history – The Life and Times of Ben Weinberg

A Society Without a Center – What Happens When Morality Fractures

“Today, that baseline feels increasingly unstable and it’s not because morality has disappeared, but because it has largely fragmented. There is no longer a shared moral consensus or compass that is keeping the glue that holds a functioning society together, which is harmful in the short run and devastating the longer it goes on.”

There was a time in my life when I was younger, and while not perfect, but real in my view, when people could disagree with politics yet still recognize a shared baseline of right and wrong. Today, that baseline feels increasingly unstable and it’s not because morality has disappeared, but because it has largely fragmented. There is no longer a shared moral consensus or compass that is keeping the glue that holds a functioning society together, which is harmful in the short run and devastating the longer it goes on.

We no longer argue from the same starting point when it comes to understanding what is moral and what is not. What one group sees as justice, another sees as inequity where this principle is not being equally distributed or followed. What one calls freedom for everyone; another calls it inflicted harm to a particular group who is having their freedoms limited as a result. These aren’t surface-level disagreements; they cut to the core of how people interpret truth, responsibility, and even reality itself.

A shared moral compass cannot survive in a system where consequences are inconsistent or not applied equally to everyone. When ordinary people are expected to follow rules and laws that the powerful and the well-connected routinely evade and mock, morality stops feeling like a standard and starts feeling like a tool, used or applied when convenient, and ignored when costly or detrimental to those people who have a lot to lose.

For example, the average employee notices when corporate leaders avoid consequences for actions that would destroy the career of an average employee. The average voter also notices when political figures excuse corrupt behavior from themselves, their allies, or their donors that they would condemn in their opponents or in their colleagues. They notice when public outrage seems selective, flaring up in some cases while remaining quiet in others showing a peculiar kind of hypocrisy that has only gained steam in recent years in a polarized political and social climate.

Over time, this kind of blatant inconsistency corrodes overall trust and fairness in one another. It sends a quiet but powerful message to everybody in society: morality is not universal and it is conditional and can be applied or not applied as such. As a result, more people begin to believe that the incentive to act morally weakens or erodes completely leaving an absence from that behavior, especially in our institutions. Why follow rules that others can bypass or not be held accountable to? Why uphold standards or norms that are not enforced equally to everyone in the society?

Part of this shift comes from the collapse of shared institutions, religion, local communities, even trusted media, that once anchored moral conversation. In their place, we’ve built personalized ecosystems of belief, reinforced by algorithms and tribal loyalty. The result is a culture where validation matters more than reflection, and outrage travels faster than understanding. However, the deeper issue isn’t disagreement, it’s disconnection. When people stop believing that others are arguing or acting in good faith, the possibility of persuasion disappears. Debate becomes performance, and morality becomes a tool for scoring points rather than seeking truth.

This doesn’t mean that most people suddenly abandon their values or morals entirely. It means those kinds of values become more tribal, more situational, and more defensive as a result. Morality becomes something we apply outward, toward others, rather than inward, toward ourselves. It becomes easier to justify our own actions while scrutinizing everyone else’s.

At the same time, we are facing a different kind of problem: a lack of education around how to think morally in the first place, which should start at a young age but for which schools and universities have long neglected in their curriculum. We’ve replaced moral education with moral reaction. People are often taught what to believe, what to support, and what to condemn but not how to reason through complex ethical situations or think critically about why enforcing standards, morals, and laws equally is so important. They inherit frameworks that have been established through centuries of precedent without examining them or understanding why they exist in the first place. Many people today absorb positions or opinions without questioning the principles or values behind them. In today’s environment that rewards speed and certainty, there is little incentive to slow down and reflect on how or why one should act in any given situation.

This untenable situation creates a kind of moral fragility that becomes more relevant each day. When individuals encounter perspectives that challenge their beliefs, they are more likely to react defensively than to engage thoughtfully on how someone came to develop those perspectives. This is not necessarily because they are unwilling to think critically, but because they were never taught how to navigate moral ambiguity. In a world where many issues are not black and white, that gap becomes a serious problem for the next generation(s) to solve on their own without guidance from previous generations.

Education systems, broadly speaking, prioritize absorbing complex information and developing technical skills. Those matter in developing one’s career and prospects in the 21^st century. However, the current curriculum by and large often leaves out something just as important: the ability to weigh competing values, to recognize bias, and to wrestle honestly with difficult moral and ethical questions. Without that foundation, people default to the loudest voices, the most emotionally charged narratives, or the groups they feel most aligned with to guide their own morality. Perhaps most worrying to me is that we really do not teach ethics, values, having a strong moral compass or how to recognize a lack or absence of that kind of compass in other people in society regardless of who they are or what their status is.

