Throughout history, transformative figures have recognized a fundamental truth about creating lasting societal change: meaningful reform rarely happens from the margins alone. The ability to reshape institutions, laws, and cultural norms requires more than passionate advocacy—it demands strategic positioning within the very systems one seeks to transform. This principle of engaging directly with established power structures, rather than solely opposing them from outside, represents a sophisticated understanding of how change actually occurs in complex societies.
This philosophy of strategic engagement has been exemplified by numerous changemakers throughout American history, but perhaps none embodied it more completely than Ruth Bader Ginsburg, whose legal career and judicial service demonstrated the profound effectiveness of working within established institutions to reshape them. Her approach to advocacy and reform offers valuable lessons for anyone seeking to create meaningful change in their communities, organizations, or nations.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg emerged as one of the most influential legal minds in American history, dedicating her entire professional life to advancing gender equality and social justice through the American legal system. Her journey from a young law student facing discrimination to becoming only the second woman to serve on the United States Supreme Court illustrates the power of persistent, strategic engagement with institutions of authority.
Ginsburg understood from her earliest professional experiences that transforming society required more than protest or critique from the outside. While she deeply respected grassroots movements and popular activism, she recognized that lasting change in a society governed by law required changing the law itself. This meant positioning herself where legal precedents were established, where judicial interpretations were crafted, and where constitutional principles were applied to concrete cases affecting millions of Americans.
Her philosophy reflected a pragmatic realism about power and influence. She knew that those who control the mechanisms of governance—the “levers” of power, so to speak—ultimately determine which reforms succeed and which fail. Therefore, advocates for change must find ways to gain access to those decision-making spaces, to earn credibility within those systems, and to use their positions to advance progressive causes incrementally but persistently.
To fully appreciate Ginsburg’s strategic approach to advocacy, we must understand the social and political context in which her career developed. During the late 20th century, when Ginsburg’s legal career was burgeoning, the United States was navigating significant social transformations that touched every aspect of American life. The nation was grappling with fundamental questions about equality, justice, and the proper role of government in protecting individual rights.
The women’s rights movement was gaining unprecedented momentum during this period, building on decades of earlier feminist organizing and advocacy. Women across the country were challenging discriminatory laws, demanding equal treatment in employment and education, and questioning traditional gender roles that had long constrained their opportunities. This movement created both opportunities and challenges for legal advocates like Ginsburg who sought to translate popular demands for equality into enforceable legal rights.
Ginsburg played a pivotal role in this transformative era, but not primarily through mass demonstrations or political campaigns. Instead, she focused her energies on strategic litigation—carefully selecting cases that would allow courts to establish favorable precedents that would benefit women far beyond the individual plaintiffs involved. Her advocacy for gender equality was not just about arguing cases eloquently or winning individual victories; it was fundamentally about positioning herself where she could influence legal precedents that would shape American law for generations.
This historical context underscores a crucial insight about social change: movements need both outside pressure and inside advocates. The women’s rights movement created public awareness and political will, but translating that energy into concrete legal protections required lawyers who understood the judicial system, who could craft arguments that would persuade judges, and who had the credibility and access to bring cases before influential courts. Being at the table where decisions are made was vital for change, and Ginsburg dedicated her career to earning and maintaining her seat at that table.
Ginsburg’s approach to advocacy can be traced back to her early days at the American Civil Liberties Union, where she founded and directed the Women’s Rights Project. This position gave her a platform to identify and litigate cases that would challenge gender discrimination in various forms. Rather than taking every case that came her way, she carefully selected cases that would allow her to build a coherent legal strategy, establishing precedents incrementally that would collectively dismantle discriminatory legal structures.
Her work at the ACLU demonstrated her understanding that effective advocacy requires strategic thinking about how to use available resources and opportunities. She recognized that the courts, particularly the Supreme Court, were institutions where relatively small numbers of people made decisions with enormous consequences. By positioning herself as a leading advocate before these courts, she could influence outcomes far more effectively than she could through other forms of activism alone.
