Selective outrage

November 22, 2015

Where is the world outrage when the targets are non-western, non-white?

Selective outrage

Dear All,

Following the Paris terrorist attacks on the night of the 13th, it feels as if the world is on the brink of entering some major new phase. There is a real sense that this is a decisive moment not just for the future of the war against terror but also for the future of Europe. The eyes of the world are on Paris, on Hollande, on the unity of Europe. People are muttering about the advent of World War III.

But, of course, it was just a matter of time before attacks of the sort we saw in Paris happened. Surely, most of us with any sense could foresee that it would prove impossible to contain the armed strife and bloodshed that western nations were happy to support in Syria?

The arrogance of the developed world reminds one of the delusional nature of despotic monarchs: kings and queens unable to understand either the problems of their people or comprehend the fact that these problems will inevitably affect life within the palace walls. Treating Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and Yemen as distant wars and consistently supporting war (with its many geo-political perks and revenues) has been a careless route to chart out, and every so often citizens in western capitals pay the price of their governments’ modern day imperialism.

One hundred and twenty-nine people from 19 different nations were killed in the Paris attacks, by attackers who, so far as we understand, were all European. The attacks were as shocking as the attacks in France earlier this year, and outrage poured in from all over the world. But, after a while, some voices on social media pointed out the fact that very relatively little outrage was expressed at the terrorist attack in south Beirut just hours earlier in which 43 people were killed.

Many people resisted the pressure of social media and the reporting frenzy to change their Facebook and Twitter images to the French flag or the Eiffel Tower, and many of them did this not because they are emotionless people and terrorist supporters but because they felt they should speak out on the imperialism of outrage.

Outrage is now mandated, it is required, it is heavy handed. Cast your minds back to earlier this year when solidarity against the terrorists was expressed by the "Je suis Charlie" slogan. This "I am Spartacus" type declaration went on and on and on… Then in August TK Max was forced to recall t-shirts bearing the slogan "Je suis over it" because of a complaint from a shopper who deemed them offensive and disrespectful.

Was this slogan really disrespectful? Couldn’t it have been interpreted as a comment on modern cultural trends as well as a general sort of "get over it" philosophy? (Je suis so confused).

This is not to say that we should not be outraged by murderous and brutal terrorist attacks or grieve for the victims, but that we should also feel as outraged when the targets are non-western, non-white and non-European. Yes, it does seem more shocking when these attacks can take place in affluent, democratic nations instead of within the borders of failed states, but we should be acutely aware of how we are steered towards a certain sort of reaction.

Where is the world’s outrage at the slaughter and rape and trafficking of the Yazidi women? Where is the outrage at killings in the Yemen conflict?

The world’s media has sent reporters out to Paris where they give us hourly updates on police investigations and political statements and where they talk to "members of the public" about their reaction and their grief. Meanwhile, Yemen remains a largely unreported conflict -- as one medic from Doctors Without Borders remarked it is a conflict singular in its lack of international media presence.

Attacks on western capitals do carry a heavy symbolic significance in the war against terror, but let’s remind ourselves the victims of this war are not confined to these cities….

Best wishes

Selective outrage