Some criticise those who show compassion for the victims of Paris on social media, but have ignored every other victim of any other attack previously. Do we have to post something for every unfair act to justify our sympathy to others? Are these so called “critics” so objectively correct that they raise their voice for each and every terror attack, mass murder or injustice?
I believe all sort of compassion or sympathy with humanity is good, whether you start with Paris, Syria or any other country. However, while I do agree that the attention is unevenly distributed depending on the geographical area, but if that is the case, why can’t you — critics, instead of criticising those who ignore — raise these silent atrocities yourselves?
Personally, I like to raise attention about all the unjustified mass murders of Armenians, Greeks, Assyrians but that doesn’t mean that I am going to criticise everyone who does not. We shouldn’t have to think about our Facebook feed in order to decide whether or not to show solidarity with our fellow human beings. Just because I didn’t post anything about Iraq doesn’t mean that I do not have the right to post in support of the people of Paris.
It is the need of the hour that we change this mentality of constantly criticising each other, always waiting to point fingers or play the blame game because at the end of the day, does your status or change of profile picture actually bring the dead back or undo the attack? No, but something will always be better than nothing so let’s just focus on making this world a happier place rather than creating unnecessary drama.
— The reader is a Swedish student based in Gothenburg
