When the message of trump’s COVID-19 infection spread, many were gloating or leaving malicious comments on social media platforms. In my recent article (how Corona shapes society), I stated that pandemics are levelers. They don’t care about propaganda.
Are we evil people? Did trump victimize himself with his obsession to downplay the danger and not show “weakness”? Is it allowed to feel joy when another person is sick? What is wrong with us?
Audio Version:
In this article, you will learn how we make moral judgements and why some people gloat over the misfortune of another individual.
I’ll throw in some random thoughts before I get to the topic:
Why trump might not like his diagnosis
- Populist trump portrayed Corona as a personal enemy. Falling sick with the virus in his eyes, equals defeat.
- trump’s world comprises winners and looser, winners don’t get sick.
- trump’s Corona infection is a dementi of his own politics.
- For the longest time, he downplayed the danger of the disease and the likelihood of infection, even after we heard him on tape admitting its deadly danger.
- Supporters might have second thoughts about the fact that trump admittedly knew since February how dangerous the disease is.
- He’s the third leader from countries with high infection- and death rates who downplayed the danger and fell sick (the other two are Brazils Jair Bolsonaro and England’s Boris Johnson.)
Now, we’re not looking at this from a political point of view. From a political point of view, trump could probably use his illness to his advantage, if he’s up on his feet in no time. Even if he gets gravely ill, he can use it as a narrative in the spectacle he made of the US government.
We’re looking at the fact that many people are gloating about trump’s diagnosis and what it says about us.
Why are people happy that trump has COVID-19?
A rationalization would be that some people see his illness as the only way to get through to people who still refuse wearing masks and taking precautions.
It all comes down to how the brain makes moral judgements.
How we make moral judgements
When the brain makes moral judgements, it takes the intention of a person into account.
I made a video for you to explain what I mean:
It’s human nature to feel offended if another person willingly and knowingly either harms us or accepts that we might get harmed or even die for ulterior motives.
We would feel differently, if trump hadn’t known how dangerous COVID-19 is.
Another factor is anger. When we’re helpless and cannot change a harmful situation a third-party forces upon us, anger turns to hatred. While it’s understandable, we should still try to remove these negative feelings ASAP.
We’re emotional creatures and might even think it’s Karma. Calm down, everyone. It’s not Karma, it’s a virus and simple mathematics. By rejecting precautions and being around people who follow your lead, you increase the likelihood of getting sick exponentially.
Think of it this way: If you say it’s Karma that trump and some of his entourage fell sick, then it could also be Karma that hundreds of thousands of Americans died because we elected him/didn’t care for people who felt left out when there was still time.
Human nature and the step too far
Secretly assessing the chances of policies that save lives doesn’t make you a bad person. If your aunt died from COVID-19 after one of trump’s super spreader events and you’re angry, it’s understandable.
However, there’s a line between wishing someone dead and secretly not feeling as sympathetic as we feel we should. If you go to social media and post a heartfelt death wish against someone, you might have become as big of a monster as the one you’re fighting.
There’s no good reason for gloating about the misfortune of someone else.
With over 200K dead and over 7 million infected, we could just remember trump’s statement: “Elections have consequences.”
“When they go low, we go high”, is my favorite Michelle Obama quote.
What did you feel when you heard the news?
I could tell you my initial thought when the news broke, but I would not write it down. No matter if you felt sadness, compassion, gloating joy or something else: It was your unintended, emotional reaction. Most importantly, it was private. We can share every last thought publicly, but we don’t have to.
And if you're struggling with negative feelings such as anger or anxiety, check out my PROJECT INNER PEACE!
Sources
http://capricorn.bc.edu/moralitylab/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Young_Saxe_JOCN.pdf
We’re amid a conflict that forces us to to find a balance between isolation and staying safe. Washing our hands, wearing masks and keeping a distance has become our new normal. Corona also changes how we interact with each other, how we love, and how we live.
Epidemics have always transformed society, whether it was the pest, cholera, HIV or polio. Epidemics are levelers. On a granular level, that is not true as having health insurance might make or break your survival in case you get sick and your living/working conditions might increase or decrease the amount of exposure.
The Corona pandemic changes all aspects of our lives.
- How we work
- How we live
- How we love
We take precautions to avoid getting sick, and that changes our social interactions. Isolation takes a toll on us and creates challenges. For instance, how do you explain to your young children they can’t play with their friends?
