The "tidal wave" or tsumani resulting from the past week's massive earthquake in the pacific has caused a death toll of more than 70,000 in several countries. Indonesia, Thialand, and India, along with others, suffered massive casualties. India alone, according to December 30, 2004 headlines, lost 7,000 lives. The quake, second largest in the world as far as in known, caused 40-foot waves to swamp shores and carried hundred or thousands out to sea.
The media are quick to report the casualties and the potential for further deaths due to disease. But no one is reporting the historical context. The same part of the world routinely loses thousands or hundreds of lives due to yearly natural disasters that are somewhat less dramatic, such as india's perinial mudslides. And nothing is done the following year to try and prevent it.
Granted, the focus now is on the deaths from the earthwuake and resulting wave, and on helping survivors. Yet, why has nothing been said about the context of these deaths? Meida reports have speculated what would happen if such a wave hit other coutnries; naturally people even in the U.S. are concerned. Yet, the likelihood of similar casualties here is very small. It is not that we have wavebreaks or seaswalls by our shores; no seawall will stave off a 40-foot surge. But there is a difference. The "protection" against a disaster such as this is, in its most basic form, knowledge -- and ideas. It is a warning that could have saved lives -- and an ideology that foucses on individual lives which would require its implementation. The U.S. by and large still has such a philosophy, though its government often does not abide by it and sometimes neglects it. Can the countries affected claim the same?
But the media have not gone into this -- it is one of the limitations of broadcast or visual media. They show a few pictures, say some words, and then its on to the next story. Granted, written press is seldom known to delve into historical context either, but that is a failing of the writers, not the medium. Televised news, however, just does not lend itself to in-depth eporting or analysis. And it is impossible to guage such an event without going the in-depth route. Because such a disaster is a once-in-life-time thing, the likelihood of it occurring again is small. So should the governments of these countries, knowing it isn't likely to happen again for, say, one hundred years or so, bother to do anything? Take the long vie,w and the view of the individual citizen. You will conclude they should. Yet they have not -- just as they have not addressed the mudslides, etc. that continue to plaque them.
The situation, admittedly, isn't as bad as in Iran, where Israel -- the only civilized nation in the middle east -- offered to send help after a massive earthquake, and Iran refused because the one offering help was Israel. In such a case, the rejection of the West and its ideas are explicit. In the case of the undersea earthquake and wave that struck Indonesia and much of Asia, the issue is different -- but not dissimilar. There are things that can be done to warn of, if not prevent, earthquakes and "tidal waves". Many such warning services are provided free by the organizations who run them. Why did many of the countries struck by the disaster not subcribe to these services?
The question may be asked -- but not seriously. Pragmatic concerns are addressed, but they are a smokescreen and not substantial. No real reaosn -- no real ideas -- are considered. With a free warning service the only pragmatic concern is designating a contact person within the subscribing government. If this is too much of a hassle what does it say about said government's regard for its citizens? It goes tot hew heart of the issue of why a government is instituted and what its purpose is. In the U.S. (and the West generally) the answer has been: To protect the rights and lives of the citizens. And by and large this has been the role governments have played, especially in the U.S. What is the view of the purpose of government in, say, India? Indonesia? And, as governments are shaped by ideas, that question ultimately is: What is the role of the mind?
The issue is not just confined to this disaster. Look at the concerns of "overpopulation". Worldwide the birthrate is in decline; in the West it is lower than in the past. America has no "overpopulation". Europe has a falling birthrate, which is playing havoc with its socialist "social security" style welfare systems. The only countries suffering population trouble are those that cannot feed their people, and these are usually technologically backwards, with either an unstable social and government structure (i.e., civil war)or an estabished government that does not respect the rights of its citizens (such as Mugabe's regime in Africa, or Communist China). Both factors are connected; unfree or war-torn countries are less likely to develop technology, and standards of living, able to cope with their population. The "overpopulation" problem, then, is not about the number of people in a given geographical area, but rather about the ideas of the government under which said people live!
The role of the mind, of ideas, is overlooked because the media does not respect the mind. That can only account for their reporting. But it is not a good sign of things to come.
Back...