Layer on top of that the digital media environment is designed to amplify and cause division, and the problem continues to compound each day. Social media platforms reward content that provokes strong reactions and outrage. Nuance doesn’t spread as easily as certainty and thoughtful disagreement doesn’t travel as far as selective outrage. Over time, this shapes not only what people see, but how they think. It encourages a style of moral engagement that is quick, reactive, and shallow.

Where does that leave the future of morality? The loss of a shared moral compass does not mean society is doomed to fail or deteriorate. Still, it does mean the work ahead will be harder and be exceedingly difficult if this issue is not treated with the seriousness that it deserves. Rebuilding common ground and shared morality in a fragmented world requires more than louder arguments or sharper critiques. It requires a shift in how we approach and teach morality itself.

First, there must be a renewed emphasis on consistency, especially when it comes to applying morals to those who hold power, influence, or wealth. Rules, ethics, and norms cannot be optional at the top and mandatory for the rest of us. Accountability must apply across the board, or it loses its legitimacy with society. That doesn’t mean perfection in diagnosing who’s being moral and who is not and the consequences that the latter should face. It means a genuine effort to close the gap between what we say we value and how those values are enforced.

Second, we need to take moral education more seriously and to invest much more money, time, and effort in its teaching, especially to young people. This approach should not be done in the sense of telling people what to think, but in teaching them how to think. That includes engaging with different ethical frameworks, debating morality and how it is applied, understanding trade-offs, and developing the ability to question one’s own assumptions. It also means creating third spaces, whether in schools, communities, or in public discourse, where people can wrestle with difficult ideas without immediately being reduced to labels or judged harshly for what they see is moral or not.

Finally, there must be a cultural shift toward fomenting intellectual humility. That doesn’t mean abandoning convictions or pretending that all viewpoints are equally valid. It means recognizing that our understanding is limited, that we are capable of being wrong, and that other people, even those we strongly disagree with, may be operating from a framework that makes sense to them given their education, their background, and their life experiences.

A shared moral compass doesn’t require total agreement all the time on what is ‘morality’. It requires enough overlap to make conversation possible, enough trust to assume good faith, and enough consistency to believe that the standards we claim matter and they apply to everybody once agreed upon and instituted within the rules, laws, and regulations of that society as such.

Right now, that foundation feels shaky and declining across the world. The loss of a shared moral compass doesn’t mean society is doomed to regress further. It does mean though that we face a harder task ahead: rebuilding common ground in a world that increasingly rewards division and rancor. That kind of consensus building starts not with louder arguments, but with a willingness to question our own certainty and to listen, seriously, to those we instinctively dismiss and disagree with.

The question isn’t just whether we can rebuild a shared sense of morality and virtue immediately given the gravity of the current situation; it’s whether we’re willing to do the slower, less rewarding work required to get there in the future and establish it for the long term. Otherwise, we will continue down a path where right and wrong mean something different depending on who you ask and which person it applies to. If everything is debatable, eventually nothing is binding, including morals. A society where nothing is binding is one that cannot hold together.

The Stadium Test – What Japanese Fans Understand That We Don’t

“The difference between these two scenes isn’t about cleanliness, it’s about culture, responsibility, and what we believe we owe to each other.”

The final whistle blows at an international stadium as tens of thousands of fans rise, cheer, and file out either in celebration or in dismay about their national team’s performance at the Olympics or World Cup. However, in one section, something extraordinary happens. A group stays behind and does not leave their trash behind. Instead, they pull out trash bags. They start cleaning and not just their own mess, but everyone else’s too. This isn’t a publicity stunt. It’s not a requirement. It’s just normal for them. Meanwhile, across the world, another kind of crowd leaves behind a different legacy: half-eaten popcorn, plastic cups, and the quiet assumption that someone else will deal with it later. The difference between these two scenes isn’t about cleanliness, it’s about culture, responsibility, and what we believe we owe to each other.