This strategic positioning extended beyond simply arguing cases. Ginsburg invested considerable effort in building relationships with judges, establishing her credibility within the legal community, and developing expertise that made her arguments more persuasive. She understood that influence within power structures depends not just on being present but on being respected, knowledgeable, and effective. Her meticulous preparation and careful legal reasoning earned her the respect even of judges who might have been initially skeptical of her arguments for gender equality.
The sentiment that meaningful change requires engagement with those who control decision-making mechanisms reflects a sophisticated understanding of how power operates in modern societies. In democratic systems governed by law, change typically occurs through established processes—legislation, judicial decisions, administrative regulations, and executive actions. While popular movements can create pressure for change and shift public opinion, translating that pressure into concrete policy requires working through these institutional channels.
This principle applies far beyond legal advocacy. In corporate settings, meaningful reforms in workplace practices, environmental policies, or ethical standards typically require advocates who hold positions of influence within companies. In educational institutions, curriculum changes and policy reforms are most effectively advanced by those who serve on relevant committees and hold administrative positions. In community organizations, those who participate in governance structures have greater ability to shape organizational direction than those who remain outside.
The wisdom of this approach lies in recognizing that institutions have their own cultures, processes, and power dynamics. Effective change agents understand these internal workings and use them strategically. They speak the language of the institution, build coalitions with other insiders, and frame their proposals in ways that resonate with institutional values and priorities. This doesn’t mean abandoning one’s principles or compromising core values; rather, it means understanding how to advance those values effectively within specific institutional contexts.
While the exact first use of the specific phrasing about being with those who hold the levers is not extensively documented in available historical records, the sentiment encapsulates a philosophy that Ginsburg frequently expressed throughout her career in interviews, speeches, and writings. Her belief in strategic positioning within power structures is reflected consistently in her career choices and public statements, from her litigation work to her service on the Supreme Court.
Ginsburg often spoke about the importance of incremental change and using existing legal frameworks as tools for social justice. She emphasized that while dramatic transformations might be desirable, sustainable change in a democratic society typically occurs through patient, persistent work within established institutions. This philosophy guided her selection of cases during her litigation career and her approach to judicial decision-making once she joined the Supreme Court.
The challenge of precisely documenting the origins of widely-shared quotations reflects a broader issue in attributing ideas and phrases to historical figures. Many influential people express similar concepts in various ways throughout their careers, and the specific phrasing that becomes popular may not be the exact words they used in any single instance. What matters more than the precise wording is whether the sentiment accurately reflects the person’s documented beliefs and actions, and in Ginsburg’s case, the evidence clearly supports this attribution.
Over time, the principle of engaging with power structures to create change has been cited in countless discussions about leadership, advocacy, and social transformation. It resonates powerfully with leaders and activists across various fields who understand that being part of decision-making processes is crucial for achieving meaningful outcomes. The concept is often invoked to inspire those seeking change to engage directly with influential bodies, whether in government, corporate settings, educational institutions, or community organizations.
This principle has particular relevance in contemporary debates about the most effective strategies for social change. Some activists argue for working entirely outside established systems, building alternative institutions and applying pressure through protest and disruption. Others advocate for engagement with existing power structures, seeking to reform them from within. The most sophisticated change strategies typically combine both approaches, using outside pressure to create urgency while inside advocates work to translate that pressure into concrete policy changes.
The application of this principle varies across different contexts and causes. In environmental advocacy, it might mean seeking positions on corporate boards or in regulatory agencies where environmental policies are shaped. In education reform, it might involve serving on school boards or in administrative roles where curriculum and policy decisions are made. In criminal justice reform, it might require becoming prosecutors, judges, or legislators who can change how the system operates from within.
As with many powerful ideas, this principle about engaging with power structures has been expressed in various ways by different thinkers and leaders throughout history. Some attribute similar sentiments to other influential figures, highlighting the universal appeal and cross-cultural recognition of this insight about how change happens. The concept appears in various forms across different traditions of political thought, from pragmatic reformism to strategic revolutionary theory.
The core message remains consistent across these variations: true, lasting change requires engagement with power, not just opposition to it. This doesn’t mean that all forms of engagement are equally valuable or that working within systems is always the right strategy. Sometimes systems are so fundamentally unjust that they must be opposed and replaced rather than reformed. But even revolutionary change typically requires understanding how existing power structures operate and finding ways to undermine or redirect them strategically.
