Change Your Participation, Not the System
I have been noticing something about change.
When something isn't working, my first instinct has often been to try to change the system.
Explain the problem.
Talk about what should be different.
Get everyone to understand it.
Maybe establish a rule.
This seems reasonable. If something isn't working, why wouldn't we try to fix it?
But I am beginning to think that very often there is another place to start.
Change my participation in the system first.
This is not the same as saying that I need to change who I am.
Actually, I think it is almost the opposite.
I can remain myself. I can still believe what I believe. I can still have standards, preferences, boundaries, and expectations.
What I can change is what I do.
How I respond.
What I participate in.
What I stop participating in.
What I am willing to carry and what I leave for someone else to carry.
That is a very different kind of change.
For a long time, I think I assumed that if I saw a better way of doing something, I needed to explain it.
And if other people could just understand what I understood, then perhaps we could all do it differently.
Sometimes that works.
But I have noticed how much energy can disappear into explanation.
You explain.
Someone disagrees.
You explain differently.
They explain why they see it another way.
Now the original problem is still there, but you also have a discussion about the problem.
Sometimes even a discussion about the discussion.
And very little has actually changed.
I am becoming more interested in something simpler.
If I believe something is worth doing, I can begin doing it.
I don't necessarily need to announce it.
I don't need everyone to agree.
I don't even need anyone else to participate.
I can simply change what I contribute to the situation.
Then something interesting happens.
The system is no longer exactly the same system.
Because I am part of it.
If I stop doing something I have always done, the system has to respond to that.
If I stop solving a problem that belongs to someone else, that problem doesn't disappear. It goes back to the person who owns it.
If I stop arguing every time I disagree, the argument cannot continue in exactly the same way.
If I become more reliable about something myself, I have changed at least one part of the environment without asking anyone else to become more reliable.
This seems almost too obvious when I write it down.
But I don't think I understood it for a long time.
I thought change required agreement.
Maybe very often it doesn't.
There is also something else here that I am still thinking about.
Trying to change the system can easily become another way of trying to control other people.
Not necessarily in some terrible or manipulative way.
Sometimes it comes from good intentions.
I see a problem. I think I see a solution. Naturally, I want the people around me to see it too.
But they still have their own choices.
They may agree.
They may disagree.
They may understand perfectly and still choose differently.
That belongs to them.
My participation belongs to me.
I think there is a certain freedom in recognizing that distinction.
I don't have to convince everyone before I can act according to what I believe.
And they don't have to become different people for me to become more deliberate about how I participate.
This doesn't mean never discussing things.
Families need conversations. Work requires coordination. Relationships require communication.
Some problems genuinely require agreement.
But perhaps agreement doesn't always have to come first.
Sometimes the better sequence may simply be:
See something. Change my participation. Watch what happens.
Maybe others respond differently.
Maybe they don't.
Maybe the system improves.
Maybe I discover that my idea wasn't as good as I thought.
That is useful too.
Reality gets a vote.
I am beginning to think this may be one of the quieter forms of self-command.
Not trying to arrange everyone around me.
Not withdrawing either.
Remaining fully present, but becoming more deliberate about what I bring into the system.
I don't know how far this idea goes yet.
But I have started trying it in small places.
And so far, I find it much more useful than another explanation.