When I think of Japanese culture, what stands out to me is about the internalized responsibility to each other and to the greater society. I’ve seen videos and photos of it at international sporting events, but I’d imagine that responsibility is ingrained from an early age and while I haven’t been to Japan yet, I do believe there is a key distinction that separates their culture of cleanliness from others including my own. Recently at the 2026 Oscars, a photo went viral after Hollywood’s biggest night when popcorn boxes, candy wrappers, and soda cups were left behind at the Dolby Theatre, and instead of depositing the waste in trash bins after the awards ceremony was over, a lot of folks chose instead to let the custodians handle it. They could have deposited their trash themselves but in my view, American-style messiness (especially at large events or in public places) reflects an opposite culture of outsourced responsibility.

The Dolby Theater in Los Angeles, Post-Oscars 2026

From my research, Japanese students from a young age are taught to pick up after themselves including in the classroom and in the workplace. Instead of relying on janitors or custodians, there is the ‘Osouji’ (cleaning) system where values like ownership, respect for shared space, forming good habits are emphasized by authority figures. While Americans including myself were taught to ‘don’t litter’, Japanese kids were also taught that ‘this is your mess and you are responsible for also taking care of it yourself.’ Another Japanese expression I have learned about known as ‘Atarimae’, which is the cultural expectation that cleanliness is both normal and expected from everyone. Even if they are not in Japan for a sporting event, Japanese fans will often clean up after themselves and their section after pure habit because it was ingrained in them from such an early age.

These fans don’t see themselves doing anything out of the ordinary or exceptional and while they are admired for it by other nationalities especially as guests or visitors, the Japanese fans often shrug and remark how it’s just a normal cultural practice for them even when they are not mandated to clean up after themselves in these stadiums. Often times in Western culture, we praise those who clean our streets, stadiums, and public areas, but we often pay them little for their hard work and instead of asking everyday citizens to pitch in to do it more often or to pay our custodians and cleaning staff better, we do neither and wonder why there is less communal responsibility as a result here.

In Japanese culture, especially in sporting culture, it doesn’t matter if their team won or lost, cleanliness and having respect for your surroundings is non-negotiable. This attitude also extends to the players themselves who clean their locker rooms, leave thank you notes to their hosts, and leave their space better than they found it, inspiring others with their example going forward. Character often shows itself most when nobody else is watching or expecting someone to go above and beyond but that’s exactly what these fans, players, and supporters are doing. Collectively, cleaning is seen as respect for the shared space and for other people around you. In these sporting events, the Japanese fans will not just clean their own immediate space but for others’ as well and work together as a team in the section or in the whole stadium.

Oftentimes, in Japan, “This is our space and we should take care of it together.” I’ve found that in the U.S. we ask others with pay or to volunteer to help solve the issue rather than see it as a collective responsibility. The Japanese proverb that is often cited focuses on “don’t leave a place worse than when you depart from it.” I believe this is something that while Japanese in origin should apply to the rest of us too. This one idea alone could help cities and countries adapt more, especially when it comes to reducing pollution or helping our growing waste problem. Incentivizing people to clean up after themselves, to not leave shared space messy, and to start imparting that message from a young age should not be specific to one culture but about promoting a global consciousness around this important issue.

In my own country, cleanliness can vary widely but there have been multiple times where I’ve seen trash left behind in stadiums, people don’t flush after themselves or leave the bathroom in good shape, concerts have sticky floors from spilled alcohol, overflowing bins in my neighborhood because the city doesn’t have enough of them or they are not held onto until the tourists go home, etc. I could go on and on but the dominant cultural mindset is that “there’s staff or people who will clean up after me” and while that is true, I still think it’s in poor form to not throw things out, to make a mess and not clean it up, and to pass on the problem to somebody else. I have been guilty of this myself and I’m not proud of it in terms of leaving trash behind in a stadium or movie theater, and I recognize that now. I hope to get better at it and tell friends and family politely to do the same as me.

When responsibility is outsourced to others, behavior will follow accordingly in this case. When we internalize a new behavior or see others change theirs, culture can shift over time especially regarding cleanliness. When people are seen to clean up after themselves especially foreigners in a football stadium who practice what they preach, others will follow this example and set a new trend. Culture isn’t something to be enforced but it can be mirrored when we see others who have expectations of themselves that we didn’t even think would be possible in our own culture.

Not everyone is perfect and I don’t want to stereotype a whole country regarding cleanliness practices, which can vary depending on the individual context. Social pressure and conformity expectations do have their own drawbacks in certain areas but I do believe that encouragement can be healthy in terms of promoting trash pickup, leaving a place better than you found it, and taking responsibility for your actions in a public place, these are not negative behaviors to me and I think we’d all be better off for encouraging these positive actions like the Japanese fans at a World Cup stadium.

