Sunday, December 2, 2012
Extreme is usually the start
Not quite understanding, why it takes such extreme events to occur for people to make the right decision. If quality of participation matters just as much as the quantity of the participants. Why do people only start to participate after the tragic occurs? The UN secretary council waited until after eighteen months and six hundred fifty Palestinians were murdered before taking a course of action, but why?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
...and there were four pedestrian deaths in a single intersection before the village of Williamstown finally put in a stoplight, and even then there was heated debate about it. I think people in general crave stability and continuity more than they crave equality or justice (which are, after all, fairly abstract concepts, and quite remote from our actual experience). So things usually have to get really, really bad to mobilize most folk.
ReplyDeleteI think Professor Silliman is right in what he said. I also think, in situations regarding international relations, there are countless other factors in play. Is intervention always good, or detrimental? For a country like the United States, who has been in a World War II mentality for the past half-century, it may not be so. Cold War politics and foreign policy, in Africa especially, are evidence of that.
ReplyDeleteWith Israel especially, I don't think we should expect much to be done in favor of the Palestinians. The US supports Israel, to a fault, and powers such as China and Russia have been supporters of countries like Syria, Iran, both of whom oppose Israel. All three countries (US, CHN, RUS) are on the UN security council, and all have permanent seats, with veto power.