Let’s look at challenges and opportunities as every crisis comes with opportunity.
Epidemics in recent years
It’s not the first time an epidemic changes society and forced people to take precautions, and it’s not the last time.
In 1918, the Spanish Flu terrified and killed people. American soldiers brought it to Europe, where it spread quickly towards the end of World War I.
Picture Credit: Unknown source
The Spanish flu caused more deaths than World War I.
As a precaution, people wore face masks. They cleaned roads regularly and avoided overcrowded trams.
Success crowned the cautionary measures. After two years, the Spanish flu disappeared.
New viruses appeared:
- The Asian flu
- Hongkong flu
- Russian flu
These are just a few examples. Every new epidemic calls for extra measures. In many regions of Asia, face masks are already the norm and part of everyday life.
It’s not too long ago that polio terrified people. Then came HIV, Ebola, smallpox.
HIV caused about 30 Million deaths and divided society because the biggest risk groups were minorities, such as gay people and drug addicts.
Modern medicine made vast advances, and never in the history of mankind has it been easier to share information. And misinformation, which is the biggest source of the deadly division our society is struggling with today.
Back when HIV first appeared, a few ideologists wanted to isolate HIV-positive patients.
Some parasites can control the brains of their hosts. So can false beliefs.
Besides false beliefs, a problem with bacteria is that it’s invisible. And then there’s an incubation phase and some carriers do not experience any symptoms.
However, as long as there’s no cure, precautions to prevent the disease from spreading are the only option we have.
How is Corona shaping our society?
Emptiness
Social distancing, closed bars, cancelled events and businesses - there’s emptiness at many places formerly filled with liveliness and closeness.
New borders
After a long phase of opening up and nearly borderless possibilities, our world is getting smaller. Strict border controls, travel bans, fewer parties, travelling became a chore…
Financial hardship and insecurity is a factor that makes travelling yet more unattractive for some families.
Connection
We need closeness and connectedness. Being locked in our apartments and houses is exhausting, not just for people who live alone. Many depressive people are getting worse. If you’re feeling down, I recommend you take advantage of the offers on my primary site: AC
Politics
Epidemics are times of executive power. Justice departments, parliaments, can all take a break. What matters now are administration and regulators.
Leaders who take action will improve their reputation and standing.
Other leaders try to play the severity of the pandemic down. The reason might be that making sure of people’s survival is the very responsible of a country’s leaders. However, when there’s insecurity and the masses are dying, a government looses their basic legitimacy.
This could be why some leaders, such as Boris Johnson, trump, Jair Bolsonaro tried to minimize and downplay the true extent of danger.
Chances and outlook
The Corona pandemic exposed weaknesses in our society, our social systems, politics and even ourselves. For instance, one reason the pandemic hit us seemingly unprepared is that out of greed warnings by experts have been ignored.
Even Bill Gates warned about a situation like this back in 2015 (and ever since):
Conspiracy theorists and far-right groups thanked him by making him the subject of ridiculously abstruse ideas. Another lesson we might learn from Corona is that we NEED to invest more in education. Education of young people, old people - all people.
It is time to cut the cable and stop watching those “drama” YouTubers that kill our brain cells faster than an acid trip with their irrelevancies. And “The Housewives of Jon Doe town” that numb us down harder than a punch on the head.
We must leave our "social" media world of anonymity and pseudonyms and take a stance.
Relationships
Isolation is not only a problem for singles, but also families. The number of homicides and violent conflicts is on the rise. Many couples are not used to spending that much time together, and financial problems make the situation even more tense for many.
Casual dating has mostly become an artifact of the past. We meet fewer people and treat the ones we do meet with more care.
Every medal has two sides, and every crisis provides growth potential.
Return to “normality”
Many people expect that in a few weeks from now everything will go back to normal.
Some experts estimate it will take years to go back to “normal” I do not expect that to be the case. As of today, we do not even have a reliable date for when a vaccine will become available.
Just like since HIV our normal has changed, it will change again.
The death toll is horrible, but things could have been worse. The virus could have been even worse. Hopefully, we’ll not go back to “business as usual”, but prepare for the next pandemic.
People are adaptable creatures of habit. We’ll get used to the new normal quickly.