Having lived in other countries, every country has a different relationship to cleanliness and what constitutes civic responsibility, but I do believe that a healthier, happier society is one where the individual thinks more of him or herself in a social context and is in harmony with their environment. We are not an island unto ourselves and what we do has an effect not only on our surroundings but on the wider planet we all share together. The question to summarize isn’t why Japanese fans clean stadiums. The question is why the rest of us don’t and what it would take to make that kind of behavior feel just as normal. Because culture doesn’t change through rules, regulations, or fines, it changes when enough people decide that leaving a place better than they find it isn’t extraordinary, it’s just what you choose to do.

Frederiksborg Castle

“Frederiksborg Castle in Hillerød, Denmark – a Renaissance masterpiece framed by water, silence, and centuries of Danish history.”

Camera: iPhone 15

Location: Frederiksborg Slot (Castle), Hillerød, Denmark

The Pantheon and The Pendulum

“My first visit to the Pantheon – one of France’s most cherished monuments and a mausoleum for some of their most cherished cultural and political figures. You can’t forget the famous Foucault’s Pendulum as well, a centerpiece of this Pantheon.”

Camera: iPhone 15

Location: The Pantheon; Paris, France

Bienvenue à Bordeaux

My first voyage to Bordeaux, France, a key stop on any wine lover’s journey through the southwestern region of the country. A beautiful and vibrant city with amazing food and wine (of course).

Camera: iPhone 15

Location: Up In The Air; Bordeaux, France

Cause, Chaos, and Consequence: Ripple vs. Butterfly Effect Explained

“I’ve written about the Ripple Effect before but while they sound like each other, The Butterfly Effect is far from being the same thing as a concept. They are philosophical cousins to be honest but while they are related, they were both raised in different households.”

I’ve written about the Ripple Effect before but while they sound like each other, The Butterfly Effect is far from being the same thing as a concept. They are philosophical cousins to be honest but while they are related, they were both raised in different households.

To give some further background on the Ripple Effect, it is one action that causes a series of consequences that spread outward like ‘ripples on the water.’ These are both linear and observable consequences that are clear to see, like water droplets hitting the ocean. For an example of this phenomenon, if you donate to a college scholarship fund, that money would directly help a student go to a college or university. Maybe that student goes on to start a non-for-profit because of the help you gave to help hundreds of other students who were in the same position as he or she was when you donated the money. The effects of your one action spread out logically from the original action taken. The ripple effect has been used in the social sciences, in business development, and in personal decision-making each day.

When it comes to the Butterfly Effect, the definition of it pertains to a very small or slight change in the initial conditions of someone’s day or a event that was rather small or insignificant at the time that ends up causing unpredictable and massive effects down the line affecting untold numbers of people. The key idea for this phenomenon is that events can be nonlinear and cause chaotic consequences when you think the effects would have been minimal or nonexistent instead. For an example, a butterfly flapping its wings in Mexico could theoretically start a chain of atmospheric events that cause a tornado to occur across the border in Texas. The Butterfly Effect is often used in describing chaos theory, meteorology, or how complex systems work together succinctly or can become dysfunctional rather rapidly.

Aspect	Ripple Effect	Butterfly Effect
Definition	One action causes a series of predictable consequences	Tiny change leads to massive, unpredictable outcomes
Nature of Impact	Linear and logical	Chaotic and nonlinear
Predictability	Generally predictable	Highly unpredictable
Example	Helping one student who then impacts others	Being late to an event and missing a life-changing meeting
Field of Origin	Social sciences, psychology, personal development	Chaos theory, meteorology, complex systems
Visual Metaphor	Pebbles dropped in water creating waves	Butterfly flapping wings triggering a tornado
Control Over Outcome	Moderate to high: effects unfold over time	Low: small causes can lead to wildly disproportionate results
Typical Usage	Cause-and-effect logic in planning or strategy	Describing randomness or complexity in systems

Regarding the main difference between The Ripple Effect and The Butterfly Effect, ripple effects are much more predictable to the average person, and you can trace the causality more easily. Butterfly effects and their events are unpredictable, chaotic, and can happen when you least expect them yet have been put into motion for quite some time. To sum it up, Ripple effects have an obvious cause and effect that are easy to explain and observe while butterfly effects show how tiny inputs or changes can lead to wildly disproportionate outcomes.

