Earthquake in Middle Asia

[Sandy]

Somehow I'm not that surprised that a thread like this hasn't been made, even though the earthquake occurred yesterday morning (in my time).

Anyhow, a [B]7.6[/B]-magnitude earthquake caused utter destruction in three Asian countries: Afghanistan, Pakistan and India.

An estimate on the death toll is [B]18.000[/B]. Well, that sure passed Katrina's victims by far...

I brought this issue up on the 9/11 memorial thread, and I will bring it up again: when a natural disaster happens in a foreign country that kills this many people, why do we act like we couldn't care less?

This is NOT a criticism towards just American people, I'm also pointing to every other people from other countries - including myself (I would be the worst kind of moralist if I didn't do so).

Personally, even the tsunami in last December didn't do much for me emotionally, and hundreds of Finns died there too. Am I just a cruel, emotionless, self-centered person who doesn't give a damn about anybody else but myself and the people around me?

Or has the modern world made me like this? Is this really an each-on-his-own -type of society we live in?

Why do I have to go through something so horrible myself before I really care?

These are some questions most of us need to ask from ourselves.

Fortunately there are those who care, and much aid from governments around the world is pouring to the Middle Asia.

I just wish I could care more...

[Onix]

[QUOTE]when a natural disaster happens in a foreign country that kills this many people, why do we act like we couldn't care less?[/QUOTE]

[COLOR=SlateGray][SIZE=1]The short answer: Because we're human.

The long answer: Humans are animals. I'm not trying to step on anybody's religious toes, but it's true. Get past our higher-level thinking, and we're just beasts based on instinct and a need to survive. And a trait about any creature that wants to survive, is that they have self-interest. Humans are selfish, and driven to focus on our lives, even if it's only on a subconscious level. This is not wangsty drama, this is not an insult towards anyone, it's simple truth. We care about ourselves more than others on an instinctual bases because, when the chips are down, we want to live. This isn't to say that we can't overcome this, or that any animal can't overcome this.

Okay, back to my point. Say you're a deer, just for the sake of argument. Are you going to feel more threatened when the family 500 miles to the south is attacked by pumas, or when your family is attacked by pumas? So, are you more freaked when a country far on the other side of the globe suffers massive damage, or when your country suffers damage. We want to survive, so we care less when danger is far away. Human nature, simple fact.

As you can see, it's not the modern world that's made you like this. You're not desensitized. You're just following instinct. Don't blame TV and video-games for base-line, genetic problems.

Call me a nihilist, call me a hopped-up jerk, I'll just stick with realist.[/SIZE][/COLOR]

[Dagger]

Personally, I think it has to do more with the fact that disasters like this are almost beyond our ability to comprehend. Pictures, articles, even video clips--they capture part of what's going on but not all of it, and I think we ourselves unconsciously don't want to understand it.

It doesn't help that people are used to reading about catastrophes in which thousands die--in a historical context. When you're living safe and secure on the other side of the world, something like this may seem about as immediate as an earthquake that happened fifty years ago.

I think we should try to care, even if it doesn't have the emotional impact on us that we expect tens of thousands of deaths to have. I don't think it's right to accept feeling blase about it as the ordinary status quo. But at the same time, I don't think being unable to weep over your newspaper makes you a bad person.

~Dagger~

[Gavin]

[SIZE=1]Interesting, most interesting.

Well I only heard about it on the radio this morning when I was having my breakfast, and so far the death toll has risen to over nineteen-thousand people including a school full of children. The Pakistani President has requested international aid, though more specifically additional air-support in order to reach those affected by the quake that cannot be accessed by road. Sky News has been giving details of the quake and it's after-effects during it's bulletins every hour.

In response to your question as to why we act as if we don't care, well bluntly it's because most people don't actually care, let alone act as if they don't. People by their very nature don't concern themselves with events that occur outside their own sphere, and natural disasters which have no effect on them personally are exactly such events which fall outside their sphere. It sounds harsh I'll admit but it's the genuine truth, people feel badly for those who've been injured or killed in natural disasters but there's nothing that they themselves can do to prevent these things from occurring.

I'll agree with Dagger's last point though, when events such as this earthquake or the tsunami occur we should care, because those people dying are human beings too.[/SIZE]

[Retribution]

[size=1]I agree with ULX and Dagger alot on this.

