My hypothesis is that we as humans today are desensitized to disaster. What might have caused an intense emotional reaction, now does not instigate humanity the same way. How we respond to news of a terrorist attack is a good example of said desensitization. Many of us devote mere minutes to discuss the attack and go about our lives. Others make a public display of emotions of anger and hurt, but the sincerity of the reactions on social media are questionable.
I grew up learning about disaster management, and saw it in action during the Tsunami of 2004. Do you remember how many people died that year? I don’t. I had forgotten about one of the greatest disasters to hit India. It wasn’t until CJ recounted his experience at Andaman that I remembered. CJ and his family were stuck on the airport for hours without food or water. Upon hearing his account, I felt something. An intense emotion : relief. I was relieved that he was alive today that he had not been one of the nameless victims. I also felt shame; it never occurred to me to mourn those affected by the Tsunami. At what time during my childhood did I stop feeling the loss of human life?
Consider, a pre-9/11 era when terrorism motivated people to take action to keep their loved ones safe. Compare that to the Jaipur bomb blasts in India in 2008. There were nine serial blasts in a busy marketplace and there was severe damage to property and human life. But the people of India did not react to this incident as they should have. Many of them might not even remember this act of terrorism, it was washed away from our memories by the many acts that followed. I was in that Jaipur marketplace. I heard those three blasts in the vicinity. I saw people running in panic. My grandmother grabbed my brother and me by our shirts and rushed us to the car. We flew out of Jaipur the next day. I was disappointed my trip was cut short. It was not until I talked to my frantic aunt and saw the panic in her eyes that I realized we had been through something terrible. It is only now as I write this I can see how desensitized I was, and perhaps still am.
Preparing for disaster is important, but can it done effectively by a group of people that do not take the consequences of the disaster seriously? Disaster causes death, destruction and dearth of resources. We can prepare for the latter two, but preparing for death seems too grave an idea. As life would have it, many of us don't get as affected by the death of strangers as the older generations would. But does an objective outlook toward death increase or decrease our capability to combat the consequences of a disaster?
Fast forward to today. Millions of people are affected by the coronavirus; many have lost their livelihoods, some died alone and almost everyone is faced with unforeseen challenges. However, look at our actions. We preach about masks to appear woke, but how meticulously do we protect ourselves and the others? We express our support for the victims of the virus, but how many of us actually empathize? If we as a species, come together and fight for our survival as one then we stand a chance.
It is a gargantuan task to unite the human race for a common purpose. We are divided into parts, and smaller parts within those parts. One group claims to care for all human life, and yet had to take to the streets during a pandemic. The other wants to close its homes to strangers and yet clamor to reopen businesses and schools. I am no critic and I do not wish to discuss my political ideologies. I simply want to stress how divided we are, even when faced with a problem that threatens us all equally.
If our response to the pandemic is not proof enough of our desensitization to disaster, then perhaps the following will be. The death toll of the coronavirus pandemic of 2020 as of August 3rd is 697244. How many of you read all the digits of that number?