|
|
| |
| Friday, October 14, 2005 |
| Beware: rant ahead |
There are a lot of people talking about recent "disasters" (mostly the domestic ones are getting all the news coverage in a decidedly american kind of way) and what the meaning behind them is, if there is any at all. So much of the coverage focuses on the stuff people lost. I don't mean to belittle losing one's home or pets, but the news media puts such a spin on it and so frequently the people get second billing. Lives are lost. And not just numbers, but people's brothers, mothers, wives, children. I have taken to watching BBC news on whatever channel that is that is local PBS sometimes. Foreign news coverage is a little more people focused. I have taken heart in stories done on specific people rescued from the rubble in Afghanistan (the 5 year old girl, the mother of 3), I have seen coverage of the mud slides in Guatemala (something nearly completely glossed over by American news media due to current "disaster" strikes here).
And yes I have been putting "disasters" in quotes on purpose. The way nature has been acting against our man-made constructs as of late have caused me to begin thinking about how hard we tax the land we live on. How we shape and mold it into what we consider habitable areas will eventually catch up with us. We are trying to tame a wild thing. Our metal and concrete are thorns in the paw of the land. We cannot expect that the earth won't do it's thing (what we term "disaster" when it disrupts our stuff) just cause we built something and claim to own the land. It's like trying to have a tiger for a pet. There is still something wild in it even though most of the time it acts much like your domestic house cat. It's unpredictable and needs to stretch it's wildness every now and then. So maybe we need a new word for natural "disaster". It's not a disaster for nature. It's a part of a cycle that has purpose to it. Just because it disrupts the man-made world doesn't make it bad.
One final note: I have also been thinking on the large scale of poverty in parts of the US that sit just below the radar until something drastic happens to that section of the population (like people being trapped in New Orleans without a way to leave before the hurricane hit). How is it we allow so many people to be so invisible to us? How is it we focus so much on poverty in the rest of the world and do things to help there while completely missing it right in front of our noses? There is a huge amount of wealth in the US and yet those who have the least are most willing to give.
End rant. |
posted by Jen @ 12:22 AM   |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