An opportunity for growth
Gratitude
An epidemic is an incredible opportunity to become more grateful. For our freedom, our family, our friends.
During this crisis, uncountable fellow humans supported others. They give their money, time, care, and love to help others. The wave of altruism is heart-warming.
Deeper relationships
Greed and selfishness are the ugliest features of people and societies. Many people realize now that they are following the wrong gods. This crisis provides an opportunity for them to become less selfish and to understand that maximising profits isn't the only thing that matters.
If we discover we’re someone we can’t stand being alone with, it’s an excellent time to become someone we like to be alone with if need be.
I used to write about digital vs real connection, but I think I can skip that topic as this crisis reminded us on how much we need real human connectedness and closeness.
Corona made us more humble
We rethink our values and have a newfound respect for each other. We paused on our (attempted) race to the top as it's now about life and death. While Corona is not comparable to the Black Death, it's still about life and death. Status and power lose their importance to respect, dignity and decency.
I mentioned earlier that Corona is a leveler. No matter who you are, we share the same experience and will get through this together.
Work
Some jobs might go away, new jobs will appear. Some companies will keep their work-from-home positions. Perhaps corporate offices will become something like status symbols.
It could be the end of business travel as we know it (but that's pure speculation.)
We might see a new norm around respect and trust, and coworkers might become even closer.
For those who were longing to make a change they deemed too risky, might be a good time to go for their dream.
Politics
Should we discover that our elected leaders did not address the crisis competently, we can make a change.
We could consider, at least in democracies, to elect people with expert knowledge and/or the willingness and ability to consult experts in areas where they are not.
Also, we might push for more fairness, social justice, and demand that our new beliefs turn into policy.
Society - Catalyst for change
Corona exposed weaknesses in our system that we can address and as a result become a stronger, fairer society.
A pandemic can be a catalyst for change. We're in a phase of insecurity and are more aware of the importance of our infrastructural, economical, intellectual, and social resources. For instance, the importance and value of nurses, doctors, truckers, and shop assistants for a functioning system.
Crisis is part of live.
People are supportive creatures by nature. And evolution does its thing. Let’s enjoy the ride and be as helpful of a creature as we can during our short time on earth.
Why evolution wants betrayal
As difficult as admitting it to yourself might be, the first rule of betrayal is that our perception of someone else’s character was wrong. We did not predict their behavior correctly.
Because of my background in emotional intelligence, I see betrayal as a learning experience that’s pointing out my growth potential.
Jealousy can comprise a broad range of experiences, from an everyday feeling to a pathology that leads to crime and abuse.
Jealousy destroys the foundation of positive relationships. It is crucial to remember we do not build those sound foundations overnight - or in a two-day session in a random online game.
Why could evolution want that betrayals hurt?
Studies confirmed what you knew all along: Men and women are different in jealousy.
Is jealousy the most counterproductive emotion?
On the first look, jealousy must be one of the most counterproductive emotions of them all. Just think of all the relationships that break because one partner is overly jealous.
I haven’t experienced physical betrayal yet; but I experienced emotional betrayal just the other day. It hurts.
And just think of all the hours we spend crying about unrequited love, break-ups, and disloyal people. I can only imagine the pain someone must feel when someone cheats on them.
From the standpoint of evolution, jealousy seems to be even more counterintuitive, doesn’t it? More partners, more sex = more offspring = sped up evolution.
Why do we suffer when our partner is unfaithful?
The answer to this question is complex, and scientists are still researching the topic. We have a few theories on how jealousy serves evolution. What we know so far is that men and women are equally jealous, even though the triggers are different.
We must differentiate between suspicious and reactive jealousy as the latter is a normal human emotion.
A definition:
Reactive jealousy
We call it reactive jealousy when someone discovers an actual threat or danger to their relationship. That would, for instance, be the case if you catch your partner cheating. Reactive jealousy is always a response to a real, realistic danger. You see your partner misbehaving with your own eyes or have proof of their betrayal.
Suspicious jealousy
What we mean by suspicious jealousy is if someone is jealous even though their partner did not misbehave. For instance, your jealous partner feels you’re talking too long to someone, or a stranger has looked at you with an interest in their eyes.
We base suspicious jealousy on fear, painful experience, or, with abusive people, the knowledge that they are not excellent partners and any decent human being could pose a threat.
