Iraq bombings 31 dead, more than 200 injured.
- Thread starter Silphonica
- Start date
- Status
Aquamarine
Member
I didn't know about it...the event was too under-reported. It just shows how little we really care about the loss of human life, and how much we rely on the media's current focus to persuade our sympathies. I mean come on now----TWENTY car bombs. It's almost a bit selfish in a way, the degree to which we tune out tragic losses of human life except when it hits close to home or it fits a convenient narrative.
It should be pretty easy to stop being bothered by it if you keep in mind that based on location it may/may not be effectively nonexistent to you.
For instance, I do not live in Haiti, I do not plan on ever visiting Haiti, nor do I know anyone who knows anyone who lives in Haiti. Essentially, Haiti does not exist to me, and whatever events may happen in Haiti, (For example, the earthquake a few years back), do not, (as far as my world is concerned), have any effect on me.
It's just a line of thinking that may be helpful if you really just want to "stop feeling" stuff about these types of situations.
Sympathy is something that everyone should feel, even if it doesn't effect you.
Rainbow In The Dark
Member
I'm a junior; otherwise I would have made one
Also not only on Neogaf or USA the bombings in Iraq aren't being reported as much as the ones in Boston, from what I've been searching on the Internet on other countries is similar too. However, as I previously said, it is probably because of the expectations that people already have.
Standard of living and crime rate can be turned around extremely fast. For example, much of Eastern Europe was completely changed in just a few decades, just like how Japan and Germany were transformed from war-torn wrecks into some of the most powerful economies of the modern world.
I didn't know about it...the event was too under-reported. It just shows how little we really care about the loss of human life, and how much we rely on the media's current focus to persuade our sympathies. I mean come on now----TWENTY car bombs. It's almost a bit selfish in a way, the degree to which we tune out tragic losses of human life except when it hits close to home or it fits a convenient narrative.
Its a coping mechanism. Its human psychology. Get off your high horse.
Silphonica
Banned
I think empathy is more fitting here.
Krappadizzle
Member
How can people do this shit? I know some people just want to watch the world burn but, damn. How ca you justify your actions?
You should really quit while you're behind. Or do you really not comprehend why a terrorist action in a city that doesn't ever have any is getting a lot more talk from a community of people who live in or near there, know people from there, speak the same language, or who's city reminds them of their own city?
In normal circumstances, when a family member dies, you feel worse than when a friend's family member dies. When a friend's family member dies, you feel worse than when a stranger's family member dies. And so on, and so on. It's not a disrespect for others' tragedies, it's that people, animals and all living things form emotional attachments by familiarity, which tends to lessen as the familiarity lessens.
And just as importantly, Boston doesn't get terrorist attacks. It lends itself to a lot of discussion and speculation. Iraq has terrorist events weekly. Bombs will probably go off there next week, too. It's horrible, and very sad. But what's to discuss, really?
One of these threads was created six or seven hours ago. The other was created within the last hour.
Stop comparing the two because it's making you look like an idiot.
I don't want to stop that feeling honestly. I would be a cold mother fucker if I didn't have it.
Its very easy when you believe you are doing a great thing for a great reward.
Aquamarine
Member
Well yeah, I comprehend it. I'd be an idiot not to see why that thread is getting more comments. Boston never gets bombed. People have ties to Boston. Nationalistic pride, a feeling of community, human psychology, a lot more stuff to talk about, bla, bla, bla.
I'm just concerned about degree of apathy we are capable of feeling towards tragic losses of human loss, and the narratives crafted by the general media to "milk" a localized tragedy for profits. It'd be interesting to have a nuanced discussion about how much we are influenced by the media to focus on tragedies / how quickly we forget tragedies / etc.
Quite frankly, I see absolutely no reason why I should, and I challenge you to give me a convincing reason why I should in the event that I'm completely removed from said situation.
