For various reasons, I can understand that 48 people dying in London due to terrorism gets more attention than the same number dying from poverty worldwide, whether in the sense of media coverage or reactions from people. But I don't understand the idea of mourning or feeling personal loss for people you don't know - if it's a person I don't know, I feel no difference whether they die from a bomb in London, Iraq or elsewhere.
I don't really understand the point of silence in this situation, for people who weren't affected. There's no reason to mourn those deaths over others; it doesn't achieve anything useful; there's no point considering the risks of terrorism over more likely ways to die. I wonder when we'll start having three minute silences?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2005-07-14 10:09 pm (UTC)For various reasons, I can understand that 48 people dying in London due to terrorism gets more attention than the same number dying from poverty worldwide, whether in the sense of media coverage or reactions from people. But I don't understand the idea of mourning or feeling personal loss for people you don't know - if it's a person I don't know, I feel no difference whether they die from a bomb in London, Iraq or elsewhere.
I don't really understand the point of silence in this situation, for people who weren't affected. There's no reason to mourn those deaths over others; it doesn't achieve anything useful; there's no point considering the risks of terrorism over more likely ways to die. I wonder when we'll start having three minute silences?