When considering a solution to the age old problems of crime and imprisonment the scientist part of me wanted to identify the root (or roots) of the problem, that is, reduce the problem to its basic principles, so we might build a solution. In considering this I (obviously) tended to look towards inequality, addiction, poverty, etc.
So my thoughts went thus:
We know that inequality is one of the root causes of crime. What is the root of inequality? Why do some people want enough for a hundred lifetimes while others don’t have enough for one day?
I had no ready answer to this.
So I found myself asking, are inequality, addiction, poverty etc. merely proximate roots, (that is, roots near to the problem) and should I look for deeper roots? Should I be looking to more fundamental matters concerned with our very existence, insecurity, power and control, the nature of humanity, philosophical or ontological, anthropological, hereditary roots rather than the more obvious proximate ones?
Anyway after all my deliberations on roots I decided that I was only interested in them insofar as they were useful in forming a solution.
But then, gradually, over many years, I noticed something!
I noticed that it is a lot easier to support people who feel powerless on their journey of empowerment – thereby making their and their children’s lives better – than it is to encourage an unwilling system to change.
In particular, if I am going to consider energy usage, the energy used in transforming a child’s life for the better is far, far less than transforming policies, procedures, practices etc. within the Pillars so that they’d be more respectful of, empathic with and ultimately helpful to the families in the Focus Group.
So I became a lot more interested what I might call the roots of change or even, the roots of solutions than the roots of crime or even the roots of inequality.
I decided that I’d leave that to the media, academics and people who are good at campaigning. (And, in a democracy, campaigning on these matters is very important).
Also, I felt that identifying the roots of crime involved a lot of reductionist type thinking whereas investigating the roots of change seemed to be more exciting, more life affirming, and also had more of a systemic and holistic flavour.