First of all, humans by instinct are just selfish creatures. Secondly, when something of this magnitude occurs, its so surreal, and I can't wrap my mind around it. The same thing happened with 9/11, but the impact and gravity of it all hit me much harder and faster because I live in DC (I could see the Pentagon's damage), and in America.

We really should try to give a damn about what's going on in a far-off land. Like Gavin said - those are real people dying. It's difficult to grasp, watching a little clip of a crying family or a dead child on the ground. But we should try to grasp it, try to feel for those who are hurt, and do what we can to help.[/size]

[ChibiHorsewoman]

[color=darkviolet]Well, first of all I'm shocked at myself for not posting this thread myself. Can you imagine?

I'm really shocked by the loss of life- 18,000! I just can't imagine that many lives in two days.

And now I'm just waiting for some extremist group to claim that this earthquake was brought about by a.) Infedels or B.) the terrorists who don't believe in God. [/color]

[DeathKnight]

[color=crimson]I cannot imagine what it is like to witness two major skyscrapers tumble down in front of my eyes, deal with my entire city being wiped out by a hurricane or deal with a regional earthquake decimating everything familiar to me. It's hard to ask me to sit here and deeply, deeply care about something that is unfamiliar and mostly unfathomable to me. I can and do respect the loss but I cannot do much else aside from toss money at charities- it's on the other side of the world, there's no way for me to do much for them to aide them. I can hope that they rebuild and continue with their lives as best their ability. My hope is meaningless to them but, thusfar, that is all I can find to give in copious amounts.

I find it amusing that all of you can shove so many negative qualities onto your brethren with such naive ease. You sure do sound like pseudo-professors, talking about an entire sentient species in such simplistic ways, lol. I'm glad so many of you take such lengthy periods of time to study and profoundly define our species.

Such productive works for minds so young.[/color]

[eleanor]

[color=darkslateblue] I agree with Dagger. I think it's just very hard for people in general to place themselves in that extreme of a situation (hurray for novels and movies!). Without personal establishment with someone involved in a tragedy, or actually being in it, most people can only say that they feel very bad for the people who's lives have just been destroyed. That's why I brought the novel/movie thing. Those mediums allow audiences to connect and know a character, whether he/she is fictional or true, and then we can actually get emotional over things like this.

Are you bad person? I heard about the earthquake and I didn't feel any real pain or sadness. I thought to myself "I'll donate some money when a fundraiser starts up at our school, or help with the fundraiser with anchor club", and then I was on my way to the mall with a bunch of my friends. I don't think I'm a bad person. I think the society we live in has affected us this way. News is now media, and media is here to entertain audiences.[/color]

[Retribution]

[QUOTE=DeathKnight][color=crimson]I find it amusing that all of you can shove so many negative qualities onto your brethren with such naive ease. You sure do sound like pseudo-professors, talking about an entire sentient species in such simplistic ways, lol. I'm glad so many of you take such lengthy periods of time to study and profoundly define our species.

Such productive works for minds so young.[/color][/QUOTE]
[size=1]Alright, stop acting like all of this information is somehow revolutionary, new, or earth-shattering. Machiavelli's said basically the same thing about how humans need an iron fist ruling them, because they are decietful/flawed/evil/etc. And that was hundreds of years ago. It doesn't take a lengthy amount of time to read The Prince and understand what the guy was saying.

It's also something rather easy to observe. Look in the past, look outside your window - we're still behaving in [relatively] the same manner. Humans by instinct are designed to want to survive and procreate. If that means looking out for numero-uno, then most of the time they will, or at least strongly consider doing that. Yes. Everyone has that trait to them. [B]Everyone.[/B] Humans want to have their own possesions. Humans want to have enough for themselves to eat first, then everyone else. Humans want to have shelter. In packed buildings where someone shouts "FIRE!" they trample one another to preserve their own life. It's selfish. There are, of course, those who decide not to act on their impulses, and behave in a more civil manner. Good for them. >_>[/size]

[DeathKnight]

[QUOTE=Retribution][size=1]Alright, stop acting like all of this information is somehow revolutionary, new, or earth-shattering. Machiavelli's said basically the same thing about how humans need an iron fist ruling them, because they are decietful/flawed/evil/etc. And that was hundreds of years ago. It doesn't take a lengthy amount of time to read The Prince and understand what the guy was saying.

