The Indifference of Good Men

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”
-Edmund Burke

This particular phrase, in it's many incarnations, has stuck with me for many years, and it's one that I've given an exceeding amount of consideration to lately. Simple on the surface, but it's implications are much more far reaching. What exactly are the consequences of indifference? And can one be condemned for being indifferent?

I'm not suggesting that everyone should be required to be a good Samaritan, or that the man who ran when he heard the gunshots should be tried for murder, but in terms of personal relations, I think that yes, there is a degree of responsibility that can be placed on an indifferent party.

In my opinion, the mettle of a person and a relationship is never better tested than in a time of strife. Struggle is inevitable, and when it arrives, our first reaction is to turn to others. Often, this is not presented outwardly, but we are social creatures, and such a reaction is as inevitable as the conflict itself.

This being said, it has been my experience that people will react in one of two ways. They will be as supportive as possible, giving all of themselves that they can in an effort to provide the necessary support out of a sense of human decency. Or, they will react with passive indifference to the situation. The latter, unfortunately, seems more often than not to be the case. This isn't necessarily an intentional thing, but to me, it is a learned behavior among the majority of our current culture. We live in a "me first" society, in which an issue is ignored completely unless it is personally involving, be it on a personal level, or even in terms of societal issues.

What's more tragic is that these same people who would turn a blind eye are usually the first to come searching for support. It is at this point that the good among us seem to suffer the most.

While it's certainly been said countless times before, any relationship requires reciprocation, that is, a mutual trust, understanding, and ultimately, a mutual support at all times. It's unlikely that this notion would ever be denied by anyone, and yet it certainly conflicts with the ideals of Generation Me.

Which leads to yet a greater conflict: the conflict of the good. A good man gives, and asks for nothing in return, but being human, is not unreasonable in his expectations of receiving the mutual support from those he's selflessly served. Ultimately, when it's his turn to face the struggle, those he's helped have returned to their strength, their issues absolved, and due to our new nature, simply turn a blind eye unless the issue at hand directly involves them. And the good man suffers alone.

Does this make the other party evil for their indifference? For allowing evil to triumph in the life of an otherwise good person simply because of their inaction, or their unwillingness to be inconvenienced?

Perhaps not evil, in this instance, but I think it's safe to say a little less in touch with the spirit of humanity. Furthermore, I think it's all circumstantial. We all make mistakes, and can be short sighted. In such simple circumstances, I believe this sort of indifference can be forgiven, and can often lead to a stronger bond being formed, should a lesson be learned. Rarely is this the case, however, and this leads to the greatest question: how should the good man react to this?

Initially, I suppose the appropriate response would be to shake it off, move along, deal on his own, or to find support where he is appreciated.

Unfortunately, we can never truly know someone's intentions. And often, this cycle will not be a mere isolated incident, but instead be oft repeated. And after so much abuse, even the strongest of armor will break, and the good man will suffer as a result of his nature. His blessing of humanity is also his curse, and he's left at an impasse. Does the good man continue to be a good man, knowing that he will inevitably suffer for his positive contribution to society; that he will suffer for being different by being human? Or at this point should he give up, should he take his own well being into account, and no longer burden himself with the troubles of others, rather than suffer any longer for his nature? Should he relegate himself to a guilty conscience, and sacrifice his humanity in order to better live among humans?

If evil were truly to triumph in any way by the indifference of good men, i truly believe that it is in this way. That indifference by the selfish ultimately breeds indifference among the good, and that, with the loss of each good man, the world as a whole suffers.