem on, et see on vabatahtlik.

But most importantly, it's voluntary.

See on vabatahtlik.

It's voluntary.

Niikaua kuni me õpetame oma lastele,

As long as we're teaching our kids

that heroism starts when someone scratches a mark on your forehead,

et kangelaslikkus on see, kui keegi kratsib su laubale märgi,

or someone tells you you're part of a prophecy,

või kui keegi ütleb, et sa oled osa ettekuulutusest,

ei pööra me tähelepanu asjaolule,

they're missing the most important characteristic of leadership,

et juhiks olemine saab alguse meie seest.

which is that it comes from within.

It's about following your own dreams, uninvited,

See on sinu enda unistuste järgimine -

ilma, et keegi oleks kutsunud sind seda tegema -

and then working with others to make those dreams come true.

ja seejärel nende elluviimine koostöös teiste inimestega.

Political parties: oh, boy.

Poliitilised parted - oh jah.

Need võiksid olla ja peaksid olema

Political parties could and should be one of the basic entry points

peamised hüppelauad,

for people to get engaged in politics.

et kaasata inimesi poliitikasse.

Instead, they've become, sadly,

Selle asemel on neist kahjuks saanud organisatsioonid,

mis pole ei inspireerivad ega loomingulised,

uninspiring and uncreative organizations

that rely so heavily on market research and polling and focus groups

mis tuginevad nii tugevalt turuanalüüsile,

küsitlustele ja fookusgruppidele,

that they end up all saying the same thing,

et nad ütlevad lõpuks kõik ühte ja sedasama,

pretty much regurgitating back to us what we already want to hear

paisates meile tagasi loosungeid, mida me kuulda tahame,

ja tuues ohvriks julged ja loovad ideed.

at the expense of putting forward bold and creative ideas.

And people can smell that, and it feeds cynicism.

Inimesed tajuvad seda ning nende küünilisus kasvab.

(Applause)

(Aplaus)

Charitable status.

Heategevuslikud grupid

Groups who have charitable status in Canada aren't allowed to do advocacy.

ei tohi Kanadas avalikes küsimustes oma meelsust väljendada.

See on suur probleem ja väga suureks takistuseks muutustele,

This is a huge problem and a huge obstacle to change,

because it means that some of the most passionate and informed voices

sest osa kõige kirglikumatest ja teadlikumatest häältest

on sunnitud vaikima, eriti valimiste ajal.

are completely silenced, especially during election time.

Mis toob meid viimase punkti juurde -

Which leads us to the last one, which is: our elections.

meie valimised.

As you may have noticed,

Ehk olete märganud, et valimised on Kanadas täielik naljanumber.

our elections in Canada are a complete joke.

Me kasutame ajast ja arust süsteeme,

We use out-of-date systems

that are unfair and create random results.

mis on ebaausad ja juhuslike tulemustega.

Kanada eesotsas on partei,

Canada's currently led by a party

that most Canadians didn't actually want.

mida enamik kanadalasi pole valinud.

How can we honestly and genuinely encourage more people to vote

Kuidas me saame ausalt ja siiralt julgustada inimesi hääletama,

when votes don't count in Canada?

kui nende hääl Kanadas ei loe?

Kõike seda arvestades pole ime,

You add all this up together, and of course people are apathetic.

et rahvas on ükskõikne.

It's like trying to run into a brick wall.

See on nagu vastu müüri jooksmine.

Now, I'm not trying to be negative by throwing all these obstacles out

Ma ei soovi olla negatiivne,

rääkides vaid takistustest, mis meie teel on.

and explaining what's in our way.

Vastupidi: ma arvan, et inimesed on head ja targad

Quite the opposite --

I actually think people are amazing and smart and that they do care,

ja nad tõesti hoolivad.

Aga me elame keskkonnas, kus kõik need

but that, as I said, we live in this environment

where all these obstacles are being put in our way.

takistused on meie teele pandud.

As long as we believe that people, our own neighbors,

Niikaua, kuni me usume, et inimesed, meie naabrid,

on enesekesksed, rumalad või laisad,

are selfish, stupid or lazy,

then there's no hope.

pole mingit lootust.

Aga me võime seda kõike muuta.

But we can change all those things I mentioned.

Me võime linnavalitsuse avada,

We can open up city hall.

We can reform our electoral systems.

valimissüsteemi muuta.

We can democratize our public spaces.

Võime avalikku ruumi demokratiseerida.

My main message is:

Minu põhisõnum on:

if we can redefine apathy,

kui me suudame mõtestada ükskõiksust

not as some kind of internal syndrome,

mitte kui sisemist nähtust,

but as a complex web of cultural barriers that reinforces disengagement,

vaid kui keerulist kultuuriliste tõkete võrgustikku,

mis pärsib osalust,

and if we can clearly define, clearly identify what those obstacles are,

ja kui me oskame selgelt tuvastada,

mis need takistused on,

ja kui me suudame koos töötada takistuste ületamiseks,

and then if we can work together collectively to dismantle those obstacles,

on kõik võimalik.

then anything is possible.

Suur tänu.

Thank you.

(Applause)

(Aplaus)