Difference obligates

When a horde of locusts sweeps over a land destroying all the vegetation in its path, neither the horde nor the individual locusts have any idea that they are destroying at all. They are just being what they are. Many in the world would consider them pests that need to be eradicated, others hear of locusts and think of a fried-peanut-like delicacy, and far too many people think absolutely nothing at all, because they weren't directly affected one way or the other.

When a horde of marauders or bandits or whomever sweeps over a land destroying everything in its path, both the horde and the individuals within it know perfectly well that they are destroying. They are not being simply what they are, they are being what they, at that moment, want to be. Those affected by their actions certainly see them as more than just pests that need to be eradicated. Others hear of what has happened and think how awful, and far too many people think absolutely nothing at all, because they weren't affected one way or the other.

The difference between the actions of all involved in both cases is that we can tell the difference between what just is and what needn't be. Another difference is that we can hear about both, regardless of how far away we might be. In other words, we know; we are aware; the event has become part of our individual experience, perhaps not radically or existentially, but a part nevertheless. Fish don't know about locusts, and neither do most other animals. But we know because we're different. We are capable of knowing. That makes all the difference in the world.

Whereas a bear or a dog or a fish may simply go on about its business, we can't. We would never expect the bear or the dog or the fish to react at all because we know they don't know about locusts or marauders so it would truly be unfair for us to expect them to care. We, however, are different. We know. We know the difference, because we are different, and that difference obligates.

When you know, when you have been made aware, you can no longer claim ignorance as a defense. Once you know, you are involved ... perhaps only tangentially, perhaps only remotely, but you are involved. Sure you can maintain that you're half-a-world away so what could you do? Quite a few of those that are helping those people, though, often come from half-a-world away. So why should we allow you that excuse? You can claim you're just one person, what effect could you have? But you have no friends? You know no one? You live in a bubble?

But, hey, we don't even have to go that far: what about the homeless person you pass on the way to work? The street musician you love to hear but cross to the other side of the street so you don't have to toss anything into her hat? What about the guy next door who keeps beating his wife or girl friend? What about, well, anything you know and do absolutely nothing about? Yes, what about it?

A significant difference between us and the animals is simply that we can know. But when you know and you do nothing, you aren't doing anyone a favor, especially not yourself. You are simply denying your own humanity.