For the Greater Good

Disclaimer: this is not an article about politics. 

I would like to begin with a small story about current Australian politics, so bear with me. Australia has long had a refugee problem, coming to Australia via boat seeking asylum and often exploited by people smugglers; the problem exacerbated by the various conflicts going on in much of the Middle East. Our parliament has had a lengthy history of debate surrounding what to do with the increasing influx of refugees. The (current Labor) government proposed, and strongly favours, the so-called "Malaysia solution", whilst the (Coalition) opposition prefers Nauru instead (not only is Malaysia not a signatory to the UNHCR, aspects of the policy was ruled unconstitutional by the High Court). The Greens, meanwhile, strongly advocate neither and insist on onshore processing (on the mainland).

In June this year, there was another boat tragedy off Christmas Island, where around 130+ asylum seekers perished in the seas. Within the House of Representatives (Lower House) at Parliament House that day, and in the Senate the next, there was a fierce and emotional debate surrounding policy, all sides "wanting to get something done" after years of inaction and argument. Alas, nothing eventuated following the two days of Parliament sittings: although a bill that would have initiated offshore processing was narrowly passed through the Lower House, it was soundly defeated in the Senate. There was a public outcry: some blaming the Greens (who held the balance of power in the Senate) refusing to budge from their own policies and not "compromising... to get things done" that day, whilst others putting much heat on the Opposition that refused to support a bill that "ignored human rights", and vice versa for Labor and its seemingly "flawed" Malaysia solution. And hence, the boats kept coming in and people kept risking their lives to cross the seas on rickety boats.

Why am I bringing this up? My point isn't about asylum seeker policy, let alone partisan politics in general. It isn't even about human rights or the squabblings in Parliament that day (or any other day). I think this recent example is a good illustration surrounding "getting together to get things done", and how we can all sometimes be short-sighted and self-interested in our thinking and decision-making, despite "our good interests". Especially within pop-culutral fandoms. We might have our own and differing "opinions on asylum seeker policy" - after all, it is a democratic community. But sometimes, we fans lack the very foresight to think for the best of the whole community, and not just for yourself (or for a few). And I'm not just talking about one subset of the fandom - I'm talking about the whole.

Ultimately, we are a community of (predominantly online) fans, not a multitude of corporations in a capitalist perfectly competitive market economy. We are motivated for the sake of what our interests are in the fandom, and not because we seek to make profits or elating our self-worth.
Yes, there are cultural differences, both racially-motivated and as a consequence of subsets within each fandom. But we like the same core thing. Yes, groups occupy different "niches" or "positions" within the same fandom, but what happens if they overlap? Can there not be some scope for "working together" instead of being "fragmented" and "implicitly competing against one another", even if we publicly state otherwise? Fandoms, especially the Asian pop culture ones overseas, exist on the basic principle of a whole community spirit. People (and different groups of people) work together to share information. People work together to help out those who are deficient in a language or other skill. People co-ordinate together to achieve a common goal that helps to benefit the whole fandom, not just a few. 

Yet the reality is very often far from the optimum. Many people, even fans, crave for power and control. They pursue for a desire akin to wanting a lop-sided monopoly in whatever aspect (of the fandom) they want. Instead of collaborating, compromising and consulting, they push for their own viewpoint that might give them short-term gain, but often fall short from a longer-term perspective. I see this constantly, whether in forums, in subtitling groups, or elsewhere. It's that we just want to elate ourselves (or our privileged few) for our personal pride, power and satisfaction, not of the greater good - that is, the entire community. We might not often realise this (and very much fervently deny it ourselves when asked explicitly), but indeed, it does happen.

We might not be making decisions that influence the futures of many a refugee. But if we, as a whole community, cannot put aside our differences to "get things done", we are no better than those in the Australian Parliament. In fact, we are worse than them. Whilst their debate is motivated by human rights and national interests, fans online get incensed at each other because their beloved Acchan/Taeyeon/Bieber/whatever is getting dissed by the antis. Amongst other, usually more administrative, issues.