View previous stories
	"That wasn"t my child. Why should I bother?" by Lijia Zhang Agencies China   Oct 2011   The death of the two-year-old run over as passersby ignored her is symptomatic of a deepening moral crisis.   A two-year-old girl was run over twice, about 100 metres from her home in a hardware market district of Foshan, a prosperous city in southern China. As she lay on the ground, writhing in pain, before being hit by the second vehicle, 18 people, on their bicycles, in cars or on foot, passed by but chose to ignore her. Among them a young woman with her own child.   Finally, a 58-year-old female rubbish collector came to the girl"s rescue, but it was too late. By the time she was brought to the hospital, the girl Yueyue, (whose name translates as Little Joy), was brain dead. She was declared dead early on Friday morning. She was a good girl, full of life, her mother said a few days ago in an interview. She said she had just brought Yueyue back from her kindergarten. She popped out to collect the dry clothes and returned to find Yueyue gone – probably trying to look for her elder brother.   It might have been a different story if one of the 18 people had lent Yueyue a hand. None even bothered to call for emergency services. Later, when interviewed by a journalist, one of the passersby, a middle-aged man riding a scooter, said with an uncomfortable smile on his face: "That wasn"t my child. Why should I bother?"   Before giving himself up to the police, the driver of the second vehicle, a van, told the media why he had run away. "If she is dead, I may pay only about 20,000 yuan (£2,000). But if she is injured, it may cost me hundreds of thousands of yuan." What"s wrong with these people? How could they be so cold-hearted? The horrific scene was caught by a surveillance camera and has been watched by millions of viewers since it was posted on Youku, China"s equivalent of YouTube.   This is only the latest incident where tragedy has struck as a result of the callous inactivity of onlookers. Last month an 88-year-old man fell over face down at the entrance of a vegetable market near his home. For almost 90 minutes, he was ignored by people in the busy market. After his daughter found him and called an ambulance, the old man died "because of a respiratory tract clogged by a nosebleed". If anyone had turned him over, he might have survived.   Both cases, the death of Yueyue in particular, have provoked much public outrage and a nationwide discussion about morality in today"s China. From Shanghai, someone with the cybername 60sunsetred wrote: "The Chinese people have arrived at their most morality-free moment!" There was plenty of condemnation of the cold-heartedness of the passersby. But, astonishingly, a large percentage of posters said they understood why the onlookers did not lend a helping hand. Some admitted they would do the same – for fear of getting into trouble and fear of facing another "Nanjing judge".   Let me explain the story of the muddle-headed Nanjing judge. In 2006, in the capital of Jiangsu province, a young man named Peng Yu helped an old woman who had fallen on the street and took her to a hospital and waited to see if the old woman was all right. Later, however, the woman and her family accused Peng of causing her fall. A judge decided in favour of the woman, based on the assumption that "Peng must be at fault. Otherwise why would he want to help?", saying that Peng acted against "common sense". The outcry from the public in support of Peng forced the court to adjust its verdict and resulted in Peng paying 10% of the costs instead of the total. Since that incident Peng has become a national cautionary tale: the Good Samaritan being framed by the beneficiary of their compassion.   It"s true that in China you can get into trouble when you try to help. Weeks ago I spotted an accident on the fourth ring road in Beijing as I returned home one night. A man was hit by a "black car", an "illegal taxi", and his face was all bloody. Watched over by a crowd, the injured man behaved aggressively towards the driver. I got off my scooter. As I tried to pull the two men apart, I was struck myself. When I asked if anyone had reported this to the police, the driver said no. I couldn"t believe that people just stared as if enjoying a free show, without doing anything. I called the helpline and the policemen turned up soon after.   The fundamental problem, in my view, lies in one word that describes a state of mind: shaoguanxianshi, meaning don"t get involved if it"s not your business. In our culture, there"s a lack of willingness to show compassion to strangers. We are brought up to show kindness to people in our network of guanxi, family and friends and business associates, but not particularly to strangers, especially if such kindness may potentially damage your interest.   Fei Xiaotong, China"s first sociologist, described Chinese people"s moral and ethical characteristics in his book, From the Soil, in the middle of the last century. He pointed out that selfishness is the most serious shortcoming of the Chinese. "When we think of selfishness, we think of the proverb "Each person should sweep the snow from his own doorsteps and should not fret about the frost on his neighbour"s roof," wrote Fei. He offered the example of how the Chinese of that period threw rubbish out of their windows without the slightest public concern. Things are much the same today.   