“Everything is due to a worsening of the climatic crisis,” others said, and they rushed to clarify that it was a last call of attention because from here it would only worsen, and they did not forgive the green exclamation signs that were attached to the warning. Forty -four seconds, the field reporters had not yet had time to reach the spokesperson’s headquarters, which had not yet been installed, but those who know everything do not need reality to confirm their unequivocal knowledge: omission! Arson! Crisis!
A particularly sad example of this superficial discourse was given by the viewers of the various channels. The panelists, who were even summoned to talk about other issues, immediately pointed out with an accusing finger against those who are against beforehand and regardless of the issue. From Netanyahu (“He did not learn anything from the fire of the Carmel!” And of the “omission”, did we say?), To the Arabs (“Who loves the earth burns it!”), The ultra -orthodox (the fact that the fire reached the outskirts of Beit Shemesh took one of the spokesmen to mention that everything could have been different if they had been different if Fire extinction forces). The fact that no evidence has been collected did not prevent them from presenting a valid argument from their position: omission! Arson! Crisis! And also, ultra -orthodox!
Disastrous reactions
These automatic responses, which scratch in Pavlovian conditioning, are disastrous. They undermine any real capacity of us, as a society, to understand what really happened and try to prevent it from happening again. For example: have we really not learned anything from the previous fires? I’m not sure. The facts are that no one was seriously injured, that no community was burned and that the evacuations were carried out in a quiet and orderly manner. It is possible that, despite this, there has been a failure, and this time it was the fate that played in our favor; But this must be verified before ruling on a failure, and it is also worth doing without an a priori position (see the dispute over who delayed the purchase of fire extinction helicopters: Ben Gvir or Bar-Lev?). The same goes for the fire caused, with due respect to the blinking maps of the locations of the incendiary attacks or the lighter found in the rear seat of a suspect in southern Jerusalem (which states that it only went out to smoke a pipe), and the same goes for the climatic crisis. Everything may be true, but certainly not in an a priori knowledge that is devoid of every foundation.
In addition, it is possible that the accusation, if presented, include a guilt number. Both those responsible for failure, the piómanos, and those who ignored the climatic crisis. To do? There is the possibility that the explanation is as complex as the reality that caught fire. The superficial automatic cessation prevents us not only a deep understanding of what happened, but also the possibility of improving the response in the next confrontation. And it will arrive if we continue to vain this zero water, water that by its nature cannot extinguish any fire.
Related news :