Suspicious jealousy is distrust.
Emotional betrayal vs physical betrayal
According to the research of renowned psychologist David M. Buss, the male brain reacts stronger to physical betrayal while the female brain fears emotional betrayal. If we look at our ancestors, that makes sense and led to the parental-investment model.
Men had to be sure that women are physically loyal so they don’t waste time and resources on other children than the men’s own.
Women didn’t need to worry about that, but they depended on their men regarding food, wood to keep the fire burning.
That is why women feel more threatened by emotional negligence while men respond stronger to the thread of physical betrayal.
Extremely jealous people might be triggered by everything and not fit the gender stereotype. One might wonder where their place in evolution is. So what I am saying is that we need to look at this as a model rather than black/white scenario.
We all know that people are not great at assessing themselves. When asked which event is scarier for them, physical or emotional betrayal, a certain amount of people might have responded based on inaccurate self-perception. That said, several follow-up studies came to the same result.
These ancient emotions are even present in couples who are too old to have kids or stayed childless. Even in online dating, ancient patterns are still valid.
Researchers concluded that men react more jealous when their partners might have cybersex and women react stronger to the threat that their partner could form an emotional connection to someone online.
Emotional connection and jealousy
Gender is not the only factor. In 2010, psychologists Kristen Kelly and Kenneth Levy researched the correlation between the depth of emotional connection and jealousy. Their study concluded that the patterns of connections are not genetically predetermined but formed by our first relationships and friendships.
Simplified, you can say that partners who emphasize sex or independence over love fear physical betrayal while the people who feel a deep emotional connection to their partners are more scared of emotional betrayal.
According to scientists, more men than women prefer casual relationships.As in all fields of evolutionary psychology, several factors play a part; may it be genetics, upbringing, or environment. Some signs show men are angrier when their spouse cheats, while women are more threatened by emotional betrayal.
Related:
Article: How to deal with toxic people
Article: Toxic people Plan A and B
Training: Project Self-Confidence
When conspiracy theories and rumors are on the rise
Since 2016, the number of people who believe what they want has increased dramatically. Some of us have become fact-resistant.
As we are dealing with the impact of the coronavirus, the world has become quieter in some places much louder in others. Telling rumors and conspiracies, opinions and chatter from facts takes effort.
Is it science or superstition?
Have you heard the story that Bill Gates wants to implant a chip into every person? Or that the government adds a substance to our drinking water that makes us terribly tired?
Far right extremists grab the opportunity to blame the Jews for the pandemic.
Many Americans think Corona is a hoax (we’re at 89,874 deaths, 1,496,509 reported infections and the number of new infections is constant, while it is sinking in many other countries as of 05/18/20.)
Don’t laugh at crazy
At the height of the recent refugee crisis, Germany made a terrible mistake. They didn’t take the angry protesters seriously. Americans made the same mistake in 2018, and I was one of them.
A few days ago, flat earther Mike Hughes died while attempting to launch himself 5,000 feet into the air with a homemade rocket.
Laughing at people is a sharp sword that can make people angrier than any conspiracy theory could. We should take everyone seriously and address the root of things, the fear and discomfort that makes an increasing number of people fact-resistant and willing to believe in fiction more than facts.
The more condescending and ignorant we are, the faster superstition and false beliefs will rise.
The difference between conspiracies and science
We construct conspiracy theories in a way that they are difficult to disprove. How could you prove that Elvis is not alive or that we are not living in The matrix?
Getting through to someone who believes Bill Gates is responsible for corona is a challenging task.
When a scientist has a theory, they are eager to be proven wrong to learn how to perfect their science. They put their facts to the test.
How could you put someone’s superstition to the test or debate it constructively?
Conspiracy theories use confusion and insecurities to create a false sense of control and comfort.
I second this statement by Seth Godin:
“Reality doesn’t care whether or not we believe in it, but it’s more useful for all of us when we understand it.”
Seth Godin
What you can do to improve communication and happiness
Communicate effectively
Mostly when I use this expression I am referring to getting through to people and influencing them. Here, I am talking about something else.
Ask yourself:
What percentage of my communication is
- Talking about others
- Listening to others speaking about others
- Spreading rumors
- Listening to others spreading rumors
And what percentage of your communication is sharing your genuine message (of love, humility…)
Then work on decimating useless and harmful communication.
