MLA Report: From bell curve to bell and well curve: A call for good people to act

By Justin Wright on September 17, 2025.

I had an entirely different report I was going to submit this month, but I thought it prudent to pause on that one. I have talked frequently with friends, neighbours and members of our community in casual conversation about the transition of society from the “bell curve” into the “bell and well curve.” You might ask, “What does that mean?”

In the bell curve, the majority of individuals were in the middle, communicating, disagreeing and making concessions, while the radicals and extremists were kept on the outside by both sides.

However, we have begun to see a shift. People stopped talking, stopped connecting and became more disconnected from the community around them. They started building walls. This created an environment that pushed the masses outward and turned the walls into a well. Now we are two groups sharing one land, but not one culture or one sense of morality.

Are there still people in the middle trying to build bridges to close the gap? Of course, but what does that look like? In my mind, it is someone who listens to the ideas of others, who challenges people to become better, who does not accept excuses and who is willing to look after the future of generations rather than focusing only on the comforts of the here and now.

It is someone who speaks honestly rather than offering misleading information or easy reassurances. It is someone who encourages people to rise up and change a nation.

The opposite also exists in this bell and well curve. Some prefer to avoid difficult conversations, which may inadvertently discourage open dialogue and the sharing of diverse ideas, which sometimes contribute to polarization among younger generations, and who might prioritize immediate comfort over long-term consequences.

Some use heightened emotions, uncertainty and divisive rhetoric to maintain separation and ongoing conflict. Their approach often centres on advancing particular interests, sometimes through a focus on grievances and perceived injustices. In such an environment, we risk losing sight of our shared values and common ground.

In truth, I have been wrestling with my own belief that people should be free to live their lives as long as they are not hurting others. But if we remain on the current path, moral confusion and increasing polarization will likely continue.

There is an old saying: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men must do nothing.” I wrestle with this and reflect often, especially in light of everything that has been happening – from increasing political polarization, to the challenging decisions made during COVID that affected our youth, to society’s tendency to choose expedient solutions over more difficult but potentially more effective approaches to complex problems like addiction.

Well-intentioned compassion and empathy, when not balanced with accountability and practical wisdom, may sometimes perpetuate rather than solve the problems they seek to address.

I have been reflecting on two quotes.

The first is from Edmund Burke, in Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontents (1770): “When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.”

The second is from Charlie Kirk: “I can’t stand the word empathy. I think empathy is a made-up new age term that does a lot of damage. Sympathy is a better word, because empathy means you are actually feeling what another person felt, and no one can feel what another person feels.”

Empathy assumes you know how someone is thinking or feeling. Sympathy comes from understanding, communicating and a relationship. It is a feeling of pity or sadness for someone else’s circumstances or situation.

Rest in peace, Charlie. Your mission is over. Ours is just beginning.

Justin Wright is the MLA for Cypress-Medicine Hat

17
-16