http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/03/22/united.nations.water.report/index.html
A new report from the UN argues that contaminated drinking water kills more people than war.
If only the resources were devoted to solving this problem as to preparing for wars. That issues like these aren't central to IR theorizing, but war is, tells us something about the perspective from which most IR theory is made-- not from the perspective of people who are at risk of dying from contaminated drinking water, but from people who are concerned about major war (ie, people in wealthy, industrialized nations).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This article goes right along with the slide you showed on the first day of class (and today again in class) about what constitutes IR. It's true that developed nations don't worry about contaminated drinking water killing their people. I am sure that war probably kills more people in developed nations than contaminated water does. This just goes to show that powerful nations make issues only pertinent to themselves global news, and neglect to recognize global problems that do not impact them or threaten their power. Maybe Critical Theory can help solve our problem?
ReplyDeleteCould it also be possible that war is a much larger problem to humanity as a whole because of our past. For as long as people have been around they have fought each other and killed tons of people and we have been horrified by the results. It is a much closer problem to humanity as a whole. Water purity on the other hand was an accepted risk for thousands of years before we were able to identify bacteria and contaminates in water. In todays media world, horror sells much better than truth and war is one of the most horrifying things to most humans. Im simply trying to play devils advocate using constructivist theory as my backing.
ReplyDeleteRealists would not be surprised or upset by the focus of international attention, problematizing, and solution efforts on only the issues that affect the elite amongst whom world power is distributed, while liberals would be dismayed, but I wonder if the frameworks established by the elite interests based on their own selection or interpretation of important information is sufficient to solve the problems like water injustice and famine.
ReplyDeleteThe only thing I can think to say is that people killed in war is growing at a much faster rate than people being killed by water. War a century ago would kill in the realm of thousands. In the 20th century, they killed in terms of millions. A 100,000 percent increase, or so, over the course of 100 years is much higher than the increase of people killed by water for sure. Therefore, the rate of death as a result of war is much higher than the rate of death as a result of water. It would seem that war then is much more of a problem, which isn't necessarily better, but just a different interpretation of the findings.
ReplyDelete