Paulo M. Costa
"Morre mais gente em quedas na banheira do que em atentados terroristas. Porque devemos dar mais importância aos segundos do que aos primeiros?"
Brendan O'Neill explica porque é que este tipo de argumento, tão frequentemente ouvido, é terrivelmente infantil.
I've been on the radio five times in the past few hours, debating people who have gone a bit mental over my spiked article on Manchester. And they've said similar things: "Well, statistically speaking, you're more likely to die falling out of your bath than in a terrorist attack..."; "More people die on the roads than in terror attacks so why aren't you angry at cars..??"; "Storms cause more deaths than terrorism..."
This is so infantile. Terrorism is not an accident or a natural disaster. It is a conscious act. It is a product of ideas and ideology. It is *designed* to kill you, and to spread fear. Baths are designed to wash you, cars are designed to transport you, and if they kill you, it's a mistake. There is no comparison between a car crash and someone deciding and planning to detonate a bomb at a pop concert. I've been really surprised by the terrorism denial I've witnessed over the past 48 hours. People are running from really hard moral and political questions and basically saying: "Shit happens. Let's mourn and move on." They are desperate to drain terrorism of its evil intent and ideological content and reduce it to something that is sad but also an unavoidable, routine part of life, like falling down the stairs.
Nope. I accept that one day I might fall out of my bath. That's life. But I refuse to accept that one day a fellow citizen of mine might be blown up as he has a drink or dances with friends. That isn't life, and never should be.