The dual crises of the global pandemic and the war in Ukraine have been testing our governments, our institutions, our diplomacy — and our collective sense of time. In part because of social media, both events already seem intolerably long, even though the Russian invasion of Ukraine is less than a month old.
One of the most prominent words of the last few years is “doomscrolling.” People can now easily imbibe new information 24/7, about COVID or the war, simply by scrolling through social media on their phones.
In the case of Ukraine, every day there are scores of events to learn about and react to. I can pop into my Twitter feed and see that Russian missiles have started hitting Odesa, the Ukrainian city of Mariupol refuses to surrender, and a shopping mall in Kyiv has been destroyed. I can read multiple analyses of how the China-Russia relationship is evolving, or get the latest about rumors of a coup against Putin. And all this is without even making much of an effort.
Photo: AFP
Once upon a time, news of war was lumpier and more periodic — people watched the nightly news or read the morning paper. They could turn on the radio and hear more frequent bulletins, but due to the absence of the internet and other means of modern communication, there were far fewer reports from far fewer sources.
NEVERENDING INFO STREAM
The now-neverending stream of information shapes our perception of time. For many people, especially America’s news-intensive elites, it may make the war feel much longer than it actually has been.
This greater sense of witness to atrocities cements this impression. Each moral outrage, no matter how small, is taken in. Several generations ago, people may have heard that there was a big battle over a place called Dien Bien Phu. Nowadays, they can see, replay and share videos of people who died or were injured in the bombing of a theater in Mariupol. Each terrible event somehow feels more intolerable than the last, fueling the feeling that something must give and that the war has to end soon.
That is a dangerous feeling, if only because it makes it harder for leaders to pursue strategies of patience. Polls show high US public support for a no-fly zone, although in my view that would lead to an unacceptably higher risk of escalating the war. This hawkish stance is not hard to understand. If the current situation feels intolerable, then surely something dramatic and decisive has to happen very soon — and better to act than be acted upon. At the very least action will imbue a feeling of having “done something.”
Doomscrolling-induced impatience also induces people to underrate Russian military prospects. It is true that Russia failed to achieve its objective of an immediate Ukrainian collapse. Still, it took Hitler five weeks to conquer Poland, and that is usually regarded as an extremely successful military campaign.
It’s just not clear yet how well, or how badly, the Russians are likely to do. It is hard to embrace that fundamental uncertainty when everything else feels so intolerable.
COVID
COVID is a much longer-running story, now more than two years old, but it has engendered similar reactions. People feel that the pandemic is or should be “over” by now. I myself favor a resumption of normal activity, but am distressed that Congress is treating the matter so cavalierly and refusing to make haste with additional COVID funding. The voter outrage simply isn’t there, in large part because the public has decided that the pandemic is over.
At one level that is a very healthy reaction that will help reboot economic activity. On another level, it is extremely dangerous. If a new and more serious variant were to come along, the US would simply not be ready, not even after two years of suffering and more than one million deaths.
It is possible that, over the long run, people will become numb to all this detailed reporting of suffering from both the pandemic and the war. They might forget just how much those events commanded the world’s attention. These moments might come to feel like time-slices rather than eternities.
But for now, we are not at peace with our grasp on time — and this runs the risk of being a major problem for America and the world.
Taiwan Power Co (Taipower, 台電) and the New Taipei City Government in May last year agreed to allow the activation of a spent fuel storage facility for the Jinshan Nuclear Power Plant in Shihmen District (石門). The deal ended eleven years of legal wrangling. According to the Taipower announcement, the city government engaged in repeated delays, failing to approve water and soil conservation plans. Taipower said at the time that plans for another dry storage facility for the Guosheng Nuclear Power Plant in New Taipei City’s Wanli District (萬里) remained stuck in legal limbo. Later that year an agreement was reached
What does the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) in the Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) era stand for? What sets it apart from their allies, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)? With some shifts in tone and emphasis, the KMT’s stances have not changed significantly since the late 2000s and the era of former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九). The Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) current platform formed in the mid-2010s under the guidance of Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), and current President William Lai (賴清德) campaigned on continuity. Though their ideological stances may be a bit stale, they have the advantage of being broadly understood by the voters.
In a high-rise office building in Taipei’s government district, the primary agency for maintaining links to Thailand’s 108 Yunnan villages — which are home to a population of around 200,000 descendants of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) armies stranded in Thailand following the Chinese Civil War — is the Overseas Community Affairs Council (OCAC). Established in China in 1926, the OCAC was born of a mandate to support Chinese education, culture and economic development in far flung Chinese diaspora communities, which, especially in southeast Asia, had underwritten the military insurgencies against the Qing Dynasty that led to the founding of
Artifacts found at archeological sites in France and Spain along the Bay of Biscay shoreline show that humans have been crafting tools from whale bones since more than 20,000 years ago, illustrating anew the resourcefulness of prehistoric people. The tools, primarily hunting implements such as projectile points, were fashioned from the bones of at least five species of large whales, the researchers said. Bones from sperm whales were the most abundant, followed by fin whales, gray whales, right or bowhead whales — two species indistinguishable with the analytical method used in the study — and blue whales. With seafaring capabilities by humans
RSS