[flagged]
This thread is going nowhere pretty. But if you want an honest answer to this, the answer is obviously no social networks don’t properly represent world issues.
There are a myriad of reasons for this in the case of the Gaza famine some legitimate and some illegitimate, but one I would call fairly legitimate is that the US provides vast support to one side of the conflict as an ally so it is very natural for it to be a hotter talking point than the famine in Sudan. People feel they are complicit in what happens in Gaza.
As far as I can tell the US is not supplying the army of Sudan with billions of cash, munition, weapons and unconditionally political backing.
That sounds... pretty similar to what's happening in Sudan? From the OP:
>[...] Some of the shortage is down to theft and damage by the RSF and other militias. But much blame lies also with the SAF, which is loth to allow food into areas, including most of Darfur, under the control of the RSF.
>A single convoy of aid trucks can wait six weeks or more in Port Sudan to be cleared by the SAF for onward travel. Even then, almost all of it goes to SAF-controlled areas. Only a tiny fraction has reached Darfur. [...]
The proclamation by UN is regarding a specific refugee camp (Zamzam) that doesn't have any governance, not Sudan as a whole. Gaza has governance, so any famine in Gaza would be announced by the government there, not UN, as far as I understand things.
Per the precious words of their so-called Defense Minister:
“I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed,” Gallant says following an assessment at the IDF Southern Command in Beersheba.
“We are fighting human animals and we are acting accordingly,” he adds.
And of their National Security Minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir:
As long as Hamas does not release the hostages in its hands - the only thing that needs to enter Gaza are hundreds of tons of explosives from the Air Force, not an ounce of humanitarian aid.
Whether the situation ultimately met the technical definition of "famine" or not by the time Biden successfully twisted Netanyahu's arm to compel the establishment some form of humanitarian aid to flow into the territory -- is basically a matter of splitting hairs.
Let's have some empathy, please.
The collapse of the Sudan is not directly being enflamed directly by any western power compared to the Gaza collapse. So the Sudan conflict is less interesting to us.
The Sudan collapse is being enflamed by regional powers where the UAE is funding the Janjaweed (who are officially declared a g*nocidal outfit) whereas the Sudan government actual is being supported by Iran.
The UAE might be considered a proxy for the US though but this kind of indirection makes the conflict too complicated talk about in the general media i guess.
> Yes the situation in Sudan got worse so that it exceeded the situation in Gaza. It has been deteriorating for many months since April 2023.
Just to be clear the famine is deliberately being caused by occupying g*nocidal Janjaweed army (the RSF), they are besieging towns across the region destroy to prevent food production, blocking supplies and trade.
Famine is always deliberate and caused by military and political decisions.
If you ask me, though, I don't see why it's not possible for grave suffering to exist in multiple places simultaneously.
My capacity to give damns is finite.
If you happen to be some saint who has infinite capacity for empathy, good for you. I think most people share my sentiment, though.
It’s just that my ability and will to do anything more than care is lacking.
Presumably if I cared enough I’d donate to some charity, but I feel fixing this kind of stuff is why we have governments with humanitarian aid programmes (which I happily pay for through taxes), which should theoretically be a thousand times more effective.
* First priority is caring for myself. I can't care for anyone if I don't.
* Next is immediate family.
* Then it's my closest friends.
* Followed by my other friends and extended/distant family.
* After that are my professional connections: Co-workers, bosses, subordinates, clients, suppliers, and so on. They are who I derive a living from.
* Now I get to strangers I happen to meet during my life. This is actually an important group as, indeed, most if not all friendships, professional connections, and even family originate here.
* Finally, after all that, I can maybe care about strangers I have not met and will never meet during my life.
I'm sorry, my damns ran dry somewhere in "strangers in my life" before I got through them and I think that's actually being generous. I don't have any left for someone on the other god damn side of the world who is literally meaningless to me.
When people bring this up, why does it always seem to be to suggest we should not care about anything, instead of to wonder how we can build more action (just attention alone does not do anything) on more disasters?
Of course raw death toll isn't the only way to judge the newsworthiness of a story, but it is illumiating how things (presumably via trad media, social media, psyops) either enter public conciousness or don't.
Particularly I find it absurd how little I hear about the Yemeni civil war.
[0] e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_armed_conflict...