What to do in the face of futility? Nothing?

Germaine's battle insignia

We only have one life. Our time is short and precious, at least in my opinion. Some of us do things that seem to be futile, arguably wasting time. Why engage in futility, if time is short and precious? Does engaging with futile causes make any sense? That might depend on how one defines the futility concept.

Writing an opinion for the NYT (not paywalled) exiled Russian reporter Masha Gessen wrote this about her futile dream, justice for the murdering monster Vladimir Putin:

And just like that, the Western powers, which had never fully embraced this invention of theirs, became willing to leave international justice for dead.

This is the first in a series of columns on new and emerging attempts to deliver on the promise of international justice. For me, this promise is not abstract. It’s personal — as, I suspect, it has been for dissidents all over the world. As an opposition journalist in Russia, and later, living in forced exile, I have cherished the thought that Putin might one day be tried for his crimes. I have said to myself that I will keep working long enough to be able to report from his trial. International justice is a civil religion for our time: Those of us who do not believe in God may still have believed in the higher judgment delivered in The Hague.

Skander Khilf -- MAGA hates her guts

because she advocates for international justice[1]

What is the likelihood that Putin will ever be tried for his crimes? Given the state of the human species on planet Earth on Oct. 17, 2025, close to zero. 

So why would Gessen keep fighting to get justice for Putin if the exercise is futile? Because maybe it isn't 100% futile. She is virtue signaling about the ideal of justice. She is trying to keep the idea alive, even if the reality is out of reach. In Gessen's short lifetime and in Putin's far too long lifetime, one can confidently say that Putin will not face justice for his crimes. Odds of that statement being wrong appear to be almost nil. But maybe in the long run, post-Putin history will show that it was a grave mistake to not hold the monster accountable.

Why does Germaine keep virtue signaling about the core moral values of democracy, rule of law, civil liberties and respect for truth? For the same reason that Gessen keeps up her virtue signaling. Maybe her pleas for justice, along with those of other like-minded pro-justice people, will resonate with people who can do actually something good about it in the future. Maybe arguments for democracy, rule of law, civil liberties and respect for truth will resonate some day. Without those arguments, the chances of those moral values ever amounting to anything significant are much lower.

Virtue signaling about social ills, such as cruelty or kleptocracy through blogs or newspaper opinions mostly stems from moral conviction. Despite minimal or no discernable immediate impact, these acts foster and reinforce unity among like-minded people. Such signaling sets a record of dissent that may detectably influence future thought, policy, or social norms. Historically, some once-ignored arguments, e.g., abolition, civil rights, gained traction and shaped policy. Dissents in USSC decisions don't affect cases immediately but sometimes become the foundation for later important majority opinions. In short, seemingly futile advocacy for democracy, justice, etc., helps foster mindsets needed for future reform. 

Footnote:

1. Last July, MAGA Secretary of State Marco Rubio imposed sanctions on Khilf. He designated her to be a "specially designated national". That status is normally slapped on arms and drug smugglers, terrorists, and their oligarch funders. But these are not normal times. Those people can't travel to the US. They lose access to their assets in the US. They cannot engage in most international financial transactions because they are barred from using US currency. That is how MAGA treats people seeking justice for Trump's good friend and mentor, Putin.