When two plus two isn't ....

I'm not sure who I heard say it the other day, but it bears consideration with regard to the "occupy" movement ...

When you have a few people who know what they want (self-described anarchists) infiltrating a large group of followers who concede they don't know what they want and admit they are looking for leaders, it is an equation for trouble.

Change for the sake of change alone looks much like foolishness to those who are watching.

G.K. Chesterton writing in "Orthodoxy" (1908) observed,

It is true that a man (a silly man) might make change itself his object or ideal. But as an ideal, change becomes unchangeable. If the change-worshipper wishes to estimate his own progress, he must be sternly loyal to the idea of change; he must not begin to flirt gaily with the ideal of monotony. Progress itself cannot progress. It is worth remark, in passing, that when Tennyson, in a wild and rather weak manner, welcomed the idea of infinite alteration in society, he instinctively took a metaphor which suggests an imprisoned tedium. He wrote -

Let the great world spin forever down the ringing grooves of change.

He thought of change itself as an unchangeable groove; and so it is. Change is about the narrowest and hardest groove a man can get into.

Something to think about ...