People killed in terrorist attacks in 2017: Europe (Blue) vs Africa (Red) [OC]

People killed in terrorist attacks in 2017: Europe (Blue) vs Africa (Red) [OC]

Translation:

Terrorism kills 20 times more in Africa than in Europe

Africa is a target of choice for terrorists, mainly Islamists. Since the beginning of the year, 343 attacks have claimed at least 2,600 victims, 22 times more than in Europe. Our infographics and map.

Terrorist violence is rampant almost daily in Africa. In the week following Mogadishu's unprecedented attack - nearly 360 deaths on 14 October - five new attacks were perpetrated on the continent.

In total, at least 2600 people were killed in 2017 in the region, according to a count of major attacks from 1 January.The comparison with a similar count in Europe shows the extent of terrorism in Africa.

On the European continent, 117 people died during the same period in the 35 incidents described as terrorist, including those related to the conflict in Ukraine: a record 22 times lower than in Africa.

There are a number of factors that magnify this effect.


Homicide rates are 4x higher in Africa (excluding war victims)
There is a high number of ongoing conflicts in Africa. A couple of decades ago, many of the perpetrators would have been labeled communists (opposition) or warlords (allies). These days the rebels are called terrorists.
Who was Robespierre?



If the basis of popular government in peacetime is virtue, the basis of popular government during a revolution is both virtue and terror; virtue, without which terror is baneful; terror, without which virtue is powerless. Terror is nothing more than speedy, severe and inflexible justice; it is thus an emanation of virtue; it is less a principle in itself, than a consequence of the general principle of democracy, applied to the most pressing needs of the patrie

There are a number of factors that magnify this effect.

Homicide rates are 4x higher in Africa (excluding war victims)

There is a high number of ongoing in Africa. A couple of decades ago, many of the perpetrators would have been labeled communists (opposition) or warlords (allies). These days the rebels are called terrorists.

Who was Robespierre?

If the basis of popular government in peacetime is virtue, the basis of popular government during a revolution is both virtue and terror; virtue, without which terror is baneful; terror, without which virtue is powerless. Terror is nothing more than speedy, severe and inflexible justice; it is thus an emanation of virtue; it is less a principle in itself, than a consequence of the general principle of democracy, applied to the most pressing needs of the patrie

What's the purpose of comparing Europe and Africa? Why not just go with the entire population?

https://i.imgur.com/yN1R6M0.png

Edit: I did not make this. It's an outdated infographic from The Washington Post.

What's the purpose of comparing Europe and Africa? Why not just go with the entire population?

Edit: I did not make this. It's an outdated infographic from The Washington Post.

/sub/mapswithoutnz

You don’t really want to be on this map

So Africa has 8 to 12 times more deaths by terrorism than Europe, normalized by population.

For those commenting on Western news -

Ask yourself, would you watch a bulletin covering the entirety of the world's news, with events sorted by severity? It would probably be about 2 hours or longer and few would have the stamina to watch it

How many of these attacks in Africa were near the front page of Reddit? very few, why? because they generally aren't newsworthy to us

However when a minor celebrity dies it is typically front-page, why? because to us it's newsworthy

We do the voting on Reddit. We determine what is newsworthy. In Asia, general demand among Asians determines what is newsworthy, and so on. Likewise our European/US news ("Western news") covers events deemed newsworthy to us - and obviously with varying degrees of quality depending on the outlet

Does that mean every attack in Paris is irrelevant and should get 1/20th the media coverage of an attack somewhere in Africa? No.

The fact is, people have an expectation not to get shot up sitting in a Paris bistro. It’s awful that this happens more regularly in parts of Africa but it doesn’t change the fact that we’re not going to accept it becoming the norm in Paris.

Very good points. Additionally, these are absolute numbers. Africa as a whole has a population of 1.2 bn while Europe is at .5 - .7 bn depending on what is included.

Maybe because you're consuming western news media that caters to a western audience and therefore tends to cover more on western events. How much African television do you watch?

The beginnings of the fascist police state. First they came for elderly swimmers, and I did not speak up for I was not an elderly swimmer.

You're implying that people do, or should have the expectation to be shot in Africa. That's either empirialistically arrogant, or ignorant.

The purpose of this post is (probably)to create perspective. Not to make any attack in Europe less important.

There are a number of factors that magnify this effect.

In my opinion the main reason still is that we are pretty safe. Since 2004 (Madrid included!) terrorism has killed ~600-700 people in Europe. In 2016 in Spain 430 people drowned in lakes, swimming pools and at the beach. In Germany it was 537. Out of that, 110 were 70-85 year olds. Banning elderly people from swimming would probably save more lives than erradicating terrorism in Europe.

