In action vs. inaction

When did inaction become a welcome alternative to getting in action? I don't consider myself a social or political activist, yet I stay involved and do things that are proactive for myself, friends, and family. Not that socially acceptable baloney of donating chump change to end world hunger or voting at presidential elections (not true I turn in my ballot and then watch the electoral college do what they want). Rather I teach and coach for free, I've mentored students, and I try to be everything for everyone (difficult, tiring, and obsessive-compulsive as that may sound). I accept challenges and conquer fears, get defeated and come back stronger. I try to be in action, not inaction.

And then I look around, I see apathy, incompetence, and acceptance of the second rate. Not because it has to be that way, but because its the easier choice. And for simple, small, inconsequential things. When was the last time you went into action and stopped for someone in distress? When was the last time you let inaction hold sway and passed someone in distress? For me the answers are Saturday and a little over a week ago. Neither of these event horizons of inaction or being in action brought me joy, happiness, or less of a tension headache but I did the right thing 50% of the time. And that is acceptable to many, although a score like that wouldn't pass an accredited proficiency or technical exam in this country, being active 50% of the time is acceptable even commendable. Then why do I feel like I haven't done enough?