
Isn't it true that not everybody can be a leader - that not everybody can be a hero?
But is it also true that not everybody can make a difference?
After sending an e-mail to a teacher i know at the African Leadership Academy, i recognized a sort of smugness at how we perceive our roles in the world. "We're trying to make a difference," we think to ourselves, "while trying to balance our personal lives too!"
He follows his dream and teaches math to the future leaders of Africa. I follow my dream and investigate what it means to learn. But what about the people we're trying to affect - the people we don't talk to, or even think about - these people we nonetheless try to help, these people who try to live the the best they can within the constraints of their reality (like an office worker who enjoys his social life). Are these people somehow less? After all, these people certainly aren't leaders.
But I think they're heroes. It takes a lot of gusto just to be yourself amidst the call to justice, the call to peace, and the call to innovation. These people who live just for themselves - they must sometimes doubt the legitimacy of their life when compared to all these great leaders - but they continue.
Everybody has a role they play. Each person has a force with a certain direction and size (and can be represented as a "person-arrow". Society is like a gigantic lump of these arrows, with the direction of society determined by adding or subtracting the direction of these person-arrows. So while a given arrow might be bigger, and its role might be more important, does that make the smaller arrows any less dignified?
No. It doesn't. I'd say the presence of big arrows makes the small arrows
more dignified. It's hard to live with dignity when surrounding greatness threatens to choke and suffocate any claim to your own significance.