of earthquakes and schools

Image via Wikipediafunny how a commentator (can't remember from where) said that in an earthquake, he'd probably be safer with a bunch of nuclear warheads in some military building than in a school.

sad isn't it? the fact that it's almost seemed as a no-brainer that a military installation has to be built to be unusually sturdy while it's acceptable for a school to go down like a deck of cards under the slightest tremor, and that we value stuff that have the potential to kill millions over people that have the potential to shape our future.

the earthquake in china did not just expose a localised problem. i believe it has highlighted a worldwide pandemic of a social disease, that "we'll fix it when it's broken". but the thing is, we're not talking about something that you can just chuck some dollars in and then expect everything to get back to normal.

of course there have been efforts in earthquake prone countries like japan to make the schools safer, but for the rest of the impoverished countries in asia, what then? i think countries are sending out the wrong message that they care nothing for the keystones of communities. and it seems like the problem not only exists in poor countries. even developed countries like canada and america are facing similar situations. in their case, it's rather not an issue with money or technology, but with societal inertia, the lack of access to basic safety information or knowledge of simple ways to bolster buildings so they'll survive an earthquake.

i have no idea why i feel so strongly about this. it's just that i can't get the images of children being crushed to death in school buildings out of my head. it's just really sad, and it's so so aggravating that something totally avoidable caused so much grief.


to those who perished: R. I. P.


+listening to: waiting on the world to change by john mayer