Every time, some disasters happened, people will automatically turn to Charities. Most think it is the only and fastest way to save those people.
For the reasons that go for Charities, donate money. As I know, is just not enough. Most will say it is natural for an educated or humane mankind should act and think. There is no question for donating money, blood or any kind of help. Just like watching a kid sinking on a pool, there is no way to not save the kid. This is our Instinct.
Just hold on a bit. How about the kid is not the first time sinking on the pool? The kid is means to do so? Shall we still save his life? This is same as: will you give money when some disable asked for? Do you have the responsibilities to take care for their disable? It depends, right?
Yes, there are many disasters that come so suddenly, unpredictable and fatally. If it happened in well developed countries with well social mechanism, the Giant social machinery started automatically, and keeping people from tragedies. I guess the disaster will very soon recover. Think about United State. Just like a healthy body will quickly recover from illness. On the opposite, if the country has poor system, with a lot man-made problems. When disaster come, and quickly become an incidence that due to terrible social system. Shall we help?
The human body analogy is very good to illustrate the idea. A baby, when get attack from virus, we should help, since it cannot resist the virus naturally. For an adult, got sick is due to lack of exercise, having good hobbies like drug, over sex. Should we help him? His illness/disable is totally due to himself! (Ok, you can say, partly by the virus, which does not make any healthy body die) there is no way to take the responsibilities. Otherwise, he will take over our effort (to keep ourselves healthy, keep ourselves away from bad habits) for free.
Now a day, China and Burma, they are not kid countries any more; the country can live better if the stupid government is gone. So, I suggest, not helping them.
OK, not everything should be done due to responsibilities. We should be humanity; helping somebody suffering is no executed. I do not agree. How about the consequence? Have somebody even think about that? If you help the bad country, you are helping those suffering, but also the bad government! Most donated money will not go to the people hands, but the governors. And due to this, the people are keeping suffering.
By keeping hand out of the Charities, it doesn't mean that I am cold blood. If you want something really change and this kind of suffering does not happen again and again. It is the only hard and painful way out. China government spends million and million a year on military and salary for stupid governors. And now even fire people into space! How come it cannot take money out to help her people??? So, by donating money, it is not the way to save the people. The system will just keep the same old day!
By donating money, it is just like a present to China, and we are teaching those people that: Nature Disaster is not a Tragedy at all, is a golden chance to earn money!! I don't need to build a house more resist to earth quark, to flood. Since every time the house fall, I can build a new house for free!! Oh, my death child or relative, oh, next year, when I have a new house, I can make more! All in all, I just need to cry in front of the press!
First time is accident, Second times is forgotten, third times is Incidence, and is mean to do so! The 1976, Tong Shan earth quark, people have study a lot. There should be some prevention for the next event. However, the Chinese suck governors do their best press-cover job. And when I watching the TV, all I see am only Wen Jia bao busy, the surrounding governors still like a wood-log, and seem claim, no big deal.
At last, I really want to know, is the amount of money donated equal the spent?
***
by the way, HK people only know donate money, but not really get involved. Just like many fathers, who only knew give money for their family, but not take care, love them. What is the fucking attitude toward "love" and "care"? Some fools even pray for them, what the hell in their mind?
More over, there are many disasters in the world, why HK people only help Chinese event? I think it is so called Patriotic! It sucks! There is a thing called war, is mainly due to the romantic Patriotism. Japanese, Burma-nese, Thai, European, American are all not "our". If they bite us, we should fuck back, since they are alien. Poor the "Mankind" is.
8 comments:
I support your idea, but it is not an idea to be written in chinese, or else...
Sigh
That's the question trouble me: Why Beijing willing to accept US$500,000 from the U.S. government, but reject the offer of relief materials and the resuce team assign to find more people in the disaster area? Are there any hidden agenda or calculation in the Chinese official's points-of-views?
there is an event at 1976, from my father.
at that time, Mo reject world help by saying Chinese people can take care themselves. the way to do is: asking my father's family to give rice to central government. and you know, at that time, all china are poor. my father reject the request since his family need to feed 13 members, if rice given out, his family will suffer.
People are dying in a disaster. And that makes all the difference.
I would like to express my humble objection.
我們幫助的是中國人,不是中國政府!
I agree that an effective system should be established to help the victims, but I don't agree that we shouldn't help the victims because the system is not yet established.
For example, you see a child drowning in a pool, and there is no fence around the pool. Does it mean that we should let the child drown to death, in order to "push" the owner of the pool to build the fence? It doesn't make sense.
There were many disasters thoughout the history of China, the victims didn't get help, AND the government didn't learn from that. So I think we should help the victims first, and struggle for a more democratic government, which is generally more responsible for its citizens.
strong agree with your point of view.
I am going to post it in my blog,I hope you won't mind.I hope more people can read this passage.
"""For example, you see a child drowning in a pool, and there is no fence around the pool. Does it mean that we should let the child drown to death, in order to "push" the owner of the pool to build the fence? It doesn't make sense."""
this is very good point that i don't even think of. base on the theory, yes, we shouldn't help the kid. especially, there is a stubborn, hard-changed and supreme power pool owner.
for real case, everybody should save the kid. but, well, this is just an analogy.
Post a Comment