This Stuff Doesn't Matter, But...

This post is admittedly a really silly, unhelpful part of the discussion about Haiti, but I feel that it's important, even in the midst of crises, to parse the words of those who have regular access to large audiences.  Perhaps my feelings are motivated by the fact that Robertson has always seemed like such a vile creature, while Glover has been an innocuous character in American culture, but I feel strongly that Robertson's comments are worse than Glover's for several reasons.

In case you missed it, here's Pat Robertson discussing the earthquake that hit Haiti on January 12:

Robertson's comments are infuriating, but just in case you thought religious zealots were the only ones exploiting this situation, someone on Ta-Nehisi Coates's blog recently posted these comments by Danny Glover.  They're a nice reminder that there are people in every direction who use horrendous situations to further their causes.

My interpretation of Glover's remarks focused on the idea that Glover views events like this as predictable based on how poorly we treat the earth, but that the event itself was uncontrollable.  Was it predictable?  Maybe.  Was it predictable because we pump CO2 into the air?  Absolutely not.  "This is the response, this is what happens, you know what I'm sayin'?" was Glover trying to say "If we treat the earth badly, we'll see more disasters like this."  He's obviously confused about what causes earthquakes and global warming, but his problems don't seem to extend beyond confusion or willful ignorance.  Glover's emotional response was unrefined and poorly informed, but at its core portrays the Haitians as innocent victims who had no active role in their plight.

Robertson, on the other hand, espouses a view that strikes me as incredibly self-serving.  Robertson uses events like this to reinforce his worldview, and since he helps define the way people perceive God and His works, Robertson positions himself perfectly to either profit from this disaster, look legitimized, or both.  That's selfishness on a scale unfathomable by most people.

Glover is (incorrectly) trying to get people to band together to better the world, whereas Robertson is writing off the people of Haiti as a lost cause that finally got what was coming to them.  Robertson is providing the people who think like him another soap box on which to stand and proclaim that they know it all; that they are the greatest.  Glover gains no fame, glory, or cash from his comments, but Robertson surely gets plenty by looking like someone who understands God far better than others.  That difference--the portrayal of innocent versus guilty victims to further a cause--is frustrating in both cases, but it should be clear why Robertson strikes me as so much more conniving and devious.

If you want to help Haiti, send money.  The manpower and materials needed there are far too specialized to make donated clothes or time useful.  UNICEF and the Red Cross are sure bets for your gifts.  Texting the word "Haiti" to 90999 is also a quick way to help; it adds $10 to your phone bill and the money goes directly to the Red Cross.