I obviously know why terrorism has a much bigger impact and I don't want to say it's a trivial footnote, but I think it's important to put it into perspective too.

(P.S.: Numbers are from the top of my head.)

In all fairness 24-hour news channels could do a much better job of staying on top of world news as opposed to pigeon holing it into 1-hour at night and repeating the same stories all day.

Well of course, there are wars ongoing there. Also, Al Shabbab and ISIS have a large presence in Africa.

Europe still has a problem with terrorism.

The entire world does.

She told me not to run with scissors.

I replied.

"I would rather die then live under your thumb in this facist world. Viva le resistance mother!!"

I don't see where he implies the African attacks are not important? Simply says getting killed in a Paris bistro is way more alarming than an attack in an African village (this statement does not cancel out that attacks in Africa are still alarming).

mate, I'm glad we're not on this one.

Probably not a bad one to be excluded from.

Kinda helps the terrorists that there is a huge power vacuum in Africa so it makes it easy to carry out terrorist attacks.

Well said.

As a Nigerian I feel that most Redditors who cry about shit like this are mostly self-loathing white hypocrites who feel like they owe us something. I mean Reddit is made for and generally populated by westerners. That's the demographic, and the tastes/nature of the demographic controls the content, so why am I going to complain that Boko Haram killing 60 people didn't make the front page and accuse the media of bias? It is stupid. I'm basically on Reddit to get immersed in shit from west that I love like WWE and Hollywood. I know where to see and discuss Nigerian/African news and while it wouldn't be bad to get some coverage, all the outcry from some people in this thread and on Reddit in general just comes across as absurd. I mean, do you think news/media outlets in Nigeria actually gave a fuck about stuff like the Harvey Weinstein drama that has been making waves? No. It works both ways. People need to deal with it.

The amount of publicity and press coverage would look totally opposite to this, I guess..

Not worse, just more 'noteworthy'.

Here are two contradictory media headlines you could draw from this data:

LEFT WINGER: "Terrorism is not as big a problem as the Right makes out, we can relax our immigration policies!"

RIGHT WINGER: "Non-European immigrants will bring with them far more terrorism into Europe than we have already, so let's tighten our immigration policies!"

Same facts, different opinions. A statistical rorschach test.

then they came for the children unattended in the kitchen

Not exactly, although the entire South African rugby team were murdered there last month

stop this common sense talking please.

Something to add to this, people say that noone writes about these attacks. The truth is that they do. Huge media organizations like BBC and Reuters cover pretty much most major events around the world. You just have to look for it. Their sites and coverage of events across the world is huge. It's just that people prefer reading stories about Beyonce getting pregnant over a terrorist massacre in Somalia. The more popular story makes it to the frontpage, the other lies in the archives for the rest of time. Im not sure what my opinion on that is, its just how the media works and always has done.

So.. the politicians can just put a procreation plan in place so that they can say they are reducing terrorism.

Kinda helps the terrorists that there is a huge power vacuum in Africa

This doesn't make any sense as Africa isn't some homogenous entity. There are over 50 countries here FFS.

I can agree with this.

I'd also like to say though, this data is not very beautiful. It's not really achieving anything amazing that a simple statistic couldn't portray. The concept behind it is very very simple.

Wow, over 20k killed in the middle east. That's crazy

Is this per capita or in absolute numbers? If the latter, what's the population size of Europe v. that of Africa?

Africa is my city

What a compromise

My mother told me to always eat my greens. I told her she's a fascist pig and will be crushed by the mighty red army

Yep - this is it. Yes the above post makes sense in terms of the 9oclock news, but 24 hour news cycles could easily cover all of this stuff but choose to just put fear on repeat.

If they could show the rest of the world in comparison maybe those that veg in front of their sofa with it on would be able to put things in perspective.

I'm not sure but I think what OP is trying to establish is that the deaths in Africa are given less media attention than those in Europe thats why the numbers look shocking.

This is fine, we can be left off this one we don't mind

It sounds like they're saying it's a reflection of the realities of the world. People are less likely to be shot up in Paris than in Niger or CAR, that's just a fact. An unfortunate fact, but that's how it is, and that makes an attack in Paris more notable.

Much like a gang shooting in the UK is huge news while in the US it's a daily occurrence – or for that matter, how I can live in London and never hear about any stabbings even though there are many, but if a stabbing happened in a small Scottish town it'd be a shock.

734 kk vs 1216 kk or roughly a 3:5 ratio.

