#like yes 100% i get boosting fundraisers/resources for people or communnities that will need the most help

[imunbreakabledude]

i don't like the thread of thinking around natural disasters that some people deserve more sympathy/empathy than others, or that some people deserve having to evacuate, or having their homes destroyed, more/less than others.

like, i am not saying this in a "please think of the rich people!" way. i'm not saying that everyone must distinctly express well-wishes for every category of people equally... it does feel absolutely normal and natural to me if people's care and donations and sympathy gravitate more towards groups who are hit hardest or might have the hardest time recovering or who might not have access to certain recovery resources, etc.

but when discussion goes to that place of justifying why certain groups of people do deserve sympathy... it unsettles me, and I think i've put my finger on why. let's say there's a discussion (which i've seen much of this week) that goes like this. Some people say those who lost their homes in fires in California aren't worth sympathy because they're all rich people who lost a 2nd or 3rd mansion that was built in a place that was fire prone and they probably voted for climate-damaging policies/politicians too so they deserve what they got. Then, other people push back with reminders that not everyone affected by these fires is rich, not everyone affected by these fires will recover easily, lots of working and middle class people have had their lives destroyed, many historically Black neighborhoods have been destroyed, etc etc and those people clearly deserve sympathy!

the clarification is good. it's important. 100%. but it still views these disasters through the lens that Some people DON'T deserve them, which implies that some people... Do deserve them? and again, my point here is not "we must specifically have more sympathy for rich people losing mansions". my point is that I really don't like the undercurrent of a lot of these discussions of who "doesn't deserve" this because I don't like the idea that anyone deserves it. Because if you view it that way even hypothetically, even as like "MOST people don't deserve this but Really Bad People do"... i mean, first off, who decides who does and doesn't deserve it? and second off, like, are you okay with the idea that you or your loved ones could be put in a category of People Who Deserve To Lose Their Homes in a Natural Disaster by someone else?

it feels kinda religious-based or culturally christian to me. it feels like it's still based in the idea that natural disasters are Acts of God sent to punish the people who deserve to be punished, and ohh maybe it's too bad if some good people get caught in the crossfire and we ought to help those people out with charity. i do not like that. these aren't divine punishments. I don't even accept the line of thinking "well if it happens to people who specifically have pushed forward climate change, it's just karma/punishment for that, they're experiencing the consequences of their own actions--" no. it's problems for all of us and we have to face it together instead of arguing about who deserves to suffer and who deserves to be spared. there is literally no possible timeline where we round up all the oil barons and corrupt politicians and push them to the areas most affected by the climate crisis while we protect the Innocent Good Majority of people from those effects. and thinking of it thru that lens is both a) unhelpful and b) a way of thinking that can soooo easily be warped to cheering on the pain and suffering of any groups of people you deem "bad" which can be warped over time.