The Collegiate Laws of Life Essay Contest asked Penn State Students to explore ethical values and intercultural issues, and their talent for expressing their views in writing. Below, you will find the honorable mention essay from Economics major Dhiren Kapoor, ’16, Paterno Fellow and Schreyer Scholar, Economics, and Supply Chain and Information Systems, responding to the prompt:
“All mankind is divided into three classes: those that are immovable, those that are movable, and those that move.” ~ Benjamin Franklin
What are the differences among these three, and how can they best collaborate?
The distinguished leader of the Indian independence movement, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, once said “Honest disagreement is often a good sign of progress.” Gandhi acknowledged that in our vast world, each person brings forth his or her own perspective and such variation is sometimes difficult to reconcile. It is by understanding and learning how to influence these varying peoples and perspectives that we can aim for progress. Another great thinker, Benjamin Franklin, once classified the people of the world into broad categories by remarking, “All of mankind is divided into three classes: those that are immovable; those that are movable; and those that move.” By reconciling the differences of the “immovable” and the “movable” people, great leaders—“those who move”—can create a collaborative and progressive world.
It is vital for us to understand the differences among the three types of people before we can hope to create a collaborative world. The “immovable” people are those who hold a conservative view of the world. They are often deeply set in their traditions or their way of thinking. For many such people, it is easier to operate within their “comfort zone.” As such, these people are highly averse to change. Many of these people are truly happy with their current lifestyle, while others may fear that change will only make things worse. Consider a family that lives happily on a farm in modern America, mostly secluded from influences of the outside world. It is easy to see how such a unit may not want outside change to influence its lifestyle—whether that be new regulations on farming, mandatory education for its children, or changes in tax policies. The “immovable” people hold a staunch perspective of the world—one which is unlikely to change.
Contrarily, the “movable” people of the world are welcoming of change. These people are willing to alter their perspectives based on the arguments provided to them. There is a large variety among the “movable” people of the world, each of whom may require a different amount of persuasion to change their way of thinking. “Movable” people are not set in their ways and keep an open mind to change. In modern America, younger people tend to be more politically movable, as they are in the process of developing their own world views. Consider the 2008 campaign of Barack Obama. Candidate Obama was able to mobilize a large portion of the younger demographic, and “movable” people in general, in his campaign focused on “hope and change” for the nation. However, it is not always the younger people who are “movable.” Often, disgruntled people may be more embracing of change and this is not always for the positive. Consider the rise of the Nazi Party—particularly Adolf Hitler—in Germany. The Nazi Party’s propaganda focused on radical rhetoric to attract support from what it considered the “movable” people—notably the struggling lower and middle classes in the midst of the economic impact of the Great Depression. In either instance, “movable” people are those who approve of change and whose perspectives can be altered.
“Those who move” know how to influence the “movable” people of the world and change their way of thinking. These people understand the desires and struggles of the “movable” people and bring forth ideas that can gain support from others. As such, “those who move” are often charismatic figures, capable of rallying support from others. The world has seen a variety of such leaders. These people have the capability of bringing forth both positive and negative change to the world. Barack Obama, Adolf Hitler, and Mahatma Gandhi are all examples of “those who move.”
The responsibility of creating a collaborative and progressive world ultimately lies in the hands of “those who move.” For it is these people that must take a pragmatic view of the world to understand what type of change is necessary. Morality is just one of the factors to consider when deciding upon the required change—though it is perhaps the most important one. Another factor to consider is the desire of the “immovable” people of the world. It is vital to remember that these people are naturally averse to change, so any reform championed by “those who move” must justify the need. Similarly, the desires of the “movable” people must be assessed. What kind of change do these people seek or could be persuaded to support? A great leader “who moves” will consider the morality of his or her policies, the desires of those hesitant to change, and the desires of those seeking change when trying to determine what kind of change needs to take to place in society.