Fast is for the few.

Exasperated by the slowness with which the government cabinet perfected its proposals, Winston Churchill—the British Prime Minister during World War II—used to say: “Perfectionism may be spelled “paralysis”.”

Politics, in its purest form, has always been slow. Because slowness is something you necessarily fall into when you want the majority of people to benefit from a given project.

Today, we are on the opposite side. Today, the future is mainly in private hands, with ever-changing visions imposed on one another.

At breakneck speed.

One day, the proposal is that we all quit working, the next day, the prediction is that we’re all going to lose our jobs; one day, we must all move to the Metaverse, the next, to Mars…

These horizons are presented to us without any “manual of instructions.” Once an idea of the future has been imposed, you must figure out how to get there and, in the case that you manage to really get involved in a topic, you run the risk of some millionaire showing up with a vision that contradicts it… and you have to start all over again.

In fields such as AI, energy transition, and finance, to name a few examples, changes are happening so incredibly fast that many people are left behind, either because they give up trying to understand them or because they literally cannot keep up with the imposed pace.

Is this the future we want? A future where only a few “fit”?

No, we don’t want that. And this holds true for AI, energy, finance… and for activism.

We know we urgently need everyone to participate in improving the world, yes. But in this case, it’s also often complicated.

Unlike other sectors, what changes is not activism itself, but the needs derived from the problems. It seems that by the time we’ve informed ourselves, made a decision, and secured the resources to start acting, another problem has already taken the place of the first, and, exhausted, we feel like we’ve been left out.

Wouldn’t it be ideal to identify a form of activism that is always the same, allowing us to participate in many of the world’s issues from the “same place”?

 

Isn’t it necessary to have a form of activism that doesn’t take political affiliation, cultural, or economic level into account, so that we can be as many as possible, united by the issues that matter most?

Wouldn’t it be great to be able to carry on with a daily activism that remains simple and exciting, with dynamics and at a speed that doesn’t leave anyone out?

It would be a bit slow to launch a project like this.

But it would be for everyone.

And yes, it would be great.