Under Mao, citizens were forced to behave themselves in both public and private spheres. Every March, people were obliged to go into the street to do good deeds: cleaning buses, fixing bicycles and offering haircuts. Now relaxed social control and commercialisation over the past three decades have led people to behave more selfishly again.   People are enjoying, and sometimes abusing, the personal freedoms that didn"t exist before. To start with, it is now safe to be "naughty". Back in the early 1980s, when I worked at a rocket factory in Nanjing, one of my colleagues, a married man, was caught having an affair with an unmarried woman. He was given a three-year sentence in a labour camp and the girl was disgraced. In today"s society, having extramarital affairs or keeping an ernai – second wife or concubine – is as common as "cow hair", as the Chinese would say. For a novel I am writing on prostitution, I have interviewed many prostitutes and ernai. Many see their profession as a way to gather wealth quickly, feeling few moral qualms.   China"s moral crisis doesn"t just manifest itself in personal life but also in business practice and many other areas. The high-profile "poisoned milk powder" case and the scandal of using "gutter oil" as cooking oil have shocked and disgusted people around the world. Last year an article, "Why have Chinese lost their sense of morality?", in which the author tried to find an explanation, was widely read. He reasoned that China has introduced the concept of a market economy from the west but failed to import the corresponding ethics, while the traditional moral principles of China no longer fit the market economy model.   There"s a lot of sense in that. I believe that the lack of a value system is also deepening the moral crisis. Before Mao, the indifference towards others once so accurately described by Fei existed but was mitigated by a traditional moral and religious system. That system was then almost destroyed by the communists, especially during the 10 mad years of the Cultural Revolution from 1966 to 1976. Nowadays communism, the ideology that dominated Chinese people"s lives like a religion, has also more or less collapsed. As a result, there"s a spiritual vacuum that cannot be filled by the mere opportunity of money-making.   To drag China out of its moral crisis will be a long battle. The pressing question is how to make people act in cases of emergency and the solution is law. After the "Nanjing case", there have been discussions about introducing a law that imposes a "duty of rescue" as exists in many European countries. I am all for it, because that"s probably the only way to propel action for a people who do not see a moral obligation in rescuing others.   The Yueyue incident revealed an ugly side of China. I hope the entire nation will take the opportunity to take a hard look at ourselves and ask ourselves what"s wrong with society. There"s at least hope in the action of the rubbish collector who rushed to Yueyue"s side without hesitation.
	People want to see their leaders exercise leadership when confronting humanitarian crises by Bertha Kadenyi Amisi Open Democracy African Union   September 2011   The failure of African leaders to implement national plans and mechanisms in time to prevent drought from leading to famine, is painful beyond words, writess Bertha Amisi.   Earlier this month, governments, donors and ngos met to discuss ways of preventing drought in Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia and Uganda from creating severe food crisis and famine. This is the latest of at least five meetings convened quite late in the day by African governments.   While their very late response may be better than never, it has cost the death of thousands of children, severe acute malnutrition of thousands more, brought great shame to parents who have had to bear not being able to feed their children and indignity to 13.3 million people in the region. This is a very high price to pay for our leaders lack of concern for the welfare of their people. It is morally repugnant and painful beyond words.   Government leaders know very well that drought and its effects pose a risk to the economy and welfare of their people. That is why they have national plans for the management of resources in Arid and Semi-Arid areas that are meant to prevent drought from leading to the severe food crisis the region faces right now.   The Kenya government, for example, has an elaborate Arid Land Resource Management Project Structure. Since 2003, government leaders and officials have gone even further and promoted regional and sub-regional policies aimed at improving food security and disaster management policies and institutional mechanisms.   This was the time to also discuss contingency plans for the kind of crisis we are facing. Governments were receiving and generating early warning information on drought and the state of food security. The Famine Early Warning Systems Network, UN agencies and international aid agencies working on the ground raised the alarm as far back as 2006. A number launched appeals for food aid.   The African Union, the Intergovernmental Authority on Development and the East African Community claim to have early warning systems. National meteorological agencies provided information. Apart from Somalia, I am sure that legislators, local government officials and communities from affected areas raised the alarm and called for urgent action.   