Of course, that's not to say that feeling empathy in a situation that someone is completely removed from is wrong, just I don't see any particular reason that we should feel empathy in said situation. If the particular situation doesn't exist to you, does it really make sense to have any strong emotion one way or another over it?
Also,
Silphonica said:
You, my good sir, are correct. I assumed that's what he meant, though.
That's fine then. I just assumed you did.
Carry on then.
If the motive was already known and a suspect(s) apprehended people would already be tuning out the events in Boston.
I knew someone would bring up the bombings in Iraq in comparison to the news out of Boston and make this comparison. As if the scale/body counts should matter. Iraq is a warzone and Boston isn't so of course people in the US would at least initially have a stronger reaction to something they didn't expect to happen.
I didn't know about it...the event was too under-reported. It just shows how little we really care about the loss of human life, and how much we rely on the media's current focus to persuade our sympathies. I mean come on now----TWENTY car bombs. It's almost a bit selfish in a way, the degree to which we tune out tragic losses of human life except when it hits close to home or it fits a convenient narrative.
Bombings happen on a regular basis (I would venture weekly) in the Middle East. It's kind of hard to act shocked or surprised.
Silphonica
Banned
I don't want a 200 page thread in a heated discussion, although that's the likelihood of what will probably happen.
This event and the many bombings before it stems from our involvement with the country. It's up to you how you feel on the subject.
However to me, it's an important point to make. Empathy builds perspective. Baby steps to a more peaceful, or at least a more understanding, world. (Like really tiny tiny tiny, doesn't look like you're moving at all, kinda steps)
This event and the many bombings before it stems from our involvement with the country. It's up to you how you feel on the subject.
However to me, it's an important point to make. Empathy builds perspective. Baby steps to a more peaceful, or at least a more understanding, world. (Like really tiny tiny tiny, doesn't look like you're moving at all, kinda steps)
GillianSeed79
Member
I think it's kind of BS to say we in the West don't feel empathy for those people. Obviously that bombing is crazy and sad. The reason you see less attention, I guess, is that Boston happened in the U.S., so of course it's going to be all over U.S. media. I expect media in Iraq is all over the Iraq story. If anything, Boston, hopefully, should give us more perspective on how fucked up the world is and how fucked up that these attacks are kind of common place over there. Of course I feel bad for those people. I have family in Boston too, though.
Again, I think people prioritize their sympathy and emotions out of necessity rather than selfishness. Couldn't I say to you, why are you focusing on 31 dead in Iraq when 200 were killed or raped in an African nation last week (*a fictitious but potential story)? And then someone could say, "but 500 died in x," and then someone could say, "but 20,000,000 are starving every day in x," and so on and so on.
I don't think the vast majority of people would say any one innocent life is worth more than any other, and I'm not either. It's just both attention and sympathy wanes the further you move away from a person's sense of familiarity. For instance, I bet the people of London have a lot more sympathy and more to say about what happened in Boston today than the people of Beijing. I'm not angry at the people of Beijing for this, in fact I understand very well why this would be.
Syphon Filter
Member
why does this still go on. when will it stop.
Sub_Level
wants to fuck an Asian grill.
I'm totally guilty of seeing Middle Eastern terror attacks (and Mexican cartel attacks too even though those are often gang-vs-gang) as "well, just another day in <insert place often associated with bad shit here>" but in light of the terror and anger the Boston incident caused I really feel for these people.
This is a great explanation. There's always something awful going on somewhere and we tend to gravitate toward those we can identify with the most or those with which we have some personal connection. I live in Boston and have friends and family here. I think it's perfectly reasonable that I spent the day keeping up with the marathon bombings instead of the situations in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, et al.
That doesn't discount the gravity of what they're going through or have gone through. But we're closer to here, not there. Most of GAF is American. This is atypical for America, and it involves people, places and events that many of us are very familiar with. I can't decide each day what news stories I'll care about based on the raw carnage behind them. It doesn't work like that.
- Status