4.1.3 Do Good

The arrest disorder, which focuses its efforts on making the world less bad, imposes an arbitrary ceiling that the do good paradigm removes. Do-goodism, however, also brings about its own unforeseen bad effects in its pursuit of ethereal ideals. Altruism, the desire to make the world better by guiding it toward an ideal pattern, emerges when one’s focus switches to finding purpose in life at this level. One aspires to emulate an inspiring or aspirational model, which is frequently represented by a set of beliefs and principles, the life of a role model, or the teachings of a community. One’s focus shifts from issues that need to be resolved to opportunities that need to be explored, away from what one wants to stop and toward the items one wants to promote or create.

Several charity foundations, religious communities, and environmental and social movements are guided by the do good paradigm. Even in international politics, it can be seen. As part of a bigger aid program for post-war Europe, the U.S., for instance, decided to alter its policy and engage in reviving the German economy following World War II. The Marshall Plan, as it became known, promoted lucrative alliances that were peaceful and had a long-lasting stabilizing effect on the world. It also reinforced the U.S.’s position as a morally upright player in international affairs.

This strategy was distinct from containment tactics used after more modern wars and from foreign aid meant to address the urgent needs and issues of areas experiencing conflicts or natural disasters. The Marshall Plan provided funding for the development of essential infrastructure with a focus on increasing countries’ potential to produce their own prosperity. The strategy was flawed in design and execution, but it was notable for its dedication to the growth of new capability.

In contrast to the constant effort to control disorder, which typically depletes energy, the desire to do good can actually create power. The fact that the majority of the nation’s overseas spending, including backing for the military, is devoted to quelling unrest is one reason why it has historically been simple to capitalize on the isolationist instinct in American politics. People rightfully get weary of the never-ending, fruitless effort required to feed and govern the world. The enticing option provided by the do good paradigm is support for the social and economic development of sovereign, functioning states. 

The do-good paradigm does, however, also have a perilous shadow. The do-gooder, or the one who chooses which good to do, is implicit in the do-good paradigm. What one person deems to be good may not necessarily be considered to be such by another. Colonialism and religious wars, as well as unanticipated negative effects from a variety of well-intentioned activities, have all resulted from the sort of thinking that this paradigm tends to engender. The green revolution schemes, which enhanced farm output while destroying native different crops and impoverishing small farmers, are a prime example. This kind of issue emerges because the do good viewpoint favors abstract ideals, which are inherently less complex and dimensional than actual reality and might or might not be applicable to the particular individuals or circumstances to which they are applied.