Pharyngula

Pharyngula has moved to http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/

Wednesday, December 29, 2004

What's Really Important?

Deep under the now scenic, placid blue seas of southeast Asia, a geological horror is forming of gargantuan proportions. One which will leave its novel signature for eons in the rocky column. A new layer of strata has been laid down, but this deposit is uniquely macabre. It's a hominid bone-bed. Mixed in with the newly forming sandstones, limestones, shales, and chalk, are the remains of a civilization. Homes, trees, crops, cars, factories. And the unthinkable human toll: 300,000* dead men, women, and children. The last thoughts they had must have been rife with stark raving terror. At least tonight they lay peacefully, no longer wide eyed in fear, the final echo of their lives flickering through their oxygen deprived psyche. At least that part is over, for them; back in the earth from which we all, ultimately, arise and then return.

On the altered coastlines of Sumatra, Indonesia and nearby countries, whole villages are missing; there's just water, sand, and debris where entire towns once stood. To estimate the dead, local officials, the few who are left, are having to consult maps with GPS coordinates and then looking to see if there's still a community at that location. If there is nothing but rubble, or, even more startling, a pristine clean beach with no trace of survivors or homes, shops, and streets, they take the last population reported, and add it to the growing list of victims. It's that bad.

And, it's not over. This tragedy isn't over by a long shot. More will die, perhaps as many as have already perished in the blink of one bright Sunday morning, perhaps more. There are tens of millions of stunned, injured, and homeless people, some dying as I write this, stumbling around aimlessly in mosquito-infested swamps looking desperately for food, for clothing, for their loved ones; hoping against hope to find anyone they know. They are looking for a way to live. They are fighting for their very right to exist. Sadly, those survivors are going to be cut down in great numbers from the ensuing starvation, disease, lack of medicine, and the inevitable, panic-induced violence.

Many of the affected countries have a high population of Muslims. These tend to be the moderate Muslim nations. The cultures which have helped us the most in the fight against Al Qaeda. These are the very people who we would like to enlist in helping us fight international Islamic Militants, and the ones who are most likely to cooperate in doing so. They are industrious people, known for their commitment to science and education. But the real reason we have to help is not because of what they can do for us, but because of what we can do for them; our brothers and sisters, our grand nieces and maternal nephews, in our great family. They need help.

Wouldn't you think this catastrophe would be the kind of thing we, as a nation, would want to reach out to and soften, anyway we can? Even if it's not something that's going to directly benefit us? That we'd want to lend a hand, no matter who the victims are? If not now, when? If not for this, what for? If not for political gain, for simple humanity? For decency?

FOR VALUES?

Because we are all human, and this is utter human devastation. This could have been us. It's human misery on the scale of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This is 100 Titanics. This is twice the Vietnam War. And it's something we could make an enormous difference in, the most serious kind of difference, the difference between life and death, for thousands of our fellow travelers rocketing around our local star on this small world we all share.

I don't want to sound like I'm trying to make a political statement here, this isn't the appropriate place for that kind of thing. This disaster transcends petty politics, no doubt. But, I have to say honestly, I'm effin ashamed of my country. We first pledged 15 million, and then increased it to 40 million. Forty-Million dollars ... Sounds like a lot? To put that in perspective, we're going to spend 40 to 50 million in Washington, DC, in one afternoon, on the Presidential Inauguration. To give our pledge some context, we're spending about 100 to 200 million dollars a day in Iraq. We spend damn near 40 million for beer, chips, and soft drinks in this country every day.

Our leaders, the leaders of the richest, most prosperous nation on Earth, could have been flown in on Air Force One and other senior executive aircraft to the region in a few hours, check-book in hand, to respectfully represent our sorrow, our grief, and most important, our life-saving generosity. Surely that would have made a better photo-op than a carrier landing. They could have shown the Muslim World and the international community what the America you and I know is really about, and done so in a positive, charitable way. Instead, our White House is on vacation ... Godamn, our response so far makes me feel ashamed to be an American. It's not just poor leadership and poor PR, it's immoral.

