Reader Interaction

This stuff is great. One of the major reasons I started this blog is so that i could put my ideas into some semblence of a logical flow; this flow might then be examined by others, who could provide concurring, augmenting, or dissenting commentary. I recieve some feedback, such as the note below. A reader writes: I like your blog and applaud you free thinking. You have always been a leader of the pack. One thing of concern is that you said that you were not happy with the way that things were in the ...corporate world. I would agree with you in many respects, but you should not get too stressed with what everyone else is doing. It is next to impossible to 'change people's minds'. With your natural abilities, your best way to get your ideas across is to live what you believe. That will change peoples minds faster and stronger than anything else that you can do. You must be part of the system to change it. Dropping out takes you out of what people look at and admire. If you live in the system and excel in the system, you can live the way you want the world to be, and I believe that your influence will be established and grow. You can be a force for good. Keep reading and acting the way you believe. This is a fair criticism, but I am not sure how to respond to it. Part of me wants to remove myself from the tangled web of the corporation, and to instead elevate above it. Some may call this the "easy way out", but I do not agree. As I see it, when confronted with a situation that I do not support the morals/ethics in question, I have 3 possibilities: 1. Do what your are told (the REAL easy way out) 2. Buck the system (may get me in real trouble) 3. Attempt to operate within the system to change the situation Here is an example of a (hypothetical) corporate issue: The Corporation has mandated a 5% headcount reduction. The company is not going bankrupt. It is obvious that the reason for the reduction is to improve profits, so that corporate objectives can be met, and bonuses can be paid out. The company is demanding that some employees lose their jobs so that other employees can get slightly bigger bonuses. When confronted with this, what should the response be? 1, 2, or 3? If it is #3, how is this to be accomplished?