The persistence of this idea across different contexts and eras suggests that it captures something fundamental about how social change occurs. While the specific mechanisms of power vary across societies and historical periods, the basic principle that changing systems requires engaging with those systems remains relevant. This universality explains why the sentiment continues to resonate with new generations of activists and leaders facing their own challenges and opportunities for creating change.
The practical impact of this principle lies in the concrete advice it offers to activists and leaders seeking to make a difference in their communities and societies. It emphasizes the necessity of presence in spaces where decisions are made, challenging the notion that critique and opposition from outside are sufficient for creating change. This insight has inspired many individuals to seek roles within institutions where they can effect change directly, even when those institutions have historically been part of the problem.
This approach requires certain qualities and commitments from those who pursue it. First, it demands patience, as working within established systems typically means accepting incremental progress rather than immediate transformation. Second, it requires developing expertise and credibility within one’s chosen field, as influence within institutions depends on being taken seriously by other decision-makers. Third, it involves navigating ethical tensions between maintaining one’s principles and working effectively within systems that may reflect values one opposes.
The significance of this strategic approach is particularly notable in fields where representation has historically been lacking, such as politics, corporate leadership, and judicial systems. When members of marginalized groups gain positions of influence within these institutions, they bring perspectives and priorities that might otherwise be ignored. Their presence changes institutional cultures and decision-making processes, often in ways that extend far beyond their individual actions or votes.
Similar sentiments about the necessity of confronting challenges directly appear throughout the history of social and political thought. For instance, James Baldwin once said, “Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed until it is faced.” Both this observation and the principle of engaging with power structures highlight the need for active, direct engagement with problems rather than avoidance or purely abstract critique.
Other thinkers have expressed related ideas in different contexts. Antonio Gramsci wrote about the “long march through the institutions” as a strategy for social transformation, emphasizing the importance of cultural and institutional change alongside political organizing. Michel Foucault analyzed how power operates through institutions and relationships, suggesting that effective resistance requires understanding these mechanisms rather than simply opposing power from outside.
These various formulations share a common insight: changing the world requires understanding how it currently works and finding strategic points of intervention. This doesn’t mean accepting unjust systems as they are, but rather recognizing that transformation requires more than moral clarity or passionate commitment. It requires strategic thinking about how to use available resources and opportunities to advance one’s goals effectively.
Ginsburg’s life and career stand as powerful testaments to her belief in the power of strategic presence within institutions of power. Throughout her decades of legal work and judicial service, she consistently demonstrated how working within established systems could produce transformative results. Her career reflects a deep understanding that being part of the system allows one to change the system from within, using its own rules and processes to advance justice and equality.
Her approach to litigation during her years at the ACLU showed this strategic thinking in action. Rather than challenging all forms of gender discrimination simultaneously, she carefully selected cases that would allow courts to recognize the constitutional problems with sex-based classifications incrementally. She sometimes represented male plaintiffs challenging discrimination against men, knowing that demonstrating how rigid gender roles harmed everyone would make judges more receptive to protecting women’s rights as well.
Once she joined the Supreme Court, Ginsburg continued to demonstrate strategic engagement with power. Even when she disagreed with the Court’s conservative majority on many issues, she worked to build coalitions where possible, crafted narrow opinions that could command majority support when broader rulings were unattainable, and used her dissenting opinions to lay groundwork for future legal developments. Her famous dissents, while not controlling law immediately, often influenced subsequent legal thinking and legislative responses.
Today, this principle of engaging strategically with power structures continues to inspire new generations of leaders and activists across various fields and causes. It serves as a crucial reminder that while grassroots efforts and popular movements are vital for creating pressure for change, engagement with existing power structures is equally important for translating that pressure into concrete results. In contemporary movements for social justice, economic equality, environmental protection, and human rights, the insight remains powerfully relevant.
Modern applications of this principle appear in diverse contexts. Young activists increasingly recognize the value of pursuing careers in government, law, business, and other fields where they can influence policy and practice from positions of authority. Organizations focused on social change invest in leadership development programs that prepare advocates to take on influential roles within institutions. Movements for reform increasingly combine outside organizing with inside advocacy, recognizing that both approaches are necessary for achieving their goals.
