You have things backwards I believe, my friend. Flip it around, and you’ll get it right.

Look:
“I also do find it quite convenient that such a rage of conviction for other world events usually surges in the wake of a highly publicized one.”

Think about it. The UN-highly publicized accounts were _invisible_ *until* the highly publicized one.

I didn’t know about the Beirut issue until the Paris situation.

The “isn’t it convenient” speaks not to me, who didn’t know about it, but to those who present the news.

Perhaps it works out better: By publicizing one excessively, it accidentally creates a backlash of “what about x, y, z too?” and brings them up in the news.

The thing is: People WERE talking about the other events when they happened.

But Western media did not generally care that much until it hit Paris. This is RIGHT?

We only know the news we get. The rest? We don’t.

You have things backwards I believe, my friend. Flip it around, and you’ll get it right.

 

It makes sense, but it is our desensitization that is the larger problem.
The way evil wins is to become invisible by being commonplace.

Didn’t France just start a bombing campaign against Syria a few weeks ago?

That’s novel too. Entering war does have its consequence, although I’m not by any means justifying what happened in Paris of course.

 

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


3 × nine =

Leave a Reply