It's also something rather easy to observe. Look in the past, look outside your window - we're still behaving in [relatively] the same manner. Humans by instinct are designed to want to survive and procreate. If that means looking out for numero-uno, then most of the time they will, or at least strongly consider doing that. Yes. Everyone has that trait to them. [B]Everyone.[/B] Humans want to have their own possesions. Humans want to have enough for themselves to eat first, then everyone else. Humans want to have shelter. In packed buildings where someone shouts "FIRE!" they trample one another to preserve their own life. It's selfish. There are, of course, those who decide not to act on their impulses, and behave in a more civil manner. Good for them. >_>[/size][/QUOTE]

[color=crimson]This is all distinteresting to me since I, personally, do not desire material possessions to such a degree. Things are very temporary and desiring myriads of temporary material things is a waste of the little time you and I have. That doesn't improve me as a person and probably makes me more apathetic instead of more wise, civil or otherwise. It does, however, affect my line of thought on this subject.

Please pardon my sarcastic tone in the prior post. All of you might be right about humanity but I can't really find enough care to trod through the faux philosophical tripe in this thread. Teenagers are the last people I want to hear talking about how instinct-driven and selfish all of us really are in the end, lol.

My lack of deep care doesn't make me selfish, bad or otherwise. There is nothing I can do within my power to help them. I am not arrogant enough to imply that my hope, care or otherwise is actually beneficial to people wading through the ruins of their homes and counting the bodies of their loved ones. I can provide monetary aid and that is about it. All of humanity has it's own problems and all of us are trying very hard to work through them.[/color]

[Retribution]

[quote name='DeathKnight']This is all distinteresting to me since I, personally, do not desire material possessions to such a degree. Things are very temporary and desiring myriads of temporary material things is a waste of the little time you and I have. That doesn't improve me as a person and probably makes me more apathetic instead of more wise, civil or otherwise. It does, however, affect my line of thought on this subject.[/quote][size=1]Desire of material possessions? I was talking more about desire to have or do anything, disregarding what others want or need. Whether that be water, a raise, or another day off, you'll [i]probably[/i] want to have that, instead of another person getting those. Now, I'm not saying you're always going to [I]act[/I] that way, but you probably would want to be selfish. That's how people are.

[quote]Please pardon my sarcastic tone in the prior post. All of you might be right about humanity but I can't really find enough care to trod through the faux philosophical tripe in this thread. Teenagers are the last people I want to hear talking about how instinct-driven and selfish all of us really are in the end, lol.[/quote]
There wasn't much 'faux philosophical tripe' in this thread to begin with, just you being a condesending jerk, saying that just because we're teenagers, we can't speculate about human nature. Teenagers aren't the only ones who notice how instinct-driven and selfish humans are, however the observant ones would find plenty of proof that we are.[/size]

[DeathKnight]

[quote name='Retribution][size=1]Desire of material possessions? I was talking more about desire to have or do anything, disregarding what others want or need. Whether that be water, a raise, or another day off, you'll [i]probably[/i] want to have that, instead of another person getting those. Now, I'm not saying you're always going to [I]act[/I'] that way, but you probably would want to be selfish. That's how people are.[/quote]

[color=crimson]Then that's all fine and good. If it ties into my future I'm somewhat interested in it, yes. But just getting.. stuff is not really that interesting. Showy displays of wealth is more what I was referring to. Actual needs or things to improve my future are tad bit more important. If that makes me an archetypical human then it does.

Note I never denied any of your opinions as they are probably right, lol. Survival is a rather important thing for us to be trying to do, don't you think?[/color]

[size=1][quote name='Retribution']There wasn't much 'faux philosophical tripe' in this thread to begin with, just you being a condesending jerk, saying that just because we're teenagers, we can't speculate about human nature. Teenagers aren't the only ones who notice how instinct-driven and selfish humans are, however the observant ones would find plenty of proof that we are.[/size][/quote][/size]

[color=crimson]Hey, 'faux philosophical tripe' was fun to type. I hope it spreads across OB like a disease. Maybe I've made some kind of a cool phrase, huh? Tell it to your friends or something. I'd like to see more people use it in the near future.