To explain how this would play out in the real world, a Ripple Effect in one’s personal life would be deciding to go to the gym three times a week consistently. You start to feel healthier, have more energy, sleep better at night, improve your mood, you’re more productive at work, which leads to a monetary raise or even a promotion in your title. That one small but consistent change to your lifestyle with a new habit consistently done can ‘ripple’ out across your whole life in a predictable way given the known yet useful benefits of consistent exercise.

As for the Butterfly Effect example when it comes to your personal life, let’s say you show up five minutes late to an important networking event. As a result, you may miss meeting someone who could have been a business partner for your new venture. Your career ends up going in a completely different direction because of that missed opportunity. Because of that, you end up having to move and live in a different city, with different friends, and a different lifestyle, all because of that five-minute delay that happened once in your life. This is a key example of an unpredictable event with unforeseen consequences. You probably or will never realize how your life changed as a result unless someone observing your life full-time could tell you about the chain reaction that occurred because of that late networking event arrival.

We can also look back at history for key examples where the ripple and butterfly effects were present in what happened in retrospect. With regards to the ripple effect, the Civil Rights movement in the United States leads to the Civil Rights Act being passed by Congress. This law causes desegregation to take place in public schools, which opens more education and job opportunities for minority students and eventually leads to more diverse leadership in both government and business. It’s a chain of predictable and traceable events that go back a few decades, but for which still resonates up through the modern era.

A famous example of the Butterfly Effect in action from world history was when an obscure Serbian nationalist, Gavrilo Princip, assassinated the Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria, in 1914. After that momentous but surprising event happened, Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia, alliances with France and Russia kicked in, which lit the spark that consumed Europe during the first World War.

This momentous event of World War I then led to the fall of empires like the Ottoman and British empires over time, the stale peace that led to World War II, and then the rise of Communism and the Cold War. Would a war have started regardless of if Franz Ferdinand had not been assassinated that day? Most likely, but there was a chance that it would not have happened had the assassination not occurred. That one moment created chaos and unforeseen consequences that no one in Europe or around the world could have foreseen at that time in 1914.

Understanding the differences between the ripple effect and the butterfly effect isn’t just academic, it’s practical for your own life. In our personal lives and careers, most of us try to make thoughtful choices, expecting reasonably predictable outcomes. That’s the ripple effect in action: you invest time in learning a skill, and it pays off in future opportunities. However, life doesn’t always play by those rules. Sometimes, a seemingly insignificant decision, sending a message, missing a meeting, crossing paths with someone new, spirals into consequences no one could’ve predicted. That’s the butterfly effect crashing into the party to say it has arrived. Knowing both concepts helps us become more intentional with what we can control while remaining humble about what we can’t control. It’s the mental toolkit for navigating both stability and chaos in this uncertain world.

The truth of the matter is that life is shaped by both ripples and butterflies. Some of your actions will create steady waves of impact over time while other choices might unleash unpredictable storms. That doesn’t mean you should live in perpetual fear of chaos or paralysis over tiny choices. It does mean though that we should approach life with a mixture of clarity and curiosity: plant the seeds you can in life, but don’t be shocked if something unexpected grows.

As the saying goes, “We make plans, and the universe laughs.” Still, you should plan anyway and be prepared with the awareness that every choice matters, even when the outcome doesn’t go according to plan. You might be one ripple away from changing your community or your world, or one butterfly flap from a wild new chapter in your life.

Estadio Azteca

My first visit to the historic Azteca Stadium or Estadio Azteca in Mexico City, Mexico where the opening match of the 2026 FIFA World Cup will be played.

Camera: iPhone 15

Location: Estadio Azteca (Azteca Stadium) Mexico City, Mexico

Be Wary of Bread and Circuses

“There’s nothing wrong with distractions and wanting to enjoy an event, a spectacle, or indulge a bit but in the times that we’re living in, it’s important to realize that focusing only on ‘bread and circuses’ is something we can no longer afford to do.”

Who doesn’t enjoy sports or entertainment or both? People since the dawn of time have enjoyed being entertained or have been spectators or participants in games, sports, or other spectacles. At best, it is a thrilling adrenaline rush to be part of it to the roar of hundreds or thousands of people. At worse, it is a pleasant distraction from the humdrum of our daily life and our routines. There’s nothing wrong with distractions and wanting to enjoy an event, a spectacle, or indulge a bit but in the times that we’re living in, it’s important to realize that focusing only on ‘bread and circuses’ is something we can no longer afford to do.

