Easter & The Tipping Point

Usually the Orthodox and American (or Anglican? I’m not sure of the proper term) Easters fall one week apart. However, every few years – including this year – these Easters are on the same Sunday.

For the most part, people get together and eat. This in and of itself is cause for celebration for many who were fasting over the last few days, or not eating meat for the last 40 days. Next week, everyone will go to the cemetery and picnic at the graves of their relatives, as documented here last year.

For my part, I had a very relaxing and enjoyable Easter. I had invitations to lots of places. I'd like to think this is because of my natural charisma, but I'm sure a large part is due to the fact that as the lone American, I'm a bit of a celebrity. In the morning, I had a huge breakfast with my host-family. Then, I headed to my friend, Feodr's, for a little English practice and another feast. Next, I rolled up to Dada Borei's (Uncle Bob's) for a sit in the sun and some snacks. Then on my way to Ludmila’s, two men I didn’t really know invited me inside for dinner. Not being in any rush, I obliged. Finally, I took my leave and went to Ludmila's for more eating, this time coupled with a fun debate with one of her guests about which country was richer: America or Russia. I don't think either of us were convinced of the other’s position, but it was fun to try. Lastly, returning home around nine, my host mother tried to stuff even more food into me. I ate a few cucumber slices and went straight to bed. The weather was gorgeous the whole day.

On Monday, I also had the day off, and I basically lounged the whole time. I also made significant progress toward completing the Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell. His basic argument is that events – the drop in crime in NYC during the 1990s, the comeback of Hush Puppies as hip footware, or even Paul Revere's midnight ride to warn American colonists of a British attack – are really epidemics shaped by three things. Those three things are:

1. People, who come in three different subcategories
a. Connectors: Individuals who know a lot of other people
b. Mavens: Individuals who know a lot of information
c. Salesmen: Individuals who can persuade
2. Stickiness – how memorable is the message
3. Context – in what situation is the message delivered

I was reading the part about context on a bench outside my gate when I had an epiphany. Before I explain my insight, first a little more about Malcolm's argument. If we look at Paul Revere's midnight ride, one of the reasons he was able to gather the colonists to fight the following day against the British was simply because of the context in which his message was delivered. Simply by waking up someone in the middle of the night, pounding on a door, that person automatically attaches a greater import to the message than if it were delivered during normal working hours. [Revere’s mission was ultimately successful because his message was also "sticky" – The British are coming! – and Revere was a Connector – many of the people with whom he was speaking already knew him.]

Another example mentioned NYC's drop in crime in the 1990s. Of course there were many reasons, but one seemingly small cause that may have had the greatest effect was cleaning the graffiti off subway cars. The context of the city’s transit system was one of dilapidation. By the so-called "Broken Window" theory, when someone sees a broken window in a house, they automatically assume that no one cares about fixing it, and therefore no one will care about other infractions of the law. By fixing the window, or by cleaning the graffiti off the subway cars, officials greatly reduced the spread of the crime epidemic. Potential criminals were much less likely to commit a crime if they found themselves in a more orderly environment.

Next, NYC cops went after fare-beaters. It was a seemingly tiny crime, costing the city only $1.25. One could argue that at a time when murderers, rapists, and thieves were everywhere, it was a significant waste of a cop’s time to arrest and spend a day booking someone who simply jumped a turnstile. But what the cops soon learned was that for every 10 fare-beaters arrested, one of them had either an outstanding warrant or a concealed weapon. By going after the little guys, they were actually catching big criminals. And, as the public caught on that even small infractions like fare-beating would not be tolerated, the entire context of the subway system changed and crime dropped significantly.

The old view of causes for crime – which Malcolm and I certainly don’t dismiss – are that they're related to education, racism, infrastructure, etc. All these are big things that require huge amounts of resources to change and years to take effect. They are daunting in their size and complexity. Yet by doing something simple – cleaning off graffiti and arresting fare-beaters – NYC made its mass transit system, and later the entire city through application of similar methods, a lot safer.

So, what does this have to do with Moldova? A couple weeks ago I was in Tvarditsa, a village that was clean and ordered. Now I'm back in Copceac, where garbage is strewn helter-skelter on streets and fields. The seeming insignificant act of tossing an empty bottle on the ground has an effect on the way people who later see it perceive their environment. Does it make them take less pride in their village? Does it lead to a sense of hopelessness, that things can never get better or that one can never have a better life or gain new skills? Does it make them more likely to believe that they can get away with a crime?

I don't have any statistics to tell you if there are actually any connections, but I found it very interesting to read about the power of context in creating change, and found it comforting that big change need not come from big events.