And you know what? I don't have to put up with that shit. I don't have to let those assholes speak for me. I just gave 50 dollars to Red Crescent, earmarked to save my brothers lives, and I feel pretty damn good about doing it! I felt so good about it, I gave another fifty for those of you who may be struggling. It's a few days after Christmas, it would be truthful for me to say that things are a little tighter than usual around DarkSyde Manor. But that's a cop-out. I can easily afford it. Hell, by not eating fast food at lunch for a month I can afford it. Save lives and avoid fast food for a month? That's a bargain I can't pass up.

I realize we have a lot of students, single moms, single dads, folks who are sick, and on fixed incomes, reading this site and making up this wonderful zany community we call Pharyngula. But if you can give a little, please think about it. Not everyone can afford to give a hundred bucks, not everyone can afford to give anything at all, but if you can spare ten dollars, get off your duff and do it. Just because our leaders think billions in corporate welfare, and mega buck weapons systems to kill people, are better ways to spend money than saving the helpless victims of disaster, doesn't mean I have to let them speak for me. And I won't.

Lots of ways you can contribute are being tracked by The Command Post. They're really on top of this, and I think they deserve some recogniton. Even if you can't spare the change, maybe some of us could go visit their Blog and say howdy to them, and let them know how we feel.

Update: Crooked Timber has a deal up concerning Amazon for donations. Hat Tip: Isabel who also has some additional donation info
on her Blog.

UPDATE: Death Toll now estimated at over 200,000, expected to rise to perhaps 400,000. Several medium sized cities in Indonesia cannot be located reliably. No survivors see in aeriel surveys.

Update: In comments JBarker asked: I’m still seeing 124,000 dead on the BBC. Are these extrapolations taking into account starvation and disease in the coming weeks? Or are they still just referring to the immediate tsunami death toll?

Last night on MSNBC's News Program Countdown with Keith Olbler, several local reporters were discussing an aerial reconnaissance survey of the hardest hit area in Indonesia. Apparently, at least three medium sized cities, with population in the 100,000 or so each, are basically ... gone. They reported no structures left standing, no survivors sighted. The affected urban centers cannot be reached at this time by land; the roads are gone, the terrain is treacherously swamped out marshland. It is unknown if the residents had time to flee in large numbers, but the reporters and officials are assuming the worst.

Trackback url: http://pharyngula.org/index/trackback/1759/Gn9cTu6h/

Comments:
#12238: — 12/31  at  03:30 PM
Despite your disclaimer in the initial post, DS, it's getting harder and harder to believe you didn't take this as a Christmas present for a chance to slam Bush.

Fair enough. We know where you're coming from.

I wonder, though, whether -- and despite your later comment about his upping the response -- whether anything he might have done would have gotten a positive post out of you a few days ago.

A few factual/historical notes:

1. South Asia has experienced disastrous losses of life at least as big as this one, and not so long ago.

Cyclones pushing water up the Bay of Bengal drowned people 300K at a time (or worse) several times, until in the 1970s a simple technical fix was tried (building artificial hills as refuges on the Bangladesh flood plain).

2. There is a cyclone warning system in place in the Indian Ocean. It was, for the most part, not manned over the weekend. Presumably because this is not cyclone season.

I talked with some American geologists the day after, and Gerard Fryer of the U. of Hawaii told me that they understood "within minutes" that there was danger of a great tsunami.

(Quoting from memory, my notes are at the office and I'm at home today): "It was at least 8.5. Any earthquake that large has to be near the surface, and it has to create a tsunami."

The head of the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center tried to call anyone he could think of, but he had no emergency contact lists, and, for the most part, when he did, no one answered the phone.

The Australian seismic service picked up the quake but issued no notices. It turned out NW Australia was not affected, but they could not have been sure.

Lots of people asleep at the switch, it looks like.

3. Massive American rescue efforts do not, historically, leave huge reservoirs of good will for us, though we get some. The end result, though, tends to be long-term hatred of us, or, at best, mixed feelings.

