Skip to main content

Names and Pictures define us, a little too much


I am sure all are aware of last Sunday night’s tragic events in Las Vegas, with the 64 year-old Stephen Paddock sending shockwaves around the world through undoubtedly the deadliest mass shooting in modern American history.

At the time of writing, the death toll stands at 59, and more than 500 have been injured – a number which will surely lead to changes in American gun laws. If they are not too naïve to realise that they must act.

The event is also another example of how susceptible we are to vitriolic, bloody terrorist attacks (or hate crimes, depending upon your perspective) and how easy it is to forget about these ever-increasing crimes.

Just two days after the massacre, I was scrolling through social media, perhaps oblivious to the severity, when I came across a video. This video showed many of the victims, crucially with names and pictures.

And for the first time since I developed an arguably cynical view that death happens every day, and thus that we should not be shocked when only a small minority perish, it properly got to me.

I don’t want to over-emphasise the emotion that I felt, I wasn’t suddenly grief-stricken or in tears, but it did get me thinking; how much do names and photos affect our feelings?

If I told you that around 100,000 Iraqi soldiers died in The Gulf War of 1990-91, the figure has little meaning. These people, one might think, who are they? Is this true, or is it a statistic exaggerated and brought up to make us feel guilty?

If I mentioned Lee Rigby, the British soldier brutally stabbed to death on the streets of London in May 2013, it is more likely to draw gasps or mutterings from an audience. For this was an Englishman killed, off-duty, inhumanely, on his own streets.

It would be a stretch for me to liken each of the Iraqi soldiers to Lee Rigby, but the point still remains. These are still people in their own right and many of those will have been serving just like Lee Rigby – with the aim of feeding their families.

By logic, we should be 59 times more despondent, or rather shocked, upon hearing of the Las Vegas attack, than we were when hearing about Lee Rigby. That is based off a basic human intuition, that everyone is equal. It seems only right that we care more depending upon the numbers. Yet we do not.

As Josef Stalin reputedly put it, ‘the death of one person is a tragedy, the death of a million is a statistic.’

But just why is it like this?

The simple explanation would just be to put it down to human emotion. A lot might argue that when you hear of a single death on the news, through whatever source, it takes on more significance as you are exposed to all the details – their life, age, name etc.

Emotions like this aren’t quantitative. The personal connection to one death (or indeed around 60) that we hear about in detail, is a lot higher than the connection between us and 100’000 people hundreds of miles away.

Understandably, anything which has a perhaps more direct threat to us and our society sticks in the forefronts of our mind more easily – recent examples of this are the terrorist incidents such as 9/11 and the 7/7 bombings, plus the ones I have previously mentioned.

And unfortunately, in my opinion, it seems that that feeling is simply inescapable.

I’m not arguing that we should care about every single person when they die, for otherwise we would have death on our minds 24/7, and it is illogical to think anyone would think that – we are all too caught up in our own worlds as it is.

Nor am I suggesting that we should completely disregard the tragic deaths of attacks such as the one in Las Vegas, that would be heartless and disrespectful.

And quite obviously, everyone will mourn the deaths or sufferings of people who are directly present in their lives – family and friends etc.  

But I do think it is important to have some perspective, and although that human emotion is what makes us all so unique, not to let it overcome us to the extent that it warps our views.

Because that would be an extremely sorry neglect of human emotion.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

As Western governments wilfully ignore events in Palestine, they have lost the trust of their own people - and crucially, the Global South

It does not take a genius to spot the obvious contradictions in geopolitical narratives of Western governments and media evident over the past few decades. The US' post-9/11 botched "war on terror", that created a generation of instability in the Middle East, has served as the driver for European countries to lament the subsequent influx of migrants and legitimise the xenophobic desires of far-right parties. More recently, the same states have rightfully isolated Russia for their invasion of Ukraine - despite the similarity to their atrocities after 2001. Yet in the past three months, they have managed to brazenly exhibit their hypocrisy to an extent that I, and evidently many others, find astounding. And any long-time readers will know I've been more than happy to highlight duplicity of Western countries on this blog, so that should tell you something about how bizarre recent events feel. Source: UNRWA, via The Wire In response to the militant group Hamas' terror...
Post a Comment
Read more

With an election upon us, we must make sure to get some long-awaited change

 Hasn’t the last five years felt like a long time?  In the run up to the December 2019 General Election four and a half years ago, I remember using social media to say “do your own research, and go vote for whatever you believe in”. There was, and still is, some reason in that - youth turnout in politics is still so lamentably low, and it’s partly why we see political change that does nothing to help young people. So do please vote on Thursday. But perhaps I was overly naïve in the run-up to that election, because things are a lot different now. In 2019, I was disenfranchised with the political system, cynical of all politicians looking to support their own political careers. After the wave of Jeremy Corbyn’s unexpected result in 2017,  why was it to be too different this time? And would it have had that much of a consequence? The last five years have laid bare everything I could - and maybe should - have learnt before. There are no positive words to describe what Boris J...
Post a Comment
Read more

Divisive politics: In defence of the "woke"

Waking up the morning of November 8th, to the new of Donald Trump's re-election as U.S President - I sighed. There was none of the shock or disappointment of his initial election eight years earlier, or the anger and incredulity of 6th January 2021, where Trump's emboldened supporters stormed the U.S Capitol building for the most ridiculous coup d'état attempt.  No, instead, there was a grim sense of inevitability about the most divisive figure in modern global politics becoming the most powerful man in the world for a second time.  Trump's election is symbolic. For this is a man who, since his formal intention to run for President in 2015 - has thrived on propelling division and hatred. Some of his many moments include  questioning  the legitimacy of Obama's birth certificate, making policy announcements on social media, and telling people to drink bleach to protect against COVID-19.  It comes at a time where society seems at a crossroads, as social media misin...
Post a Comment
Read more