Use your critical thinking skills
Critical thinking means a rational, unbiased analysis of facts. It includes the questioning of evidence and takes the agenda of whoever presents you with a theory into account.
A while back I wrote: How to recognize fake news.
Adaptability is the top survival skill, and a crisis can be an opportunity if you’re able to adapt and address the changing needs of people.
You don’t even have to be good at thinking. All you have to do is think for yourself.
Communication has more aspects than spoken words and words have more dimensions than "right" and "wrong."
We should pay attention to the obvious. It saves a lot of time and energy to acknowledge what is right in front of you.
However, we shouldn’t give the obvious too much importance. Perhaps the color of the wrap has nothing to do with what it’s hiding. And maybe the headline on the cover is unrelated to the meaning of the words inside.
The danger lies in the fact that on the first look, the obvious can lead to conclusions and opinions that fall apart on a closer look.
It encourages unwarranted and undifferentiated simplifications. The obvious can act as a coat, hiding the true meaning of a word and the true nature of an agenda.
Maybe we shouldn’t just ask what’s obvious, but also what is too obvious.
This letter is for you.
I want you to know that I will not allow that you feel alone. You won't feel ignored or abused anymore. I will not allow that you feel alone because you deserve as many marvellous things as everyone else. You deserve it because you matter. You matter because you exist.
Perhaps your life didn't go as planned, or perhaps it did until you hit a roadblock. Perhaps you hunted something you couldn't have. Perhaps you couldn't see what was so obvious to everyone else. Perhaps you ignored the warnings. Or perhaps you begged for help and nobody listened. Perhaps you did horrible things and alienated the people who loved you.
It doesn't matter anymore. You're here now and it's your turn. What do you want? Where do you want to go? What's your goal for today?
I will not allow that you keep hiding your face. I am here even though you will not always see me. I'm not sure how much or how little I can do, but I will do it.
Even though I don't know you, I know that my words can heal you.
Do you know why I know that? Because I am the voice of everyone. Because we all matter and we all can heal.
I'm also writing this letter to myself. I'm you and you're me. I was where you are now. Or perhaps I'm writing this for my future self. This letter shall remind you and me that we don't have to be afraid.
I will not allow that they tear you into shreds or that you beat yourself down. I will protect you from those who want to destroy your dreams, hunt you, and make your heart fearful. I will not allow that this happens to you.
You don't have to feel alone anymore, and you don't have to live in fear. I'll be there to help you find your inner voice and encourage you when you're feeling down. Even though I can only help with my words, I will use them to motivate you to get up and go forward.
You should know that you're not alone.
Need more help?
Join Project Confidence
The cyber mobbing clique "Ligue de LOL" is a group of French journalists, influencers, and marketers who coordinated their violent cyber mobbing attacks (mostly on women) via their Facebook group
Wait, did I say "not your typical troll?" Is there such a thing as a "typical troll?" A pimply, lonely teenager in the basement?
What picture do you see in your mind when you hear troll? How about "influential, highly educated, left-leaning, progressive journalist"?
Let me tell you about a scandal that stirs up a lot of emotions in French.
In 2009, a group of influential digital pioneers founded the mobbing clique "Ligue de LOL."
They shared links to profiles of people they thought to be embarrassing, stupid - or just too fat. They coordinated targeted attacks, mainly on women.
Last Friday, the French outlet "Libération" confirmed the existence of this cyber mobbing group. Since then, victims come forward and share their experience with digital mobbing and hatred towards women.
How did the group operate? What are the consequences? Who is a part of the cyber mobbing group?
We know the LOL Ligue for a long time in French as a "digital super clique"
At least 35 people were members of the cyber mobbing group. The members include several well-known journalists who made careers at influential French newspapers and magazines. Famous podcasters and digital consultants - including the former community manager of French president Emmanuel Macron - were also part of the boy-club.
Founder of the group, Vincent Glad, has 140,000 followers on Twitter and appears to be well-educated and left-leaning. If you speak French, you can read his rather naïve sounding apology pinned to his profile.
The other members of the cyber mobbing group are also very well connected, averaging a follower count of several thousand, mostly tens of thousands of followers.