Think of Russia in the '20s, Germany in the late '40s.



#12244: — 12/31  at  04:41 PM
Harry,

though it may be hard for many in the current incarnation of the Republican party to understand, not everyone has the knee jerk tendency to view world events as, intrinsically, opportunities to score political points.



#12245: DarkSyde — 12/31  at  04:50 PM
Harry I feel my posts from this monring and the update recognizing Bush's response this afternoon speaks to my viewpoint on the matter. I'm biased against Bush, but not about this. And if they (The WH) continue to adjust as they have been, I won't have an ill word to say about the WH's reaction.



Trackback: Tsunami Death Toll Continues to Rise Tracked on: The Two Percent Company's Rants (67.18.141.194) at 2004 12 31 17:03:48
We haven't said anything about the tsunami that hit Southeast Asia earlier this week for two reasons; first, we've been on hiatus due to the holidays, so we haven't said anything about anything lately, and second, we don't really have...



#12247: — 12/31  at  07:21 PM
Not being as magnanimous as DS, it is my perception that Shrub is not adjusting to the facts on the ground, but to the opinion polls. Shrub's administration is built partly on an anti-internationalist bent which smells a bit of racism. (Check out the 'modern' John Birch Society to see what this looks like). UN bashing is at the top of the list. I find Bush aligning a bit too much, a bit too often, with these bastards to be comfortable.

Their opportunity to do the right thing without it being a response to public pressure has passed, but the need and obligation still exist and the US needs to roll up its sleeves and commit resources to ameliorate this emergency. The coming health crisis in southern Asia in the wake of this disaster will be gigantic if quick, substantive action is not taken.

bin Laden already has his next round of fodder to rile up his base and recruit anew, but we still have an opportunity to minimize that with decisive action.



#12248: DarkSyde — 12/31  at  08:13 PM
Yeah dissing the UN isn't going to get us anywehere. We need the UN in there. Pretty soon this is going to go from wandering stunned survivors in shock, to desperate, pissed off, starving mobs with guns hijacking any food they can get their hands on. We're going to need some peacekeepers.



#12249: — 12/31  at  08:36 PM
On a lighter note; while Dark Side of the Moon is great work by Pink Floyd, I think that The Wall has held up better over time. Something my tender young ears failed to grasp when it was released. grin

DS, Thanks for the great work standing in as wagonmaster over the holidays.



#12251: — 12/31  at  09:41 PM
jbarker, don't tell me, tell DS.

I'm the one who says we WILL NOT get any props out of helping.

If Desert Donkey thinks our not helping will be a recruiting tool for bin Laden, he just hasn't studied how people think.

However much they hate us now (a lot), they will hate us more for exposing them as losers who had to take favors from the Great Satan. (That's how the Iranians reacted, if you want a specific example.)

My view -- one I know is shared by nobody else -- is that we ought to completely ignore Muslim suffering, in Darfur or anywhere else. Let them see how well they get along without us.

There'd be plenty of other places to pass out goodies and make ourselves feel noble.

My opinion is formed, in part, by acquaintance with some Aceh Christians who fled to my county to avoid being murdered by those peaceful Muslims.

Not the most important aspect of the matter, I admit, but at least some Muslims are our enemies. It's gonna be important to understand who's who.



#12254: Jan Theodore Galkowski — 01/01  at  02:24 AM
I’m the one who says we WILL NOT get any props out of helping.

[some snipping]
My opinion is formed, in part, by acquaintance with some Aceh Christians who fled to my county to avoid being murdered by those peaceful Muslims.

Not the most important aspect of the matter, I admit, but at least some Muslims are our enemies. It’s gonna be important to understand who’s who.


In part it is this kind of labeling I find singularly unhelpful. I also find this utilitarian kind of thinking with respect to foreign policy and governmental action most annoying. We should give and support these people because it is the right thing to do. Mr Bush and company, as I've mentioned here elsewhere, might be thinking "Hey, we'd better get involved in this so we can control it" or "Hey, if we don't contribute we're going to be irrelevant and then where will our empire be". Frankly, I don't give a flying ____ for how they think or why as long as they do contribute substantially. They have long demonstrated to me their thinking is flawed.