The concept and phrasing of “bread and circuses or in Latin known as, “panem et circenses”, comes from the Roman Empire and belongs to the Roman poet Juvenal. Juvenal criticized how the Roman leadership would use free food such as bread and grant entertainment such as the gladiator events and other spectacles of the coliseum to distract the citizenry from societal and economic decay. While the Roman empire declined and fell as all empires do, today, in our modern world, we have major sporting events such as the FIFA World Cup and the NFL Super Bowl. Reality Television shows remain quite popular, and the media spends hours on celebrity scandals and gossip rather than focus on systemic issues affecting each of us daily.

Why is this an issue today as it was almost 200 years ago? I would argue that we are living through an era of upheaval including political instability, economic inequality, the effects of climate change, and the rise of authoritarianism. Distraction such as ‘bread and circuses’ help to keep people distracted from these ongoing issues and is a powerful tool to be utilized by those holding power. While sports and entertainment can be healthy outlets, it does not go well for a society when it is all-consuming, and people are overly reliant on it each day for fulfillment or pleasure. An active citizenry must remain focused on issues that affect them and their families as if they are paying attention and are engaged, positive change is more likely to occur as a result.

Political leaders can use major sporting events to help push their agendas forward as the times surrounding such events are the easiest to enact policies that are controversial but in which public attention is directed elsewhere. Politicians and leaders can also engage in controversies surrounding sporting events and how it related to ‘culture wars’ and ‘celebrity feuds’ to divert from ongoing political scandals or economic problems. Major sporting events are also used to stir national pride in a country and can be used to distract from real issues that the country is facing as well.

Sports and entertainment are big money for corporations and for wealthy individuals. Sports can reflect ongoing economic inequalities especially when multimillion-dollar commercials are paid for by a company rather than in investing in their own workforce’s compensation. Money spent in the billions of dollars each year on sports betting, gambling, or on tickets could have been funneled towards programs focusing on social well-being in health care, education, or infrastructure.

Celebrities and athletes should be compensated well for the work they do but there is an issue when ordinary workers who help make events, games, and other spectacles run smoothly are not paid a living wage. Thousands of workers are making decent pay, but it pales in comparison to what the ‘stars’ are making especially when they are the one preparing their food, keeping them safe with security measures, and helping stock the shelves and sell the merchandise.

There is also the ongoing debate in society about taxpayer money funding massive students and events that are not benefiting the surrounding community or the city itself. A lot of that money gets funneled to corporations in the ‘naming rights’ and to the ‘billionaires’ who see their net worth grow up as the sports franchise becomes more valuable over the years. A society where income inequality is high and is rising will be reflected in sports and entertainment as well. While there are some economic benefits to be made by the average person in these industries, a large sum of the gains to go to the wealthiest owners, players, and stars while the wealth does not ‘trickle down’ much, if at all.

While some of these issues do get coverage in the media although increasingly sparingly, I would argue that general news media, especially in recent years, has become sensationalistic and has focused on ‘click bait’ content rather than on serious investigative journalism. News outlets have prioritized celebrity feuds, sports gossip, and other trivial controversies that pale in comparison in terms of importance compared to real issues going on with the wider society. Viral content gets more clicks and eyeballs, especially on social media, and that’s where the focus has turned especially in recent years. Too much information at one time also presents most people from being able to decipher of what’s real vs. what’s fake and what to pay attention to because ‘information overload’ makes it hard to pinpoint what is likely to affect them the most and is worth paying attention to.

Similarly to the issues I’ve mentioned that ‘bread and circuses’ distract from each day, one issue that is the most immediate and wide scale in terms of ongoing effects is the accelerating climate crisis. Major sports and entertainment events all have an environmental cost and leave a sizable carbon footprint. When you tally up, the travel emissions, energy consumption because of the game or event, and the waste involved from having thousands of people in attendance, communities who support the events or games must deal with the aftermath, including both the financial and environmental costs.