Yeah, I am being a condescending jerk. If you have issues with that then that's quite alright with me. My impression of my fellow teenagers is oddly not that high for various glaring reasons which I need not go into length to here. Nothing wrong with speculation just as long as it doesn't lead to lengthy rants that take up space on pages I'm thumbing through. Life is boring enough.

Instead of starting a duel of personas or whatever, let's just respectfully bow to each other and walk away, lol. Enough of those duels on this message board as is. Your opinion is fine, my opinion is fine. We're both cool dudes spouting lengthy rants on a internet message board, yeah?

All is well if you ask me.[/color]

[Sandy]

Well, wasn't that an unnecessary argument you started, DeathKnight... :/

Just because people here are young, doesn't mean they don't have the right to think about these things! That's what philosophy is, thinking stuff yourself - this thread isn't faux to the least!

Besides, I'd much rather have young people thinking themselves than to have them only listen to their elders and swallow [I]their[/I] truths as a whole.

Most of the things said here about the human nature might not be accurate, or even right, but at least we ponder on it on the face of another such event, and I see nothing wrong in it.

[James]

[QUOTE=Dagger]Personally, I think it has to do more with the fact that disasters like this are almost beyond our ability to comprehend. Pictures, articles, even video clips--they capture part of what's going on but not all of it, and I think we ourselves unconsciously don't want to understand it.

[/QUOTE]

[font=franklin gothic medium]Bingo, that is the reason right there. A statistic may sound horrible but it's never really enough to drive the issue home - usually someone only truly feels pain from a disaster if they go through it, or if they lose family/friends through it.

That doesn't make you a bad person, it's just how human beings are.

It's like death in general. You are more likely to feel worse pain if someone in your household dies, versus a family member who you never/rarely see - that's simply because it literally hits closer to home. Disasters are no different.

If we had more members from one of those three countries, we would naturally see more discussion on such issues. It's as simple as that, really. It doesn't mean that nobody cares...it just means that for various reasons (scale, statistics, personal involvement), we are somewhat distanced from the tragedy.

While we are coining phrases and terms, maybe we should add "faux intelligentsia" to the list. :animeknow [/font]

[DeathKnight]

[quote name='Sage']Well, wasn't that an unnecessary argument you started, DeathKnight... :/[/quote]

[color=crimson]Yeah, I'll blame it on my weekend. Took the SATs without any sleep and I'm pretty rough at the moment. I'd prolly snap at most anything at the moment, lol. Way to go, DeathKnight.[/color]

[quote name='Sage']Just because people here are young, doesn't mean they don't have the right to think about these things! That's what philosophy is, thinking stuff yourself - this thread isn't faux to the least![/quote]

[color=crimson]Yeah! This thread isn't faux to the least, that's the spirit.

Faux or not, we shouldn't declare things to be faux when they are obviously or probably not faux. Faux declarations of things being faux is wrong.

That's my point of view, how about yours?[/color]

[quote name='James']While we are coining phrases and terms, maybe we should add "faux intelligentsia" to the list. [/quote]

[color=crimson]When I saw you reply I literally said "Oh ****" out loud- I don't know what that says about you but it certainly says something. Still, this was rather tame. Yet, 'faux intelligentsia' just doesn't sound as great as what I made. You gotta do better, James. You clearly didn't extend alot of effort into creating that phrase. :animesigh

What a bunch of lazy people we have here, really. My disappointment is overflowing. :P

P.S. Maybe I could turn 'faux philosophical tripe' into an Internet meme. What do you think?[/color]

[James]

[quote name='DeathKnight']When I saw you reply I literally said "Oh ****" out loud- I don't know what that says about you but it certainly says something. Still, this was rather tame. Yet, 'faux intelligentsia' just doesn't sound as great as what I made. You gotta do better, James. You clearly didn't extend alot of effort into creating that phrase. [/quote]

[font=franklin gothic medium]Ahh, so you looked up the meaning of "intelligentsia", no? Don't worry. There are more words in the dictionary.

Anyway, in regard to the general topic...I don't think it's unreasonable to think about these things. In a way, I do think Sage has a point - people don't tend to be concerned about things that aren't happening on their doorstep.

I don't think people necessarily [i]have[/i] to be concerned about such things, but at the same time, I'm not sure how good it is to dismiss things that go on outside our own daily lives.

