Condemnation

It was a fresh meat in a pool of phiranas, a link to a story that indicated that a tsunami warning could have been issued to the areas hardest hit, but was cancelled in deference to the tourism industry.

The link was to an article in the Swedish online newspaper Expressen and did not appear in English. It was translated by someone named CLiss and referenced--but did not seem to link to--an article in the Bankok online newspaper The Nation (not to be confused with the American magazine of the same name). A brief search of The Nation's website did not indicated that a warning was cancelled.

That didn't stop a torrent of criticism at the greed involved in cancelling the warning. Everyone assumed it was true and assumed the worst. The fact that the message board was hard left wing didn't matter. I've seen (and participated in) the same reaction at far more moderate forums. In a lot of cases, I'm right. In some cases, information I find out later shows me that I was not only wrong, but needless caused pain for the object(s) of my scorn.

We live in a judgemental environment. Talk radio, columnists, muckraking authors, and others of the like all make money. After all, it's no fun listening to someone calling for cool heads until the facts roll in. It's more fun getting the adrenalin running and screaming and feeling that as bad as I might be, I am at least better than .

That's one thing when it is Jim Rome barking about Jets quarterback Chad Pennington, who has a running feud going with the New York media. No matter that Pennington is still in his 20s and many of the people criticizing him for his reaction would have similar reactions when they are criticized. Pennington gets paid a lot of money to play football and that's part of the reason why.

It is quite another thing when the object of scorn is someone thrust into the spotlight unexpectedly or worse yet, someone who has unpleasantly bumped up against us as we go through life.

Anne Coulter has a best-selling book called How to Talk to a Liberal (If you must). I will admit that I have not read the book, though I probably should. But the title puts me off. I believe that as a conservative, I must talk to liberals. Conservatives aren't always right. In fact, many of the liberals I know are far better people than I am. I learn from them.

But in the culture of instant condemnation, such learning opportunities are becoming less and less common. Instead, our existence turns into an echo chamber, making our own views more rigid and inflexible. And our appetite for condemning what we disagree with increases.

If someone completely understood the tsunami warning, and if that person cancelled it, and if the reason for the cancellation was the fact that it would have cost companies money, then that person deserves servere criticism. But that's a lot of ifs to deal with. And even if all of those ifs are true, that person deserves the same right to redemption.

There is a Biblical passage that says that the measure you use will be used against you. Many of those who are most vocal in condemnation will someday understand the cost of their actions. They will know first hand. I'm not sure that the price of such poetic justice is a thing I would wish on anyone.