Faced by what they perceive as collective decline, wrote Albert O. Hirschman, members of a firm, organization or state have essentially two options: to “exit” said group or to “voice” their critique in the hope of bringing about positive change.
That made a lot of sense to me, when I first read about it in my 101 poli-sci textbook. I was mulling my own exit. From Italy, that is.
A year later I was gone — on to graduate school in the U.S. — with no intention of coming back.
What I had gathered in my 22 years living in Italy was that there were slim chances the place would ever change — at least not significantly and not during the rest of my time on earth. And there was no place for me in an Italy that wouldn’t change.
If I wanted to do anything meaningful with myself, or even have a decent shot at it, I’d have to go elsewhere.
For a long time, I took great pride in having chosen exit. That was the way of clear-thinking people, of the brave, and of those who knew what they wanted. I used to wish my brother and my friends would also “see the light” and leave.
Sometimes I would tell them. Sometimes I held back. But whenever I heard stories about universities taking over a year to process paychecks worth a few hundred euros (the anecdote told with a laugh, because it’s not unusual), a 40-year old mother and physician holding down three jobs because she still couldn’t have her own practice, a job contract demanding that young female employees give “the guarantee of the uterus” for a year (“promise that you won’t get knocked up”) … whenever I heard that, I secretly wished the people I cared for would pack their bags, too.
Today, I am older and wiser, as they say.
Continue reading →