The principle also applies to emerging challenges that previous generations didn’t face. In technology policy, for example, advocates for digital rights and ethical artificial intelligence recognize the importance of having voices within technology companies and regulatory agencies where crucial decisions are made. In climate policy, environmental advocates increasingly pursue positions within energy companies, financial institutions, and government agencies where they can influence the transition to sustainable practices.
While the principle of engaging with power structures offers crucial insights, it’s important to recognize that it represents one element of effective change strategy rather than a complete approach by itself. The most successful social movements typically combine inside advocacy with outside pressure, recognizing that each approach strengthens the other. Grassroots organizing creates urgency and demonstrates popular support for change, while inside advocates translate that pressure into concrete policy outcomes.
This balance requires coordination and mutual respect between those working inside and outside institutions. Inside advocates need the legitimacy and leverage that comes from representing broader movements, while outside organizers benefit from having allies within institutions who can advance their goals through official channels. Maintaining this productive relationship can be challenging, as those working inside institutions may be seen as compromised by those outside, while inside advocates may view outside activists as unrealistic or counterproductive.
The most effective change agents often move between these positions throughout their careers, spending time both inside and outside formal power structures. This movement allows them to understand both perspectives, build relationships across these divides, and develop sophisticated strategies that use all available tools for advancing their causes. Ginsburg’s own career showed elements of this pattern, as she moved from academic work to advocacy to judicial service, each position building on and informing the others.
As we continue to face complex global challenges—from climate change to economic inequality, from threats to democracy to ongoing struggles for human rights—the insight that meaningful change requires strategic engagement with power remains profoundly relevant. The specific institutions and mechanisms of power evolve over time, but the basic principle endures: those who seek to transform society must find ways to influence the decisions that shape our collective future.
This wisdom encourages us to think strategically about how we can be most effective in advancing the causes we care about. It challenges us to develop the expertise, build the relationships, and pursue the positions that will give us influence over important decisions. It reminds us that creating change is not just about being right or passionate, but about being effective—about actually achieving concrete improvements in people’s lives through whatever means are available.
At the same time, this principle calls us to maintain our integrity and values even as we work within imperfect institutions. The goal of gaining influence is not personal advancement but creating positive change. This requires remaining connected to the communities and causes we serve, maintaining accountability to those we represent, and being willing to use our positions boldly when opportunities arise to advance justice and equality.
The legacy of figures like Ruth Bader Ginsburg demonstrates what becomes possible when talented, committed individuals dedicate themselves to this form of strategic engagement. Through patient, persistent work within established institutions, they achieve transformations that seemed impossible at the outset. Their examples inspire us to pursue similar paths in our own contexts, using whatever opportunities we have to move our societies closer to justice, equality, and human flourishing.
In conclusion, the principle that creating meaningful change requires engaging with those who control the levers of power encapsulates a timeless truth about how social transformation actually occurs. Its message encourages strategic positioning within institutions of authority, not as an alternative to principled advocacy but as an essential complement to it. As we face the challenges of our own era, this insight remains as relevant and valuable as ever, guiding those who seek to make a lasting difference in the world.
Explore More About Ruth Bader Ginsburg
If you found this quote inspiring, you might enjoy these products related to Ruth Bader Ginsburg:
- The Unemployed Philosophers Guild Ruth Bader Ginsburg Doll – 12″ Soft Stuffed Plush Little Thinker – $24.95
- Bleacher Creatures Ruth Bader Ginsburg 10″ Plush Figure- The RBG Icon for Play or Display – $24.99
- The Unemployed Philosophers Guild Ruth Bader Ginsburg Magnetic Personality – Plush Finger Puppet and Refrigerator Magnet, Approx 4″ Tall – $9.95
- Feminist Wood Plaque Gift, Women Belong In All Places Where Decisions Are Being Made, Plaque with Wooden Stand, Wood Sign Plaque Gift, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, RBG Woman’s Rights B1 – $7.99
- Feminist Wood Plaque Gift – RBG Woman’s Rights, Wood Sign Gift with Stand – $9.99
As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.