Whether BushCo like it or not, whether neocons like it or not, this disaster shows the UN is indeed essential, and the United States simply cannot trump them by declaring a "coalition of the giving" or whatever.

I also think BushCo are worried because this unfolding tragedy may well eclipse the Iraqi elections in the news. They have lost the substantial benefits of Iraqi elections. All they have left is its PR value. That can be marginalized if everyone is looking elsewhere.



#12256: — 01/01  at  12:17 PM
When someone is trying to kill you, utilitarianism is a virtue.



#12258: Jan Theodore Galkowski — 01/01  at  12:58 PM
When someone is trying to kill you, utilitarianism is a virtue.


I contend not, for all you are saying is that the ends justify the means. The problem with that is that any behavior can be justified by it. The problem with self-defense as a rationale is that it in itself does not prescribe limits to what might be done in its cause. Such limits need be imposed from other values other virtues.

Thus, citing "self-defense" is a null citation, carrying few constraints.

I am not arguing here that Talmud and Torah are superior in any way, merely that they have been well thought out. In fact they can be and are severely abused to justify almost anything, using standard means of casuistry.

In any case, the strictures upon self-defense in Talmudic thought are more severe than people imagine, at least if properly done. One can kill your attacker if they are attacking you directly. One can't destroy a tree in the process. One cannot kill a third person if that is a price or part of a price for you yourself being saved. One cannot commit a sexually immoral act to save yourself.

While I clearly admire much in Judaic thought, there are some aspects of Buddhism which are superior, their ideals arguing one should not kill even in self-defense. In an interview a famous Thai Buddhist teacher was asked if he would kill if someone was going to kill the last Buddhist in existence. The reply clearly trumps Judaism, for he said (paraphrase) that if there is any truth in Buddhism it must necessarily be rediscovered by future generations. While that of course comes from a religion having no inherently revealed texts, it is nevertheless remarkable.



#12269: — 01/01  at  09:41 PM
Harry Eagar,

I've taken the trouble to check the facts and figures you posted regarding guinea worm (http://www.astdhpphe.org/infect/guinea.html), and guess what - it turns out your statements were false.

The following are UNICEF's figures (from http://www.childinfo.org/eddb/gw/countdata/pakistan.htm):

Pakistan:


Guinea worm cases reported 1990 - 160
Guinea worm cases reprted 2000 - 0

The country has reported no cases of guinea worm since October 1993, down from 160 cases in 1990. Pakistan was officially certified free of guinea worm in January 1997.



Worlwide there were approx. 130,000 cases in total last year.

Perhaps you were thinking of something else, though I can't imagine what.

As far as Darfur is concerned, your views are not only callous, but again ignorant. The US is helping in Darfur? Please, don't take us all for fools. The US government helped create the very same humanitarian disaster that it is now ostensibly attempting to bring a halt to. The SPLA has been armed and trained by the US government for years now, in an attempt to destabilise the Sudanese government (- Dynacorp is there right now with it's 'armed civillian contractors'). Why? Yup, got it in one - oil. The Sudanese found oil, and were refusing to play ball with the US government, so the US government did what they seem to be best at. Look it up if you have any doubts - the facts speak for themselves.

Your statements about Muslims show so much ignorance they hardly need a response. At the moment the US's biggest enemy is its own government.



#12271: — 01/01  at  09:47 PM
[Correction - the figure of 130,000 was for the year 1995.]



#12281: — 01/02  at  03:24 AM
[Another correction, this time spelling: 'Dynacorp' should read 'DynCorp'.]



#12306: — 01/02  at  02:04 PM
You didn't go back far enough, genejob. Try visiting those rightwing nuts at the Carter Center (which was admirably involved in saving all those people).

A remarkably moving, though fictional, account of how it was done is 'Cause Celeb' by Helen Fielding. Yes, the 'Bridget Jones' writer.