Our leaders were completely aware that they faced a serious food problem as far back as 2008. They signalled their political will by developing regional, sub-regional national mechanisms to ensure food security.   During these policy processes they had time to debate ways of preventing famine as a matter of urgency. If not, then the food riots should have jolted them take immediate and long-term action. After all governments have fallen on account of hungry citizens.   African leaders and governments’ very late response to early warning on famine brings to fore their relations with society in the realm of social welfare. African leaders and governments appear detached from the everyday struggles of their citizens to provide for their welfare, particularly those in poorer, marginal areas.   Related to this aloofness is a tendency to avoid taking responsibility for failing to adequately respond to problems related to welfare of citizens, famine being the most extreme outcome of poor and tardy delivery of services.   The late Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem expressed this avoidance of responsibility for the African peoples’ welfare very well in a debate on Africa’s food crisis five years ago “It is only when it comes to feeding our peoples, educating our children, building roads and hospitals, creating jobs and looking after the welfare of our peoples that our governments plead lack of resources.”   In this aloofness and avoidance of responsibility, I notice a discomfort, a kind of awkwardness towards the promotion of human welfare – humanitarianism. This attitude is at odds with the principle of solidarity that African leaders, governments and peoples appeal to.   It negates the value solidarity has in inspiring new kinds of political action with regard to people’s welfare. Appeals for solidarity often seem like mere slogans for rallying people so late in the day and whose power ceases when the crisis is over.   William Gumede argues with reference to South Africa that there is not only a “desperate need of new thinking and new policies but also a renewal in values, morals and ethics.” This claim goes to the heart of what explains why there had to be so much suffering before our leaders and governments responded to the famine - the absence of moral obligation to act and quickly.   While I commend our leaders for initiating strategies, policies and institutional mechanisms, these are only one part of what needs to be done to prevent severe drought from leading to famine.   What is missing is the courage to do the right thing – moral courage. African leaders and governments need to acknowledge that it is wrong to allow the death of so many children and the hunger of millions to compel action. They need to accept responsibility for failing to act in solidarity with the people. Moral courage to do the right thing will come from a renewed sense of solidarity as a political value.   African peoples want to see their leaders and governments exercising leadership in preventing or mitigating humanitarian crises without being forced or pressured to do so.   Doing so requires a renewed commitment to the values, morals and ethics promoting the welfare of all citizens. A leadership compelled to act on the basis of solidarity expresses empathy, generosity, hospitality, compassion, caring and sharing in its relations with all citizens.   Leaders who do the right thing will be open to analyses that accurately present the reality on ground, no matter how painful or terrible. Such leaders know that this allows them to make wise decisions that solve, rather than aggravate, problems.   Since the welfare of the people matters to them, they will be on ground to assess the situation and immediately mobilize whatever resources needed to prevent their population from going hungry. We will not complain that they are proactive.   African leaders who care, and the governments they serve in, will discard old ways of doing government business, especially the highly centralized decision making (in the office of the executive or minister) and lengthy bureaucratic red tape that are out of place in emergency situations.   They will have appropriate contingency plans and the financial, administrative and logistical systems in place for timely delivery. They will insist that the government officers implementing these plans and systems are highly competent, motivated and empowered to do what it takes to save lives.   Corrupt government officials and local politicians out to gain from the crisis will be dismissed and prosecuted. Those invisible transport cartels frustrating delivery of services in order to gain a windfall profit will be exposed, blacklisted and denied licence to operate.   It will take a renewal of values, morals and ethics in state elite relations with society to turn solidarity from being a mere slogan into a principle that inspires action for the peoples welfare in every day life.   This task of moral renewal of political action however cannot be left to political leaders alone. Gumede rightly observes that African intellectuals have a very important role in bringing back moral reasoning to public policy on social welfare issues.   African peoples are often the first to respond before their governments and before the international humanitarian agencies troop in. Then they disappear from the story. Their stories need to come out and the telling of this story belongs to Africans.   (Bertha K. Amisi is an independent researcher at Syracuse University). Visit the related web page
	View more stories