Numb in the face of genocide

By Gabe Bradley
November 29, 2005

Acts of genocide are routinely described as “incomprehensible.” This descriptor may be more accurate then we know.

In the last several years, hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians have been murdered in the Darfur region of Sudan. It has been underreported in the American media and underrepresented on the American foreign policy agenda. The rest of the world has been just as reluctant to take action. Now, a University psychology professor seems to have found an answer: Our brains just can’t understand genocide.

Professor Paul Slovic recently delivered a paper in which he claims the emotional side of the human brain numbs in response to mass murder, according to an article in Monday’s Register-Guard.

Slovic says this is a “fundamental deficiency in our humanity,” because the numbing effect prevents a person from feeling empathy and taking action. This could help explain why people across America and the world have yet to formulate a substantial response to the genocide in Darfur.

“The only reason to know how many have died is to have a number to report when we memorialize another genocide 10 years after the fact,” said Slovic in the article.

What does this say about our humanity? Do we, as Slovic says, have a fundamental deficiency? I believe the answer is yes. Moving away from the physiological and psychological science of the issue and into the realm of philosophy, the fact that we are virtually unable to respond to acts of genocide is a serious problem.

Certainly the fact that humans have organized for the purpose of exterminating one another since the dawn of recorded history suggests that there is something fundamentally corrupt, or at least corruptible, in our nature. However, a small minority of the world’s population actually plan and participate in genocide. For every country in the world where genocide is taking place, there are hundreds where there is currently no genocide.

So it’s easy for us to ignore genocide, especially when it’s on the other side of the world, because the refugees rarely end up here. But in this era of information technology, there’s nothing keeping us in the dark except for our own unwillingness to care.

I say the American media have underreported the Darfur genocide. The media, though, are only giving the people what they want. If average American viewers gave even a slight inkling that they cared about the situation in Darfur, we would be bombarded with information about Darfur 24/7.

Can you imagine the ratings on genocide coverage? There’s no need to sensationalize that story. The problem is, people across the country and the world are so totally apathetic that the media have no incentive to provide substantial coverage.

Both the media and our government are affected by the same forces that shape our markets: supply and demand. Until there is significant demand for information and action with regard to genocide throughout the world, the powers that be will have no incentive to supply any solutions; right now, there just isn’t the demand.

For those of us who believe that being complacent in the face of genocide is a breach of our obligations to one another as humans, this is a problem.

Slovic’s finding that we are paralyzed to the point of inaction by genocide is interesting because it presents us with a situation wherein the right thing to do is to struggle against our natural inclinations — to do the right thing despite how we’re wired.

Most people would agree that we’re not perfect the way we are. That’s why so many of us seek to change, learn and grow. For many of us, this means living the beautiful life, the good life, the excellent life.

So perhaps it’s not breaking news that in our struggle to live life in the best way we can, our biggest obstacles come not from our circumstances or from others, but from ourselves. This fact has been so well-documented in the realm of exercise and sport that it has become a cliché. However, in the realm of moral philosophy, this point is very much in dispute.

Irish philosopher Edmund Burke is often quoted as having said, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” We now know that it’s incredibly easy for good people to do nothing.

I don’t particularly care for the movie “Schindler’s List.” However, the final scene is one of the most emotionally powerful scenes I have ever watched in any movie. Though Liam Neeson’s character has risked his life and livelihood to save Jews from the death camps and sabotage the Nazi war effort, he still breaks down in tears, bemoaning the fact that he could have done more. The implication here is not merely that he could have done more but that he should have done more.

Now we are faced with yet another genocide. Most of us could do more. Most of us should do more.

Slovic will be one of the speakers at a forum tomorrow night on how local residents can help stop the Darfur genocide. The forum, sponsored by the Jewish Community Relations Council, will take place at 7 p.m. at Temple Beth Israel.


gbradley@dailyemerald.com

source: dailyemerald.com