Not Choosing is a Choice

Brian Sankarsingh wonders where all the good men have gone to

There is an adage, which was supposedly credited to Edmund Burke, which goes "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." This simple statement encapsulates a deeply complex and timeless truth about the responsibility of individuals in the face of moral challenges. This statement underscores the crucial role of action in preserving justice and preventing the proliferation of wrongdoing and tells us that we all play a part – through both our actions and our inactions - in either allowing or stopping this.  Throughout history, its resonance has been demonstrated in various contexts, from political upheavals to social movements and personal dilemmas.

Although originally attributed to Edmund Burke, the essence of the quote can be traced back to the utilitarian philosopher John Stuart Mill. In 1867 he delivered an inaugural address at the University of St. Andrews. There he stated:

“Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion. Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing. He is not a good man who, without a protest, allows wrong to be committed in his name, and with the means which he helps to supply, because he will not trouble himself to use his mind on the subject.”

Central to the maxim is the concept of "good men," individuals who possess moral integrity and a commitment to righteousness. While goodness encompasses noble intentions and virtuous values, its realization hinges on active intervention when confronted with evil. Merely harboring goodwill or holding virtuous beliefs proves insufficient if not translated into decisive deeds. Inaction, whether born of apathy, fear, or uncertainty, constitutes a form of complicity that empowers malevolence to flourish. Therefore, the moral imperative lies not only in being virtuous but demands active opposition of wrongdoing through words, and deeds of courage and conscience.

Numerous historical episodes attest to the veracity of this maxim. We need not look further that the Holocaust to find a harrowing reminder of the catastrophic consequences of bystander apathy. Despite the existence of righteous individuals who risked their lives to shelter and protect persecuted Jews, the prevailing inertia of the international community allowed genocide to unfold with devastating efficiency. Similarly, during the civil rights movement in the United States, the collective action of activists and allies was instrumental in challenging systemic racism and advancing equality. Their refusal to acquiesce to injustice catalyzed transformative social change and upheld the principles of justice and dignity.

While the maxim emphasizes the agency of "good men," its message extends to all individuals irrespective of gender. Each person bears a moral responsibility to confront evil and uphold ethical principles in their spheres of influence. Whether through acts of solidarity, advocacy, or defiance against oppression, individual actions contribute to the cumulative effort of combating injustice. Moreover, the collective impact of concerted action transcends the sum of its parts, generating momentum for societal transformation and fostering a culture of accountability and empathy.

On Saturday February 10^th, 2024, at a rally at Coastal Carolina University, Donald Trump said that he had suggested to a European leader that he would encourage Russia to do whatever the hell they want to NATO member countries he thought were not “spending enough on their own defense.” A White House spokesman said Donald Trump was "encouraging invasions of our closest allies by murderous regimes" and labelled the comments "appalling and unhinged". But there’s more here and it is indicated by the reaction, or lack thereof, of the people and party that supports Donald Trump. After all, what’s being described here is a strongman scenario where to be protected from the villain by the strongman, the victim must pay the protection money. However, what’s not said is that the villain and the strongman are working together. What history has taught us about this type of situation is that inevitably either the strongman or the villain inevitably fully takeover and so the “protection” being sold was for naught.

What’s missing from this entire circumstance is the lack of response. A silence within which it bears repeating John Stuart Mill:

“Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion. Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing. He is not a good man who, without a protest, allows wrong to be committed in his name, and with the means which he helps to supply, because he will not trouble himself to use his mind on the subject.”

This statement remains a poignant reminder of the moral imperative to confront injustice with courage and conviction. But it also stands as an accusation of those good men whose voices are glaringly silent. The fact is that a man who is trying to be reelected to the most position of President of the USA just signaled to a country that he will support that country’s invasion of its neighbours. This same country has been proven to “attempt to subvert” the electoral system of the USA. As a rational human being, what do you think is happening here?

Unfortunately, the men who have been loudly proclaiming themselves guardians of righteousness, are now silent. It is therefore up to every single person to heed this call to action, recognizing that passivity in the face of evil constitutes acquiescence. We are the people who must now embody the principles of decency, compassion, justice and dignity. Our world now stands at a crossroads and we must choose to do what is right and good, and remember, not choosing is also a choice.

---

Bio: BRIAN SANKARSINGH is a Trinidadian-born Canadian immigrant who has published several books of poetry on a wide range of social and historical themes including racism, colonialism, and enslavement. Sankarsingh artfully blends prose and poetry into his storytelling creating an eclectic mix with both genres. This unique approach is sure to provide something for everyone.