Twenty Percent

A datum not generally acknowledged is that only about 20 percent of the population of the American colonies engaged in the American Revolution. Generally, about 20 percent of a population is seen to be dangerous and gets wiped out by totalitarian states (Germany, Russia, China). 20 percent seems to be a significant number.

Who are these twenty percent that the totalitarian governments so fear? They are the people with ideas: “What if?” people and “Who made you the boss?” people. They are the entrepreneurs, the dreamers, the artists and the leaders.

This suggests that a return to the fundamentals and principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States will not require the agreement or true education of the majority of the population (though this would perhaps be ideal) but that only the hard work and dedication of this twenty percent will be necessary.


The “Other” Twenty Percent

At the bottom of the socio-economic ladder we find approximately twenty percent of the population who seem to have no desire to climb out of a simple “comfort zone”. Given a simple roof, some clothing and enough to eat, they seem un-motivated to increase their survival level. The Lion might say, “If they won’t hunt they will surely die.” The Zebra might say, “If they won’t walk eight hundred miles to the next patch of green grass, they will surely die.” A purely Darwinist viewpoint is that as the “weakest” or “most unfit” of the species, they should be removed.

Humans (life organisms capable of violating the individual and species survival imperative for an idea), unlike the animals have a moral imperative. (Moral: The concept of right and wrong based on an idea, whether that idea comes from experience, education or some divine source.) We feel a moral imperative to cajole or educate this twenty percent out of this comfort zone and into a higher survival potential.

Why these people are in this state is a question for the Sociologists or the Religious Philosophers. (Unfortunately, the Sociologists are unlikely to solve this as they have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo so it seems more likely to be solved by Religious Philosophy, the realm of thought and ideas.) The fact remains that so long as they are able to maintain their “comfort level”, no change will occur.

Certainly, some people at this socio-economic level are there from simple bad luck: Illness, national economic failure, etc. These people can be expected to climb back up the ladder as soon as their “luck” turns or the economy returns.


Some view the situation and say, “If we treat them like children, feed them, clothe them, provide them with adequate entertainment, put a nice roof over their heads and give them a good paying job, they will somehow, then, desire to climb out of this comfort zone and start to produce and survive.

Some would view this situation and say “There, but for the grace of God, go I”. Others might say, “There, but for the willingness to work 16 hour days, the willingness to go without or do without and the willingness to claw ones way through the fog and misery of a “modern” education, go I”.

History suggests that so long as society does no more than to maintain them at or just below their “comfort zone” there will be no change. Perhaps we should look to other technology than that provided by the Sociologist and the “Do-Gooder”.