a culture of blame
--------------------
i was taught as a child that pointing a finger always meant that the other four were directed back at me... in light of these opinion pieces from the toronto star and the bbc, perhaps it's time we re-examined our culture of blame and found more constructive - and more co-operative - ways of addressing social issues...
--------------------
What is it that Canadians have got against other Canadians?
Why are we so suspicious of each other, so certain that other Canadians are out to get us, to exploit us, to take advantage of us?
"What? Complete nonsense! We Canadians all love all other Canadians," will be the response of most readers.
Why, then, is it that there is not a single part of this country where people do not claim that money is being taken from them in order to benefit other parts of the country? Or that, in various ways, they are being discriminated against; or that, even if being treated more or less fairly because of their own watchfulness and determination, they are being patronized and looked down on by other Canadians?
Try to think of a single province where its representatives — political, media, academic — do not regularly claim that their society is suffering from inequities, inattention or exploitation [...] Yelling and jumping up and down about unfairness and discrimination amounts to a way of saying "hello" to each other across our vast distances and all our cultural differences. In a backhanded, negative way we're saying that other Canadians matter to us. Still it is all, surely, pretty tacky and tiresome.
Why not try silence for a time and see if we can hear each other better?
--------------------
Before modern times, great catastrophes served to underline the transient quality of human existence and the futility of all purely human ends and acted as a stimulus for religious contemplation. Even in today's secular times, disasters are often invested with some hidden meaning. They are rarely perceived as just an accident - disasters appear as events of profound significance.
Traditionally, catastrophes were attributes to supernatural forces. Throughout most of history they were seen as an act or God or of fate. As an act of fate, catastrophes were portrayed as an inevitable occurrence, whose destructive power could not be avoided.
The rise of secularism led to an important shift in the way society conceptualised disasters. The development of science as the new source of knowledge altered people's perception of disasters. They were increasingly defined as an act of Nature. Though science could explain why and how it occurred, a natural disaster has no special meaning. In recent times we still talk about natural disasters but we increasingly look for someone to blame. As a result the view that disasters are caused by acts of nature is being gradually displaced by the idea that they are the outcome of acts of human beings.
In the aftermath of a disaster today, the finger of blame invariably points towards another person. Government officials, big business or careless operatives are held responsible for most disasters. Today, floods are less likely to be associated with divine displeasure than with greedy property developers recklessly building in flood plains.
Events like last week's catastrophe in New Orleans are seen as destructive events that could have and should have been avoided. How people perceive a disaster has an important impact in the way in which it is experienced. However, perceptions regarding causation are shaped by cultural attitudes that endow events with meaning.
Today, the meaning of a catastrophe, like the one unleashed by Hurricane Katrina, is fiercely contested. There is no one moral story that we are all prepared to accept. That means we are in danger of facing a double disaster. One that is about physical destruction and loss of life, and the other which is the legacy of bitterness, confusion and suspicion. Instead of a powerful story that we can learn from there is a risk that we will become disoriented by an obsession to blame.
--------------------
i was taught as a child that pointing a finger always meant that the other four were directed back at me... in light of these opinion pieces from the toronto star and the bbc, perhaps it's time we re-examined our culture of blame and found more constructive - and more co-operative - ways of addressing social issues...
--------------------
What is it that Canadians have got against other Canadians?
Why are we so suspicious of each other, so certain that other Canadians are out to get us, to exploit us, to take advantage of us?
"What? Complete nonsense! We Canadians all love all other Canadians," will be the response of most readers.
Why, then, is it that there is not a single part of this country where people do not claim that money is being taken from them in order to benefit other parts of the country? Or that, in various ways, they are being discriminated against; or that, even if being treated more or less fairly because of their own watchfulness and determination, they are being patronized and looked down on by other Canadians?
Try to think of a single province where its representatives — political, media, academic — do not regularly claim that their society is suffering from inequities, inattention or exploitation [...] Yelling and jumping up and down about unfairness and discrimination amounts to a way of saying "hello" to each other across our vast distances and all our cultural differences. In a backhanded, negative way we're saying that other Canadians matter to us. Still it is all, surely, pretty tacky and tiresome.
Why not try silence for a time and see if we can hear each other better?
--------------------
Before modern times, great catastrophes served to underline the transient quality of human existence and the futility of all purely human ends and acted as a stimulus for religious contemplation. Even in today's secular times, disasters are often invested with some hidden meaning. They are rarely perceived as just an accident - disasters appear as events of profound significance.
Traditionally, catastrophes were attributes to supernatural forces. Throughout most of history they were seen as an act or God or of fate. As an act of fate, catastrophes were portrayed as an inevitable occurrence, whose destructive power could not be avoided.
The rise of secularism led to an important shift in the way society conceptualised disasters. The development of science as the new source of knowledge altered people's perception of disasters. They were increasingly defined as an act of Nature. Though science could explain why and how it occurred, a natural disaster has no special meaning. In recent times we still talk about natural disasters but we increasingly look for someone to blame. As a result the view that disasters are caused by acts of nature is being gradually displaced by the idea that they are the outcome of acts of human beings.
In the aftermath of a disaster today, the finger of blame invariably points towards another person. Government officials, big business or careless operatives are held responsible for most disasters. Today, floods are less likely to be associated with divine displeasure than with greedy property developers recklessly building in flood plains.
Events like last week's catastrophe in New Orleans are seen as destructive events that could have and should have been avoided. How people perceive a disaster has an important impact in the way in which it is experienced. However, perceptions regarding causation are shaped by cultural attitudes that endow events with meaning.
[...]
Today, the meaning of a catastrophe, like the one unleashed by Hurricane Katrina, is fiercely contested. There is no one moral story that we are all prepared to accept. That means we are in danger of facing a double disaster. One that is about physical destruction and loss of life, and the other which is the legacy of bitterness, confusion and suspicion. Instead of a powerful story that we can learn from there is a risk that we will become disoriented by an obsession to blame.
--------------------
posted by þΛųL jØŋαŦhΛŋ @ 18:00
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home