NIce, at least 84!

heck if the media and newspaper had 20+ front covers with pools as "deadliest dangers in the world" headlines for a month or so, id bet legislation would be made to ban private pools or something.

Its basically fear mongering. You have a culture that people are unfamiliar with in most of europe, alongside a image that is stark different from their own and told by countless newspapers and media that these people want to kill them and their children 24/7, they're going to become irrational and believe them to be the biggest threat.

Europe has its own history with terrorism and genocide far long before any brown bearded men were given the title of terrorist since the late 80s. but alas its easier to paint something unknown over the fence as evil than see the evil in your own backyard.

target of choice

What a delusional way to put it. The obvious way to look at it as that more terrorists originate from there.

I mean, those conclusions have almost nothing to do with the statistics and everything to do with the ideology of the respective wingers.

Don't shit yourself.

Or between destabilised areas and extremism. Surprise!

It's crazy, poor people who just wants to have a life and a society.

But it is also not crazy (in the sense that it's logical) - the more islamists and jihadists in a society, the more terrorism they will have.

Cable news has no mandate to educate people. They're businesses. It's quite likely they would lose money if they reported on atrocities in Africa the same way as they cover those in the Anglosphere and Europe.

You make all of Africa sound horrible when it's a few (admittedly large) countries within it.

So have you personally traveled to somalia, yemen, iraq, syria, iran, libya or sudan?

Sounds like you two are basically saying a person dying to terrorism in Paris is worse than in Africa because you expect it in Africa.

Or maybe it's because im statistically more likely to be killed/murdered in an african country than in a first world country? If 20 people are murdered in somalia, that barely breaks the front page of CNN, but if 20 people are murdered in Rome, it gets to the front page of everywhere. That makes a whole lot of sense because, as depressing as it may be, mass violence is a custom associated with Africa, but not Italy, France, Britain or Germany.

No, but as someone who lives in a relatively stable area of Africa, I think that there's a heavy implication that the entire continent is terror-riddled. It's like referring to shootings in North America without making the distinction of America or Canada and possibly including Mexico but you're not really sure because it could be South America too. It makes the crime no less damaging but makes more of a distinction of the actual places that need help.

No offence but this is so ignorant. In the genuine meaning of the word, not the insulting one. Africa doesn’t have a power vacuum, there is no power structure for “Africa”, same way there isn’t one for Asia or America. Africa has 54(?) countries and is not a singular entity that groups are fighting over for like some video game

Why is Reddit always trying to downplay the terrorism that occurs in Europe? It would seem as if there is some sort of motive here.

About 85% of the victims in Africa died in attacks linked to jihadism.

Not just even any regions in Africa in particular, the entire fucking continent. Africa, the second biggest continent in the world, has "a huge power vacuum", whatever the fuck that means. Yeah, just all of Africa, it's all this single enormous somalian anarchy with warlords driving around in Toyota Hiluxes with machine guns among mud huts and lions and shit. Just can't do anything about that I guess, it's the huge power vacuum in Africa that's the reason.

I think it's best to consider the size of Africa and relate this to a specific region. It would have more impact; Africa is huge and the terrible violence is relatively concentrated.

Really? The bombing in Mogadishu 2 weeks ago was at a hotel. It doesn't matter where you are in the world, if you're lying on your hotel bed you don't expect to be blown up. You're completely trivializing the deaths of hundreds of innocent people because it happened outside your personal sphere of importance.

Yup. There are small attacks which kill a ton of people and add up over time. Only the ones which kill 30+ make news, but there are a ridiculous amount which kill like 4 or 6 or 3 at a time.

Excuse me, WHAT?!

This is propaganda designed to minimalise the threat of terrorism in the minds of westerners.

The problem is that I live in Europe, not Africa so I'm worried about being one of those blue pictographs.

This should actually make us think that immigration from Africa is a terrible idea as we are more likely to get a terrorist from there.

That there are that many in Europe is insane. This kinda looks like another attempt to normalize terror here.

Admit it? That Europeans give more of a shit about Europeans and European news than the rest of the world? Well who would have thought...

I've never grasped this attention seeking mentality, you're upset that people on the other side of the world don't care more about your shit?

It seems like the main protest here is that western news outlets are more effective and more successful than their African counterparts, which irritates people like you who believe that the entire world should care about your problems. (Which can only happen with an effective media).

Fuck your brother if he needs help, you're neighbour down the street is more entitled according to this pretentious prick.

Also just an extra point, anyone who opens their post by declaring their race and/or sex is an attention seeking imbecile, or a racist prick who believes that it makes any difference as to what they have to say.

More than just numbers. Each one of those represents a body. A family shattered and a family with a vacancy in their heart.