Jan, what do your goat-walloping sages say about me, A, killing B to save (let us postulate, innocent) C?

That's what I'm talking about.



#12308: — 01/02  at  02:22 PM
Harry, killing in self-defense is only wise if you know for sure that someone is about to attack you. To be really safe from anyone attacking me, I could kill everyone in the world -- I'd be safe from other humans, at least! (In theory! In practice, long before I got through with the slaughter, people who weren't originally my enemies would stop me, turning a potential threat to me into a real one, and creating enemies where there weren't any before.) Proposing that the US should kill all Muslims, or let them die for want of aid, because they might possibly be our enemies isn't any more sensible.



#12313: DarkSyde — 01/02  at  02:33 PM
The problem isn't Islam anyway. It's absolutist ideology in general, religious fundamentalist nationalism more specifically, and in the narrow case of Al Qeada/Islamic Terrorism, Wahabbism and related extremist Militant philosophies.



#12315: Jan Theodore Galkowski — 01/02  at  04:07 PM
Jan, what do your goat-walloping sages say about me, A, killing B to save (let us postulate, innocent) C?

That’s what I’m talking about.


There is a ruling regarding a rodef or pursuer of an innocent other. It justifies intervention, with significant qualifications.

First, the obligation to defend the innocent does not apply if one's own life is thereby put in danger. This means it cannot be used to justify it. You may try to justify it using some other argument or law, but not this one.

Second, this rule may only be invoked in the case of imminent danger to life of the innocent other. It does not apply when merely property is in danger.

Third, the defender of the innocent other may only stop the attacker if bystanders or others are not harmed or killed. Moreover, non-fatal means of subduing the attacker are always prefered to fatal means. The Talmudic expression is How do you know that your blood is redder than the blood of your fellow?

For your information, goats are not 'walloped' but, rather, according to the Text, "sent to Azazel". Azazel is, according to the best tradition another angel working for the Almighty who really is the one responsible for many of the things poor, poor Satan (Sah-tahn, in Hebrew) gets blamed for.

Of course, animal sacrifice is no longer permitted, let alone 'wallops' of animals. Your characterization, I think I am justified to say, demonstrates a good deal of ignorance about Judaism. I believe I am being understanding.

There exist total Jewish crackpots who seek things like the reestablishment of the priesthood and the temple in Jerusalem, but they are aberrations by almost any standard. Judaism is a rational religion, if there be such a beast.

Finally, I think this subthread began in a discussion of ethics and values, and your comeback left out a good deal of my reply. While you said something about Judaism, for which my response has just been given, I noticed you said nothing about the Buddhist view. That's because you can't.



#12316: — 01/02  at  04:08 PM
Vasha, I'm pretty sure the Talmud was not written with Islam specificially in mind. My question was general, as I tried to show by using algebraic notation.

Once we answer the general question, we could go forward to see how, if at all, it applies to the relationship of Islam to infidels.

DS, it's true but it isn't too helpful to say the problem is absolutist ideology in general. Generic absolute ideologues are not flying planes into the World Trade Center.

But, specifically to Islam, the distinction between Islam and Islamicism does not impress me very much. I think of Islam as being like granulated laundry detergent: 3% active ingredients (the suicide murderers) and 97% inactive (the mass of Muslims).

No doubt in my mind that if 'moderate Muslims' actually existed, they would turn over the immoderate ones and all this trouble would be over in 48 hours.



#12318: Jan Theodore Galkowski — 01/02  at  04:14 PM
Mr Eagar said in part:
1. South Asia has experienced disastrous losses of life at least as big as this one, and not so long ago.


Well, then, this is a happy aspect of this tragedy, for it means that humanity as a group is more feeling than it used to be. And apparently governments can indeed be compelled to respond to be humane and humaniarian, whether such response is consistent with their other political rhetoric or not.



#12319: Jan Theodore Galkowski — 01/02  at  04:17 PM
Vasha, I’m pretty sure the Talmud was not written with Islam specificially in mind.