Sage, if you are concerned about a lack of feeling or something (or even with your own lack of feeling), maybe you could make a donation to an international relief organization or something. That may not directly change how you feel, but it may satisfy you to know that you have made a physical gesture regardless. ^_^[/font]

[Ezekiel]

[COLOR=DarkSlateGray][SIZE=1]I'd like to add a little something...

When I heard about Katrina, I was shocked. I have friends in Louisiana and the thought of all that devastation really worried me, but no, I wasn't deeply, deeply terrified. However, my mother pointed out to me that the length and breadth of the hurricane?s path was wider and longer than the UK itself.

You have no idea how much that frightened me.

With regards to the earthquake, this is the first I've heard of it. I find that quite awful, actually, that I watch the news every morning and haven't seen a single thing featured on it, but I'm learning all about what celebrities do in their free time.[/SIZE][/COLOR]

[Sandy]

[QUOTE=Imi][COLOR=DarkSlateGray][SIZE=1]
With regards to the earthquake, this is the first I've heard of it. I find that quite awful, actually, that I watch the news every morning and haven't seen a single thing featured on it, but I'm learning all about what celebrities do in their free time.[/SIZE][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

That's exactly what I tried to point out back at the 9/11 thread, but I guess I couldn't word it right... :/

As I'm not American, I have a[B] question [/B] to those who are: Do you think the fact that there aren't much news coming from the earthquake destruction zone has anything to do with the fact that Afghanistan (and to some extend Pakistan) are considered to be enemies of the USA?

I think I personally sense a connection here...

Oh, Jamesy! Money isn't the answer! :P

Seriously speaking, I am quite suspicious with aid donations, I have some difficulty believing that all the money will go to their directed address. Besides, I'm a student, I currently have less than a hundred euros in my bank account for the rest of the month - [I]I[/I] should be among the ones getting donations instead of giving them! ;P

But sure, when I get a job and make more money, I'll most probably give donations to ease my bad conscience about having no empathy, or something... :/ Except that will prove that I [I]do[/I] have empathy, so this whole train of thought is getting me nowhere! X(

[James]

[QUOTE=Sage]That's exactly what I tried to point out back at the 9/11 thread, but I guess I couldn't word it right... :/

As I'm not American, I have a[B] question [/B] to those who are: Do you think the fact that there aren't much news coming from the earthquake destruction zone has anything to do with the fact that Afghanistan (and to some extend Pakistan) are considered to be enemies of the USA?

I think I personally sense a connection here...

Oh, Jamesy! Money isn't the answer! :P

Seriously speaking, I am quite suspicious with aid donations, I have some difficulty believing that all the money will go to their directed address. Besides, I'm a student, I currently have less than a hundred euros in my bank account for the rest of the month - [I]I[/I] should be among the ones getting donations instead of giving them! ;P

[/QUOTE]

[font=franklin gothic medium]The first paragraph is, I think, more than a little unfair.

Germany was the enemy of Australia during WWII, but do you think Australian people didn't like German people or didn't care about them? Afghanistan isn't anyone's enemy anymore anyway, or at least, it's government isn't. I think people are (generally) able to distinguish between "Taliban" and "ordinary Afghan citizen who only wants to survive and isn't concerned with blowing things up". You know?

I mean, I'm sure some people can't distinguish that...but they are not entirely rational anyway, so I expect nothing more. lol

As for donations...there are plenty of transparent organizations that get the money to those affected. Often the money is used to pay for materials and medicine and stuff. Even $5USD would probably be enough to contribute to materials for re-building a house (don't forget that a few bucks for us is of much higher value in third world countries).

Mostly I think the money is a bit of a symbolic gesture - no, $5 isn't going to solve the problem. But it might buy a toy that will comfort a child, or it may pay for some medical aid for someone.

I understand the financial difficulty though, so it's okay. It was mostly just a suggested way to contribute, given your concern for the issue.[/font]

[Sandy]

[quote name='James][font=franklin gothic medium']The first paragraph is, I think, more than a little unfair.[/font][/quote]

Oh, I didn't mean it that way! Obviously it was my fault that I couldn't get my point across in the aforementioned thread, I wasn't trying to take credit from what Imi said or anything.

It is a good point, though, how much media controls our knowledge about things.