While these massive events like the Super Bowl, the FIFA World Cup, and the Olympics due to pledge to be more sustainable and environmentally friendly, many companies do not end up footing the bill for the carbon emitted or the energy used. They can do so because the companies help sponsor the events and contribute enough money to them, so they aren’t as liable to help with the environmental aftereffects. Looking at two recent examples with the 2016 Rio Olympics and the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qarar, these two events led to increased carbon emissions (FIFA) and environmental aftereffects. (Olympics)

While I am supportive of sports and entertainment and have been a fan of both, I still recognize the need to tone it back these days because excessive consumption of either will not help our society and our world be better. Sports and reality TV may seem as important as real issues, but they are not and never will be. People must stay engaged in what’s going on in their community, their country, and their world. As consumers of news, we also have the individual and collective power to choose which news outlets we give our time and our money to as well. If frivolities and ‘bread and circuses’ is all a news organization is offering, then it’s not a real news organization to begin with.

Advocating for solutions to real issues, being a reliable voter, and volunteering in your community consistently can help keep the ‘bread and circuses’ to a more tolerable level. We all want to experience gratification and rewards in our lives and sports, or entertainment do both in providing that kind of dopamine hit but it’s a cheap one, and it’s not something we do ourselves. Political activism, working for social change, and developing our problem-solving abilities is real gratification in whatever issue you want to work on in our world. It’s not as instant and far from being easy but improving anything in society will take effort, discomfort, patience, and a lot of perseverance. Make sure you advocate for what you care about because celebrities and sports figures may not do the same, if at all.

You should stay focused on what’s important in the news, be civically engaged and encourage others in your life to do so. Remember to balance your consumption of entertainment and sports along with awareness of the issues and problems affecting you, your families, and your communities. Watching the Super Bowl is fine and I just did so recently as I have most years of my life, but if we continue to ignore political scandals, economic problems, and societal injustices, there won’t be much to celebrate in our society beyond that one day of the calendar year, where two teams of millionaires play a game that you can’t even be part of or even afford to go to.

My Thoughts on Voltaire’s Most Relevant Quote Today

“His quote underscores the perilous connection between irrational beliefs and destructive actions, an infamous dynamic that has been exploited throughout history and remains a pressing concern today around the world.”

The famous French philosopher and writer, Voltaire, is known for his various works from poetry to stories to essays in the 18^th century but Voltaire’s quote, “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities,” carries a profound meaning for the modern world in 2025. It serves as both a warning and a call to be vigilant against the forces of misinformation, manipulation, lies, and prejudice. His quote underscores the perilous connection between irrational beliefs and destructive actions, an infamous dynamic that has been exploited throughout history and remains a pressing concern today around the world.

At its core, Voltaire’s quote on ‘absurdities causing atrocities’ highlights the susceptibility of human beings to believe falsehoods when they are presented compellingly and repeatedly particularly by figures of authority or influence or power. In the digital age of social media and instant communications, this vulnerability is amplified by the unprecedented speed and reach of information instantaneously. Social media platforms, news outlets, and even AI-generated content contribute to a landscape where disinformation and blasphemy can thrive. Absurdities, once relegated to the fringes of our society, can now gain mainstream traction in a matter of minutes or hours.

A stark example of this phenomena is the spread of conspiracy theories. From unfounded claims about global health crises to political propaganda, these theories manipulate emotions and exploit fears, dividing societies, and undermining trust in our institutions. The belief in absurdities, whether it’s a denial of scientific evidence or the vilification of certain groups of people unjustly, creates fertile ground for acts of hatred and violence to occur.

To protect against the dangers of absurd beliefs that are spread rapidly without fact checking, fostering critical thinking is more important than ever. Education systems should do a better job of prioritizing media literacy, teaching students and even professionals how to evaluate sources, discern biases, and question narratives. In 2025, where now AI-driven content can mimic credible sources and change them slightly, the ability to think critically is more vital than ever.

Fact-checking organizations and regulatory measures can also play a role especially when social media companies refuse to do it themselves as was evidenced by Meta founder, Mark Zuckerberg, refusing to have his platform offer fact checking to users on what gets posted on the platform. Social media platforms should be held accountable for curbing the spread of disinformation especially when they do nothing to curb it. Transparency in the algorithms that they are using along with stricter content moderation policies are necessary to mitigate potential harm to users and information consumers. However, these efforts should also be balanced with protecting freedom of expression and speech to avoid creating new forms of digital censorship.

At the individual level, fostering open dialogue and empathy is crucial. Encouraging conversations that bridge ideological divides can reduce the allure of echo chambers that can bring out the worst in others. People are less likely to fall prey to absurdities when they are exposed to diverse perspectives and any differences are addressed through mutual understanding.