Many of them were early adopters of Twitter. In the beginning stages, Twitter was a much smaller, much more elite network and featured many journalists, digital pioneers and other people who were convinced that they can change the world through journalism.
"Le Monde" journalist Samuel Laurent describes the beginning of the "Ligue de LOL" in a (French) Facebook post of February 11 HERE
"....a small, elite world of hand-picked journalists, communication experts, developers and a few other people from the digital sector were convinced that they can change the world by journalism..."
Samuel Laurent (loosely translated by me)
Laurent explains that the group didn't realize how homogeneous it was: young, white, well-educated Parisians.
The "cool kids" of the "LOL Ligue" were on top of the Twitter hierarchy. They could make or break careers. And they knew about their power.
The cyber attacks: how the "LOL Ligue" attacked women and minorites
Vincent Glad who still worked for the "Libération" until the scandal became public, founded the group to "have fun" making fun of others. The men perceived the group as a playfield.
On Twitter, Glad now states "I created a monster and lost control of it." That's why I described his apology as "naive" earlier on. Someone who is convinced that journalism - which is writing - can change the world is surprised that coordinated attacks with written words break people?
The group not only insulted feminist authors, journalists and female YouTubers in a flash-mob-like manner, but they also created photo montages were they added the faces of people "they had fun making fun of" to pornographic GIFs.
I love a good prank. Having experienced cyber stalking and the abuse of personal information myself, I find it hard to see how creating fake porn pictures is funny.
Because they were so well connected, the "LOL Ligue" could focus hatred and attention to specific accounts and made sure that these accounts were flooded with harmful and hateful messages.
"I felt as if I was running from a sniper," one victim describes the horror of being targeted by the Ligue de LOL.
Several women left Twitter because they could not deal with the harassment and hatred any longer.
The "LOL Ligue" also terrorized their victims with phone calls. For instance, they called a victim and offered her an anchor job - and published a recording of the phone call online.
They used the name and real phone number of a female YouTuber to post a fake ad on Craigslist. Signed by "Madame fat."
Many of the members of the group are now all apologetic like "Oh, we didn't we would hurt someone's feelings." Suddenly, everyone hardly realized what was going on.
Obviously, one can be the community manager for the French president and assume it's not hurtful to create fake porn pictures and coordinate harassment attacks.
Some members used fake accounts for their attacks, while others used their private accounts. But the victims were too afraid to speak up. After all, these people are influential. It only became a public scandal when the "Libération" followed up on cues that something was off with this group.
Some members who used their private profiles are now trying to hide traces. This one - the ex-community manager of the French president, deleted about 390 Tweets on Sunday.
The consequences
For some group members, the cyber mobbing will finally have consequences. "Libération" started an internal investigation and fired group founder Vincent Glad. Online editor-in-chief Alexandre Hervaud, was sent on leave for the duration of the investigation.
Podcast company Nouvelles Écoutes fired podcaster Guilhem Malissen. "Usbek & Rica" fired Guillaume Ledit.
PR firm Publicis Consultants fired R.L. The initiative "SOS Racisme" demands an official investigation. The "Ligue de LOL" targeted mainly women but also some black people and people from the LGBT community.
This happened in France. We all know that cyber mobbing and organized cyber mobbing of "boy clubs" are not problems exclusive to France.
Having influence and money is a test of character that many fail.
I'm all about empathy and forgiveness. But what I feel when I try to understand the agenda of emotions of a group who systematically used their power to target "weaker" individuals is not pretty.
We all took a prank too far in the moment's heat. But over weeks? Months?
These were not pimply teenagers venting off some frustration in the basement of their houses. These are influential, highly educated and powerful people who knew about the destructive power of their words and actions. Wasn't their vision to "change the world with journalism"?
Perhaps a better vision is to change the world with empathy and kindness.
This is the first part of a weekly series about ethical consumerism.
Part 1 - Good Customer, Bad Customer
Buy to save the world
It's such an interesting and simple idea: With our dollars, we can change the world. But why is the movement not growing? Why are factory workers still being exploited? Why don't we buy more organic produce? Do we care about moral or how the concept of ethical consumerism and being a part of it makes us feel?
Phenom Phen, Cambodia, a small, muddy path in the city's west.
Source: Cambo Expo
Keal Leangky is sitting in front of a hut close to the factory where she worked as a tailor for two years. “I should not have eaten the mango back then.”