First, Mr Eagar, your posts show you know absolutely nothing at all about Talmud. Second, if you grant that Islam as a movement requires people to make it be, then Talmud most assuredly was written with them in mind. As I wrote How do you know that your blood is redder than the blood of your fellow?



#12330: DarkSyde — 01/02  at  07:39 PM
Harry religoin is all hooey to me regardless if the magic invisible sky wizard at the center of adulation is Allah or YVWH. bUt folks who practice Islam come in every shape and size just like folks who practice Christianity. IOW, you have fanatics and moderates. Violent and peaceful. Liberals and conservatives.



#12338: — 01/02  at  08:39 PM
Harry Eagar,

To begin with, I'm still looking for your figure of "2 million/year each year" cases of guinea worm in Pakistan alone. The largest figure I've found at the Carter Center's site was 3.2 million worldwide, back when the program began.

However, I'm considerably more concerned by your views on Muslims. 3% of Muslims are suicide bombers? If there are approximately one billion Muslims in the world, that would make 30,000,000 - a much greater exaggeration than your guinea worm claims. And the remainder are supposed to be 'sleepers'? Somehow that just doesn't ring true.

I think I should burst your little bubble right now. Are you sitting down? Here goes - not only am I a moderate Muslim, but Islam itself is a moderate ideology. See, we do exist!

I imagine it can't be easy to have one's belief system shattered, so before you go into denial, let me follow up in a similar vein to what Jan was saying. The following is not intended to be preaching, though some may interpret it that way, it is only to inform and to dispel some of the common myths about Islam.

I see the word infidel bandied around by people such as yourself quite frequently these days, but rarely correctly. For example, someone who is Jewish (such as, presumably, Jan) or Christian is not an infidel, but of the 'Ehl-e-Kitab', which is 'People of the Book'. The Qur'an states that there are Chrstians and Jews, amongst others, who will also have their reward. Similarly, anyone who professes a monotheistic belief is not an infidel.

If that isn't moderate, what is?

As for your 48 hours claim - man, are you out of touch! It's like saying if the law-abiding citizens in the USA were to turn over the murderers, there'd be no more murders in the USA! Can you not see the numerous fallacies inherent within that statement?

I'll tell you what, though. If the USA stopped backing Israel, politically and financially, as it invariably does regardless of Israel's illegal occupation, continuing atrocities and flagrant disregard of international laws and countless UN resolutions, there'd be a lot less anti-US sentiment in the Muslim world, don't you think?



#12341: Jan Theodore Galkowski — 01/02  at  08:50 PM
I'll tell you what, though. If the USA stopped backing Israel, politically and financially, as it invariably does regardless of Israel's illegal occupation, continuing atrocities and flagrant disregard of international laws and countless UN resolutions, there'd be a lot less anti-US sentiment in the Muslim world, don't you think?


No single action on the part of the United States would be more positive for the reduction of terrorism or bringing of peace to that explosive region of the world, apart perhaps from self-imposed reduction of use of petroleum products notably gasoline. Given, of course, that the people of the Untied States lack the self-discipline to do so, despite their Christian upbringing, dropping support for Israel is an important step.

I have said and written this publicly before.

The United States shouldn't do it callously, simply announce it, then reduce the support linearly over a period of ten years.



#12398: — 01/03  at  01:54 PM
That's the key point, isn't it, genejob, what is the ratio of active proselytes:mere supporters (the mass sea the guerrrilla fish swim in, per Mao)?

It may not be the same as the ingredients in laundry detergent. You'd have to tell me.

As a westerner, I would have thought that suicide bombers would be a wasting asset, too, but evidently not in the Koran Belt.

Anyhow, moderate Muslims, if any, are letting bad guys hijack their religion. Time for you guys to get a move on.



Page 3 of 4 pages « First  <  1 2 3 4 >

Next entry: Housekeeping and Iraq

Previous entry: Open Thread: Evolution and IDC Discussions

<< Back to main

Info

email PZ Myers
Search
Archives
UMM—America's best public liberal arts college