Voltaire’s quote also speaks to the unseemly process of ‘othering’ where certain groups are dehumanized or treated as inherently inferior based on lies and slander. This phenomenon has been a precursor to some of history’s darkest chapters. When absurd beliefs about the “other” are accepted and not dismissed or countered with facts, atrocities can become justified in the eyes of the perpetrators.

Historical examples abound and there are dozens of them I could write about. The Holocaust during World War II is a chilling reminder of how anti-Semitic propaganda and pseudoscientific absurdities fueled the systematic extermination of over six million Jews and millions of other minority groups. Nazi ideology relied on first dehumanizing Jewish people, portraying them as threats to society. This ‘othering’ laid the foundation for the eventual genocide that occurred.

Similarly, the Rwandan Genocide in 1994 illustrates how media propaganda can incite mass violence. Hutu extremists used radio broadcasts to spread hate speech against the Tutsi minority, describing them as “cockroaches” and urging their extermination. The absurd belief that the Hutu extremists had about an ‘existential threat’ posed by the Tutsi population led to the massacre of approximately 800,000 people within 100 days, one of the darkest years in the 20^th century.

In more recent history, the treatment of Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar serves as another example. The dissemination of false online narratives about the Rohingya group, portraying them as invaders and terrorists, was used to justify violence and forced displacement from their homes. The role of social media, particularly Facebook, in amplifying hate speech highlights the modern implications of Voltaire’s warning about believing absurdities eventually leading to atrocities.

As we continue to navigate the complexities of a globalized and interconnected world, Voltaire’s words remind us of our shared responsibility to uphold truth, justice, and basic humanity. Combating absurd beliefs requires collective action across educational, technological, and cultural spheres in our society. Governments, organizations, and individuals must work together to challenge disinformation and promote inclusivity and respect.

Empathy, acts of kindness, and compassion are all potent antidotes to prevent ‘othering.’ Recognizing the shared humanity of all people, regardless of race, religion, or background, diminishes the power of divisive and toxic narratives that are not true. History teaches us that atrocities thrive in the absence of understanding or dialogue. By fostering connections and celebrating diversity while respecting and acknowledging our differences from one another, societies can resist the allure of absurdities and the horrors they could potentially enable.

Anyone can make an impact in preventing the spread of falsehoods, blasphemy, or scapegoating as this begins at the grassroots level, such as within our own neighborhoods and communities. To achieve this goal, individuals and groups must actively engage people in fostering environments of mutual respect and accountability. Open communication and dialogue are key to identifying and addressing harmful narratives before they gain traction and spread futher.

When you encounter falsehoods or lies, it is important to call them out in a civilized manner. This means addressing the issue without resorting to any aggression or personal attacks. Instead, provide clear, evidence-based counterarguments and facts that encourage reflection rather than defensiveness. For example, sharing verified data, fact-checking done through reliable sources, or calmly asking thought-provoking questions can shift the conversation towards the truth.

Community leaders, educators, and influencers have a unique role in setting an example for their neighbors, students, and followers. By promoting fact-checking, highlighting diverse perspectives, and actively countering divisive and hateful rhetoric, they can cultivate a culture of inclusion, tolerance, and critical inquiry. Grassroots initiatives, such as hosting workshops on improving media literacy, how to do fact checking, or creating forums for dialogue with people of different backgrounds, can also help inoculate communities against the spread of absurdities.

Additionally, I believe it is very important to foster empathy through personal storytelling and connections that can counteract scapegoating. For example, over the decades, thousands of Holocaust survivors have shared their story of how they were able to survive atrocities that came about because large groups of people in their society started believing or tolerating absurd claims based on lies and falsehoods. Hearing the lived experiences of marginalized or affected individuals from Rwanda to Myanmar to the Sudan humanizes them and challenges stereotypes. This approach can dismantle the ‘us versus them’ mentality that fuels both hatred and violence.

Ultimately, building resilient communities requires consistent effort and constant dedication. By prioritizing education, empathy, and open dialogue with others, we can better guard against the dangers of falsehoods and prevent absurdities from taking root or spreading. In doing our part, we uphold the principles of truth, justice, and fairness that Voltaire so fervently championed.

In conclusion, Voltaire’s insight is as relevant in 2025 as it was in the 18th century when his quote was born. Believing absurdities paves the way for atrocities to occur, but by embracing critical thinking, rejecting hate, and nurturing empathy, humanity can rise above these challenges that remain with us today sadly. The famous quote from Voltaire is not just a warning for us but a guidepost for maintaining a world grounded in truth, justice, and compassion for one another.