A few months back, in the middle of the rainy season, Keal was hungry. She took a mango out of her pocket and ate it. The Chinese foreman saw her and started to scream at her. She didn't understand what he said until he called a translator. “Stop eating immediately”, the translator said to Keal.
Some of Keal's colleagues tried to help. 15 of them. They said Keal always makes her quota, and that she is pregnant. United, they demanded that the foreman apologizes and threatened to go on strike.
They fired all of them. The workers received their remaining pay and were let go. Keal received §35. That's it. CWKH Garment Cambodia Ltd., a factory with approximately 400 workers, got rid of staff that puts up resistance.
In the following weeks, more and more factory workers showed solidarity. They fired them too. At the time when I researched this story, they were 200.
The unemployed fabric worker tried to fight with legal and symbolic actions. The court ruled the strike illegal and the workers have to find a new job. They must start at the bottom again. In Cambodia, one of the most productive place for producing cheap clothing, “bottom” means a pay of $100 per month for 8-12 hours of work, six days a week.
Bangladesh, India
You might expect to read about the 2013 catastrophe when a factory building crashed and buried 3000 workers of which 1134 died. The pictures of collective guilt burnt our souls.
But I want to share a different story with you.
The picture is the property of stern.de. You will understand why I will not post pictures of the hero and the person seeking help later on.
Source: Stern
“It's a fairy tale come true”, titles the German magazine Stern.
Claudia purchased a shirt for her husband. When she unpacked it, she found the note above. A cry for help from Gazi, a factory worker in Bangladesh. That was 13 years ago.
Gazi was desperate when he wrote the note. Even though he—as opposed to most of the people in his tiny village—had a job, he could not afford medicine for his sick father.
Claudia wrote a letter to Gazi who noted his home address on his cry for help. A few weeks later, she received a letter from Gazi. He told Claudia about his life in Bangladesh, the pregnancy of his wife, and how hard earning money is.
“They are not rich”, writes Stern about our heroes. “They own a small house and have four children.” The couple travelled to Bangladesh and met Gazi and his lovely wife. From then on, they sent 30 Euros monthly (about $37) to Gazi and his family. That's an average salary in Bangladesh.
When Gazi's wife was giving birth, the couple saved her life and the life of the kid. They paid for the hospital stay and needed surgery.
12 years later, the couple travelled to Bangladesh once more. Accompanied by a reporter team, who filmed Gazi, his wife and (meanwhile) two children and this heartbreaking story.
For the media, this is where the story ends.
Kudos to the couple that gave some of their money to help a fellow human being survive.
How do you feel right now? I know the media supposes us to feel touched, happy, share the story and move on with our lives.
It's not how I felt. I had to force back the tears and got angry for a moment. I sensed (or imagined) that Gazi did not enjoy being on camera. They did not make him say “Thank you, Massa”, but that was the only bit of humiliation they spared.
A US American on minimum wage earns enough to buy about 1.3 shirts per hour. Questions that occupied my mind were:
- Could we afford to pay a buck more or ten for a shirt?
- Do we need to buy mountains of cheap garments and throw them away after a season?
- Did we just exploit the product of our exploitation for a viral story?
Gazi is a single person who is lucky that a family from Germany supported him. At least one of his children would be dead without their support, and likely his wife too.
We can afford to throw a few coins because our system is based on exploitation. Not Gazi and no factory worker should suffer from extreme poverty. Many of you will agree with me. Yet, I am not doing all I could do to make things better.
I started my path to minimalism a while back and gave away 90% of my clothes. After reading Gazi's story, I felt guilt for every shirt I still own and do not really need and everything I still own that I have purchased at a price that screams “suffering.” Why am I making so many mistakes?
Why is ethical consumerism so difficult in reality?
Hans-Otto Schrader, Hamburg, Germany
Hans-Otto Schrader made a surprising confession. He is the executive chairman of the Otto Group and patriarch of the $18 Billion Otto clan.
He explained how seriously the Otto Group takes their social responsibility and that sustainability is now part of the strategy. Otto shared with the reporter how his heart broke when a factory in Thailand burnt down in 1987. Otto speaks about a social project the Otto Group took on (saving trees) and the importance of social engagement and other corporate values.