[quote=James]Germany was the enemy of Australia during WWII, but do you think Australian people didn't like German people or didn't care about them? Afghanistan isn't anyone's enemy anymore anyway, or at least, it's government isn't. I think people are (generally) able to distinguish between "Taliban" and "ordinary Afghan citizen who only wants to survive and isn't concerned with blowing things up". You know?
[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I know, that's why I asked and didn't just blame (see, I'm learning! ;) ). But we must also remember that insititutions like media and government aren't just one person, they reflect the generalized thinking of the majority of people, so I wouldn't be surprised if the tv-channels have made a principle decision about not showing the damages of the earthquake much (even though I can't think of a reason why...)

In Finland the issue has been on the news and papers and everywhere over the weekend, at least.

[Ezekiel]

[COLOR=DarkSlateGray][SIZE=1][quote name='Sage']Seriously speaking, I am quite suspicious with aid donations, I have some difficulty believing that all the money will go to their directed address.[/quote]

I agree with you here, Sage. (Shock horror! Are we on level ground? ^_~ I mean that in a nice way.) I know this may be a little off topic, but with regards to aid, I believe that it should go in the form of things such as water, food and supplies for people to build shelters, like during Katrina and the Tsunami.

In Ethiopia, where the people are starving, there isn't much being done. However, I know the Oxfam shops in the UK (Not sure if they're anywhere else?) Put their profits into Ethiopia and there are multiple organisations that collect money. However, all we see are military things being bought by the government, no food or water, like they need.

I may be a little more in tune with the issue, and care about it a little more, as I used to live in SA and we got to know a lot more about the situation over there in the news. I think things like poverty are a disaster in themselves, because they're ongoing and it seems that outside countries can't do anything except hand money to the governments, [I]hoping[/I] that they'll do the right thing with it.

Anyway, if outside countries want to help the people of Afghanistan, then we should be sending supplies, not money. Because nine-times-out-of-ten, it won't be put to good use.

/rant end[/SIZE][/COLOR]

[Sandy]

A topic on the news today was that the people of some town in Pakistan had started to rob the aid trucks that carried supplies, because they were angry that they didn't come sooner. Talk about reason here... 8/

I noticed the same (quite obvious) thing with the events New Orleans last month: many people just break down mentally, or even worse, see a catastrophe as an opportunity to break havoc and pilfer stuff. What a crazy species we are... :P

Oh, and it's great that we agree on something, Imi. ;D

[Gavin]

[SIZE=1]I've just been watching the Sky News headlines and the official death toll has now reached over twenty thousand with it to rise to possibly double that as the final figure for the number of fatalities caused by this earthquake and it?s after effects. That so many people could lose their lives to a natural disaster is truly saddening, and that people are gone so desperate for support that they are now assaulting the same convoys sent to help them is equally saddening. I hope that given enough time, enough assistance can be given for all those affected by this tragedy. [/SIZE]

[James]

[QUOTE=Sage]Yeah, I know, that's why I asked and didn't just blame (see, I'm learning! ;) ). But we must also remember that insititutions like media and government aren't just one person, they reflect the generalized thinking of the majority of people, so I wouldn't be surprised if the tv-channels have made a principle decision about not showing the damages of the earthquake much (even though I can't think of a reason why...)

[/QUOTE]

[font=franklin gothic medium]Well, news organizations are somewhat bound by entertainment value as well (which is certainly not right). But it's important to distinguish between "this isn't an entertaining story so we won't air it" versus "we won't air this because we don't want sympathy for America's enemies". The two are pretty different and the former is really more accurate in those cases where the media may not be reporting it to any significant extent.

However, I must say (on cable news at least), the issue has had a lot of air-time...both on Australian and American news stations.

I think the problem with these things is not that they have too little air-time, but that they have too much air-time.

Of course, major disasters should be covered and they are important - but I would argue that disasters are often covered far too much, when there are other things going on in the world. I mean, yeah, you're more likely to cover a major disaster like this than some pointless local news story (relatively pointless, anyway)...but there are always a variety of important international events taking place. For one event to monopolize all coverage 24 hours a day is, I think, doing a big disservice to the public. But I guess that's a slightly seperate issue in general - it has nothing to do with people's perception of the situation in terms of whether or not they regard these countries as enemies or not.[/font]