note...
•
26 Jul 2011, 20:55
•
Journals
Every day almost 16000 children die from hunger- related causes.. nothing on news
60 young adults killed in norway.. its on the news for weeks..
hmmmh?
60 young adults killed in norway.. its on the news for weeks..
hmmmh?
+ it's called the news
b) Who knows if it's on the news for weeks, just happened a couple of days ago.
c) Amy Winehouse's death produces just as many headlines, which is even sadder.
d) You complain about the lack of fairness yet you probably not even once considered donating or helping out in any way. You're just as bad as everyone else. What does constant coverage do if people keep not giving a single fuck.
which would result in more resource transhering to africa, while they still couldn't do a thing about helping themselves. you drain the 'economically more advanced' countries off their resources, while trying to maintain live, where it is not supposed to be.
What's "normal" in that? This is no permanent solution at all. it's not even a start, it's a temporary betterment of their conditions, nothing more. so where's the fairness in that? there are enough needy around you already, why drift off so far, to help those instead?
Also: hunger is only one of their problems. you're partly taking care of the healthcare with this too, but not entirely, they'd still suffer from deseases, which are not taken care of. if you now wanted to transpher the resources you use for food to healthcare you'd not gain anything at all.
b) we will see...
c) +1
d) As a matter of fact i support the wild life in africa by donating to the diana fossey organization. Thats how i give back.
d) Seems like a decent cause, although I'm slightly cynical about animal charity.
b) Now when it comes to other injustices in the world (mostly caused by big companies trying to maximise their profit and exploit people to do so) that is what should be in the news!! How little children in the poor countries have to work in factories so that we can get nice clothes cheap. How the world could sustain the number of people that currently inhabit it, but Western Countries actually use somewhat over 80% of its natural resources. How the wealth of the world is distributed unequally to the privileged 5%. And how for this reason (so we here can have a good life and not to worry about food, clean water or clothes) people in Africa are left fighting for scraps. They have such a beautiful continent but wealthier countries are exploiting it empty and this has been going on since the colonial times. So I think media attention is good, in the case of the shootings in Norway. Maybe (hopefully) people will start to think how ill our society is and maybe someday be ready to acknowledge the fact that most of the suffering in the world happens so that a minority of privileged people can have a good and carefree life. That minority being us.
you're definitely part of it, everyone is, even non-civilised counties. think of darwin. you think that could ever be changed? definitely not entirely, since it's the nature of mankind to take advantage of others. some to on purpose, others simply let go, but even the 'weakest' of our society, if you want to call them that, fight each other in some way, and if it's for a better spot, where you collect more chump change or even a bowl of rice at the end of nowhere.
you do not have to like it, but at least you have to acknowlege, that it can not be changed.
Think of it this way: would you give up your current live as it is to help the needy?
you might think you could still go for equalty. but there is not such a thing. it's simply not possible that we're all equal in time and position, thus be faced with same conditions. and even if we were - some can stand certain conditions better than others, where is the equalty in that? you'd certainly have to do something about that too.
sure you might settle with "acceptable conditions" for everyone. but on the other hand: it just doesn't work. if you wanted to offer the same food, or any sort of kinda good food to everyone in africa to FAIR prices (prices not only fair compared to the low income, but also to economy - someone got to pay the food at some point) you could also just chose to say that they're not entirely forced to live there. why would others have to suffer for their ignorance?! poeple have fled danger for the time being and still are, why not them? why do others have to take care of them, while they're not chosing to change anything?
EDIT: its a Mr like u who puts the rest of us to shame.
how does offering a thought, which is not even necessarily my own beliving putting mankind to shame?
it may sound a bit harsh i give you that, but it was merely a provocative thing to say. (i do not expect you to be on this one with me (i never even said I was with it), i only want you to tell me now, why it would be shameful to act for a global cause and not a group of individuals (a big one no doubt, but a fraction of the rest of the world none the less)
only saying that it's not right to not help a certain group is hardly an argument.
(and as i said above already, if it were your believing that you should not let anything untried if it was for the good of some people, how comes you are not donating every spare coin you have? it would be only an inconvinience to you, but could improve a hundred lifes down there. or maybe even declare it your life achievement to collect funds. you could do so much, and yet you are not using all of the time at hands to do so? how do you justify that then?
The bath i chose to help this planet is by trying to maintain its wild life. Too many species have died out because of us. If i donate 10e/month out of my 450e student grant i believe its more than reasonable. I also like to recycle my clothing trough the Salvation Army. It does not take much effort and i think its something each of us could do. By these little things we already could help this planet a lot.. The problem is just people like u who choose to do nothing at all.
Again, this is not my ideology, it's just something to think aabout. again you didn't give any reason to why you would try to lessen their suffer, but only temporarily. there is no long-term solution to end their suffer from outside as of now. If you're on about the children: other peoples children are not OUT responsibility, their parents are responsible for them. if they're not able to take care of them, theres still an option for interference. but what if they chose to let their children suffer like that, by not leaving?
So you give 10€ a month, but why not 20€ and if 20€ why not 30? is it because you can put the money to better use?
I never said that i'd believe that the world can not be changed, that's not even the statement behind the text. the text merely questioned rather the world SHOULD be changed THIS WAY, in such a crude way. there ARE other options than financing someones misery, some are more pleasant for you or the suffering one, but there are other options. why would you say that yours is the right one? there is not even an argument behind it, only your moral believing that you'Re doing the right thing. for this very moment you could be right or wrong, but that also applies on the long run. more likely it's not, because not enough are following the example you set, but if they were there certainly would be an impact you might wanted to consider. (you might say that life is the highest good this planet has to offer, and you may be right in this, but there certainly are also other lifes than those in africa, which were to be affected by this. (besides, why donate 10€ for someone starving in africa while there are homeless even in the western countries, do they not suffer?)
again, please to not take this to a personal level or judge me, there's nothing for you to judge me upon. if what i wrote in the text was entirely wrong you could certainly prove it to be, no?! :)