Honestly, the interview was boring because none of it sounded sincere. But then it turned interesting.
“We have to be careful,” Otto said, “we are very careful with our communication.”
He is afraid of the power of consumers, the internet and social media. “Our analysis is,” he continues, “that buyers don't reward social engagement. They don't reward you for trying harder than your competitor, but they punish you if you make a mistake.”
A culture of outrage
Otto points out that our culture of outrage is glued to ethical consumerism. “If we take too much risk, we might become the victim of a wave of outrage that destroys everything we built.” Otto says: “If we learn that an article is produced unethically, we remote from our offering. The problem is: As a reseller of consumer goods, we don't always know if they produce an article incorrectly.”
The question is: If Otto cannot tell, how should a single simple consumer be able to decide?
Subscribe and don't missthe next part: Why fair is difficult
Who still believes the internet is free and uncontrollable must be rather naive. Our freedom of expression is in grave danger. You might think I am referring to sinister secret services, conspiracy theorists, or radical extremists from left and right. No. I am referring to the people who are out of control. I am speaking about the people lacking the guts and decency to stand by what they have to say.
Blogs, social networks and internet forums have become the playing field of anonymous trolls. Conspiracy theorists and extremists are long outnumbered by people who hide behind pseudonyms and fake pictures.
Respect is the basis of free expression
Their language and actions are free of respect and, therefore, they lack the basis of free expression. This kind of inflammatory language is the opposite of democratic discourse where people exchange their opinions and point of views. Democratic discourse can and should be controversial. But who uses technology only to denounce, discredit, hurt, attack, insult and defame distorts the freedom of expression beyond recognition. Until it's worthless.
People who hide behind fake profiles defend their anonymity, claiming their right to free expression is endangered if they have to use their actual names. They say they would suffer disadvantages by posting statements we could hold them accountable for.
Arguments like this play into the hands of those who want to control the internet, for instance, governments. One of their strongest arguments is that anonymity makes people lose their last scruples and all respect.
If you are anonymous, you are meaningless. An internet whos inhabitants have neither name nor address also has no voice. At least not one that can be taken seriously. Therefore, anonymous internet inhabitants are silent and powerless.
Perhaps you will say that demanding a non-anonymous debate would destroy the charm of the internet. The subculture, the undergroundy many are so proud of (for reasons I seem unable to comprehend. Is it an honor to hide? Is it brave? Is it cool?)
We are not talking about the board member who calls himself "horny goat 1957" on a porn site. We're speaking about the expression of controversial and/or political opinions.
Pseudonyms are necessary in a dictatorship, in a democracy they're not
Pseudonyms harm an open society
Pseudonyms might be necessary for a dictatorship. Who uses them in a democracy harms the open society. The freedom of speech also requires decency and fairness. The freedom of expression only has a meaning if the words are heard from real people by real people. Trolls and anonymous snipers are as good at influencing change as a group of punks beating up a granny at night with baseball sticks. They are what they are: cowardly perpetrators.
Citizens can influence change. Citizens have names.
Lack of democratic mindset
The internet is free as long as we are in control of ourselves. Where democratic mindset is missing, narrow views grow. Soon everything that's different from our limited beliefs gets attacked. Yours truly, John Doe.
Anonymity (in a democracy) does not lead to freedom. It leads to ignorance, self-inflicted autism, and arbitrary opinions. Is that worthy of protection? No! It's dangerous. Anonymity feeds the stalkers, the cowards, the cellar trolls and helps everyone who is against an open society. An open society can endure different opinions. But cowardliness is the vanguard of tyranny, it's its strongest legion.
The freedom of speech and freedom of expression
Free speech and the freedom of expressions are every citizen's right. On the internet and everywhere else. But it renders both obsolete when anonymization and pseudonyms devalue the worth of a speech. Who writes and speaks without a name cannot be held accountable and is not available for feedback.
How should wisdom be shared under the jester hat of anonymous indifference?
The right to free speech and freedom of expression is more important than the right to anonymity. We have to protect and fight for our democratic rights. Anonymous profiles cannot protect anything besides cowardice. They don't care to know the true meaning of civil courage. It's the braveness of the decent.
And, hey, if you are afraid to speak up because you feel that in your country the power is shifting from democracy to tyranny ... might be a delightful time to sign statements with your actual name, don't you think?
