When Being Right is Wrong

by J. Brown

As you all know by now, France was attacked by terrorists on Friday night. In an event that felt eerily similar to 9/11, 129 people were killed by attacks at six different French locations. ISIS has since claimed responsibility for the attacks, and it can be assumed that the attacks were due to France's involvement in the US airstrikes in Syria. (For more information on the Syrian war, check this out. I was a bit in the dark myself, and this video helped to clear up a lot for me.)

Since news of the French attacks surfaced in the US, many Americans have taken to social media to express their well-wishes and to show solidarity for the innocent lives that were lost. Others, after seeing these displays of sympathy, took to social media to explain why we should not be supporting the French. 

This makes no sense.

One argument is that we are extending a level of sympathy to France that was not given to Beirut, Lebanon, which experienced similarly devastating terrorist attacks, and that we routinely do not show enough support to other victims around the globe. This may be true, and in all honesty, it probably is. What I don't understand, though, is how any of that makes it wrong to show support to the French. Should we be talking about Lebanon and the other nations that have been devastated by terrorists? Absolutely. Does that mean we must now stop talking about France? No, not at all.


I'm confused by the "But What About" army that seems to appear every time anyone shows support for anything. France got attacked, but what about Lebanon? Black lives matter, but what about other lives? Immigrants are important, but what about Americans? It's as if we aren't content with people showing concern about things unless they are the same things that we want them to care about. One of the best comparisons I've heard: It's like complaining that colon cancer isn't getting enough attention during Breast Cancer Awareness Month. 

Furthermore, the beef here shouldn't be with the people who are showing sympathy towards France, it should be with the media for lack of coverage of the other events. Perhaps people would express more concern for these events if they were covered equally. And even if they didn't, that's their prerogative. It isn't our job to convince other people what they should care about. Spreading new information is cool, but chastising other people for not being informed just comes off as condescending and not very helpful. Is the intent to keep others informed, or just to let them know that you're better than they are?

Another argument is that France's government has shown a history of corruption, so we shouldn't be showing support for them. Again, this argument is misguided. Maybe France does have a record of corruption, maybe they don't. I haven't even bothered to check the facts on this, because it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter because the terrorist attacks affected innocent civilians. Should the families of these victims not be supported simply because we disagree with the political movements of their government? 

Not to mention, most powerful nations have a history of corruption, including - you guessed it - the good ol' US of A. (May I interest any of you in a quick reminder of the Transatlantic Slave Trade? How about the Trail of Tears? Anyone??) Perhaps the most evil government in the past 100 years was Nazi Germany. And guess what? There were a lot of Germans who lived there that were innocently killed, too. Are we to assume that their lives didn't matter because they were German? Should we feel no sympathy and extend no solidarity to the loss of German lives simply because we disagreed with Hitler?

I think the biggest annoyance in all of this is that some people seem to be using a tragedy to show off how educated and well-read they think they are. Additionally, there's an overwhelming desire on social media to convince. Whether it's which political agenda to support, which sports team to follow, or which tragedy to mourn, we seem to be on a constant crusade to convince others that they should believe in whatever we believe. Funny thing is, no one has asked for our opinion, and at a certain point it begins to feel like some folks are developing opinions simply for the sake of having one. (I've covered this phenomenon already here.) 

Above all else, there's one really important, overarching point that's being ignored through all of these Twitter rants, Instagram posts and Facebook arguments: none of us are really doing anything, anyway. Change your profile picture to a silhouette of the French flag, or don't. Post an article about Beirut, or don't. Tell someone why their beliefs should mirror yours, or don't. (Actually, just don't.) At the end of the day, most of us are just people with opinions sitting behind smartphone and laptop screens. 

Most of us aren't housing refugees or donating money or even writing our Congressman. We're just typing, texting and tweeting. One thing I've learned in my 29 years is that beliefs without actions are just thoughts. At that point, they might as well just stay in our heads. 

I can appreciate a desire to shed light on other tragedies throughout the world, but there's a right and a wrong way to do that. Placing guilt on those that sympathize with victims of "the famous tragedy" is the wrong way. Mourning dead lives, on the other hand, can never be wrong. 

Furthermore, none of us are the moral police. Neither you nor I is responsible for telling others what they should care about. Instead of worrying about what others are worrying about, say a prayer for all the lives that have been lost, regardless of the country that they lived in. It may not seem like much, but at least then you'll be doing something about it.