It’s easy to complain about the things we want changed.  If you asked me a couple days ago why more people don’t do something about the things that matter to them, I would have said that people are apathetic.  In other words, it’s easy to complain and easier to stay on the couch than it is to do.

But, I’m starting to re-think that.

A few days ago, I posted a TED Talk by Dave Meslin called “The Antidote for Apathy."  Meslin argues that the reason people don’t engage civically (in Meslin’s field of focus) is that the barriers to entry to are too high.  He offers up a public notice of hearing for comment on a construction.  The document is almost written in another language—challenging to identify exactly what the project notice is about and what one has to do if they want to comment.  He argues that these barriers keep people from engaging because they don’t know what to do.  I have to agree with him

 A recent survey profiled in the Huffington Post found that U.S. had worst access to law for ordinary citizens.  The survey ranked “the United States lowest among 11 developed nations when it comes to providing access to justice to its citizens — and lower than some third-world nations in some categories.”

 This connects to what I work on globally at Pepperdine.  This week, we have Gary Haugen, President and CEO of International Justice Mission, visiting to teach a class (I’m sitting in because I organized it).  We’ve been discussing India and why the public justice system is largely broken for ordninary citizens.  I’ve been to India, sat in its courtrooms, and talked to its judges.  Mumbai has a 350-year case backlog! Good luck with the legal system there.  We see exactly the same problems in Africa.  Haugen’s class explained how British colonialism created the problems in India and Africa.  The colonial public justice system was set up to protect the colonial administrator from the public!  They were doing crowd control, rather than trying to provide a functioning system.  In India, some of the mandates for the public justice system from the mid-1800’s are still in effect.  In short, the barriers set up to keep people out are still in place.

While we have it much better in the U.S., I think we still see some of the same problems.  We build barriers around our public justice system to keep people out (and sometimes with good intentions – could we handle the flood of inquiries / comments / requests if there were no barriers?).

Like the public notice example, I see subtle barriers every day.  Take the contracts we have to sign almost daily with extended fine print where we still have language written in what seems like the King’s English (“Herewith”  “Whereas” “Henceforth”).  As a lawyer, I find the form charming, but, really, it’s an antiquated idea that can go.  There’s another TED Talk by Alan Siegel, who wants simplified contracts.  He wrote and presented a sound credit card contract that fits entirely on ONE PAGE in simple, plain English.

Overall, I find “access” to be a better explanation of why people don’t get engaged than apathy.  But, we become apathetic to access.  We don’t want to change the systems that will grant us access.  In India, the poor don’t expect better human rights because oppression is simply “how it’s been.”  Likewise, we don’t necessarily expect an easier system because it’s “how it’s been.”  That’s just the complex form you have to use and intricate procedures you must follow.  Rather, we need systems that we can all navigate and understand—systems that allow us to “do” something about what matters to us.

So, what’s is going to take to change a system like this?  For one, it’s going to take self-sacrificial leadership.  These changes will mean less job security for those in control.  Nonetheless, it’s a risk worth taking.