Changing oneself or changing the world ?

The duality of opposite possible attitudes in the face of problems, between seeing them as individual problems to be purely charged on the victim (shame on him if he fails to manage, he has no right to complain anyway), or as in need of collective resolution, was expressed in the article Innovation Is the Key for Humanity's Future by Stephen Agnew
"The recursion of innovation along with knowledge and tools provides humanity with purpose and a choice between two possible futures: changing the world or changing ourselves."
This exposition of the alternative seems clear. However it is extremely naive : by its abstract generality it completely fails to describe how things are going in the real world with respect to this so-called alternative:
The fact is, for the world to be possibly globally changed for the better, we first need the ability to put a fair diagnostic of its real global problems, i.e. problems that many people face and for which "trying to change oneself [into denialism] instead of trying to change the world" cannot be the right solution that can work for everybody. Because even if a denialist or self-management solution worked for someone (yes it may accidentally happen depending on individual circumstances that are so diverse between people !), it would only work for one person at a time and could not help other people; it would only make others jealous, or oblige them to repeat the tedious "self-changing work" all over again which means that the "self-changing" work by the first people did not start to help the next ones.... and especially it is extremely dangerous to automatically and unfalsifiably blame the witnesses of global problems who complain that a "self-changing solution" does not work, as it multiplies the really existing injustice by the shame unjustly put on the victims who rightly know that "trying to change oneself" cannot be the right efficient solution for their problem. It smashes them under the weight of the dominating denialism of the world, without letting them any right or possibility to defend their honor.
The deep phenomenon of taboo towards any "personal testimony" of problem (as if real problems could be observed by any other means than personal testimonies of people struggling with something) and temptation of having to be or to pretend being, free from any "personal problem that one fails to properly resolve oneself and thus needs to blame on the rest of the world" in order to feel serious and a good problem solver or at least a serious witness of problems, is a very general bias not restricted to the physical separation between people who have problems and people who look for solutions, but it also happens as personality divisions inside the same people. The result is that, by lack of awareness of any of the real problems actually smashing us right now under our noses,
Having one's head in other planet while ignoring absolutely everything that is under our nose, is a guarantee of unfalsifiability that is very convenient to secure one's job, but is doomed to remain pure waste of thought, as absurd as the current academic system that only cares to train a small elite to absurdly pointless research (such as string theory) while everybody completely forgot to clean up the basics.

Main page:
On humanity's failures to steer itself properly
with next section "One example of concrete reality".