I haven’t donated to the Haitian relief effort for the same reason that I don’t give money to homeless men on the street. Based on past experiences, I don’t think the guy with the sign that reads “Need You’re Help” is going to do anything constructive with the dollar I might give him. If I use history as my guide, I don’t think the people of Haiti will do much with my money either.
In this belief I am, evidently, alone. It seems that everyone has jumped on the “Save Haiti” bandwagon. To question the impulse to donate, then, will probably be viewed as analogous with rooting for Charles Manson, John Wayne Gacy, or the Spice Girls.
My wariness has much to do with the fact that the sympathy deployed to Haiti has been done so unconditionally. Very few have said, written, or even intimated the slightest admonishment of Haiti, the country, for putting itself into a position where so many would be killed by an earthquake.
h/t SDH, who states the commentary cost him his job at espn.com.
Update: For some of our readers, this cold splash of reality.
“Questions for the tender-hearted scolds above:
1. Should Haiti be colonized?
2. Should Paul Shirley have been fired?”
1. That is an entirely separate discussion and a red herring.
2. Probably not. But someone working for a COMMERCIAL sports network has to be pretty dense not to connect the dots between upsetting market share and losing advertising sponsorship.
“Talk about being born on third base and acting like you just hit a triple.”
I love baseball analogies. Although coolpacific’s scolding was way off the mark, the analogy was entertaining.
Despite intellectual arguments, when we see our fellow man in need compassion demands we respond. To think we must interview the person in need, 20 question style, to see if there beliefs line up with our ideology in order to decide if they are worthy of our help is simply ludicrous. Even a four year old can understand that clarifying beliefs is just an excuse not to help. Shame on you who espouse such ridiculous standards. Come judgment day, I think you will be hard pressed to come up with a legitimate excuse for not helping.
“…That kind of earthquake would have caused major damage and significant loss of life in any large populated centre…”
The 1989 Loma Prieta (SF Bay Area) earthquake had the same 7.0 magnitude and hit an urbanized area with a population of about 6 million at the time. Total deaths were 63.
“…That kind of earthquake would have caused major damage and significant loss of life in any large populated centre…”
The 1989 Loma Prieta (SF Bay Area) earthquake had the same 7.0 magnitude and hit an urbanized area with a population of about 6 million at the time. Total deaths were 63.