Responding to the following well-written post https://www.facebook.com/manuela.garcia.rodr/posts/10203818636280489?fref=nf
I hope to someday see this kind of reaction to homicide in Chicago. Denser and more lateral social networks and lack of socioeconomic and racially driven segregation make for more powerful, meaningful and ultimately effective reactions to violence. Here in Uruguay, when one of 40 people per year is murdered, he or she is a Uruguayan whether they come from the campo, from the University, from a pueblito or from Montevideo. And we mourn and act accordingly. When 40 people per week die in Chicago, we either put it as a footnote in Section D because they were of a different race or class, or we sensationalize it on the front page because a good (read: white, rich, young and often female) abiding citizen wasn’t “supposed” to die the way “other” people die. It’s telling that in the US, the problem is often phrased as “the homicide RATE” rather than simply “homicide” or “murder”. It shows that we frame humans killing fellow humans through a statistical rather than a compassionate lens. As Manuela suggests, let’s not waste time analyzing individual events, so let me raise you this: To reduce (because it can’t be stopped altogether) murder, shouldn’t we prioritize NOT ignoring our fellow countrymen before compiling statistics, making maps and instituting quotas?