I think there's also the factor that large scale conflict that results in multiple deaths and/or injuries is practically non existent in Europe. This might sound shitty to say, but if we had weakly shootings and bombings, we wouldn't exactly find it that extreme.

The best example of this is the U.S where mass shootings are a horrible but at this point, fact of life. Gun debates spring up for weeks and then disappear like no biggie, Las Vegas will be just another 'Oh-yeah-that!' by the time the next mass shooting rolls around.

Honestly, if you only listen to the news and posts here on /sub/popular then that is the image you get. That the whole of Africa is a horrible place to live.

Hell, in school the most we paid attention to it in history class was a tiny bit of South-Africa and that is because of the Dutch history there.

(Actually, we did have more history lessons about Africa. Namely about Egypt. This was in primary school though, so they didn't really go into details.)

Yeah, swimming pools are dangerous but the same way that weather can be dangerous.

A campaign of terror is scary and more disconcerting to people as there is intent to do harm. I agree that media coverage is dangerous imbalanced and irresponsible but there are real people out there who are planning on murdering others because they are "infidels".

Swimming pools do not make plans for anything so that doesn't really sell newspapers.

The more victims of terrorism there are in a region, the more terrorists emerge there. And the more support they receive from locals. It looks like it works out.

I'm curious how it turns out if we continue as we do today. With 'we' I'm talking about our intellectual and political elites in Europe.

to be fair, even if africa was a peaceful continent with little to no war and conflict. Most of the west wouldn't give much shit if a terrorist attack happened there anyways, since its mostly not in their association as "our place".

Im not trying to detract from your reasoning, but i tend to hear this a lot in regards to asia and africa ie; "They already have so much conflict because of themselves so its hard to care/know when it happens again".

Truthfully we don't care because we have conditioned ourselves to only care in regards to social media outrage, the less other people around us care, the less we care in general.

Yes, thousands of thousands

Robespierre was a very interesting and complicated character..

One of the most prominent and eloquent members of the French Revolution and then one of the most tyrannical and bloodthirsty individuals during the Terror years that followed..

Well yeah, but toilets are designed for that purpose. I don't mean to be that guy, but that's kind of implying Africa is meant to have terrorist attacks. I get what you're trying to say, I just think there is a better analogy in there.

Jesus, that's horrific, the attackers showed no mercy. May they rest in peace

Is anyone really surprised that a majority muslim continent would have more terror attacks than a country that isn't a majority muslim populous? I'm not denouncing all muslims here, but they really need to get their fucking shit together and do something about these people that terrorize the world.

I.e. Somalia, Lydia, Sudan. Three failed/failing states in Africa that have major populations at constant conflict

Okay, here's another example you can try right now wherever you are reading this.

1 - set a timer on your phone for 15 seconds.

2 - In those 15 seconds, look around the room/place you are in right now and count all the red objects you see. Stop when the timer goes off.

3 - write down how many red objects you saw

4 - Do this now before reading on.

...

...

...

...

5 - now write down how many blue objects you saw

Obviously, you'll have very little idea how many blue objects you saw, because you were only looking for red objects. It's not that the blue objects suddenly vanished from the reality, but your "red-object bias" prevented you from seeing the fact of the matter.

Pack it in boys, this fella right here just achieved an end to racism and bigotry through the use of a relativistic view of unrelated and cherry picked data sets.

STOP TALKING COMMON SENSE.

Exactly.

In my opinion, this is one (of the many) exact problems with our understanding of stats, facts, and alternative facts. The exact same reality can be perceived and used in completely contradictory ways.

Here's another example. What does this statement make you think:

There is a group of Chrisitan nuns who go around hospitals praying for God to cure the terminally ill. Roughly one in twenty patients end up being cured of their illness and go on to live happy lives.

SECULAR PERSON: The nuns' prayers had nothing to do with the miraculous survival of these terminally ill patients; if you pray for everyone obviously you're going to hit the bullseye through pure chance.

RELIGIOUS PERSON: Coming back from a terminal illness is an extremely rare, miraculous event. Even if God never heard our prayers, his hand is clearly at work here.

I think it's worth remembering that very rarely are stats & facts are viewed without bias.

Not a zodiac killer, merely a Pisces killer

But everyone is still going to say Islam is peaceful. Do the history, from its beginning spread it has always been violent in nature and the very guide book on how to be a Slave for Allah (aka Muslim) (aka the Quran) is to kill , and destroy all unbelievers. And only then peace will enter the earth. Why wont people wake up?

Downvote me if you wan't.

But the fear of terrorism is stastically idiotic and i simply don't understand the uproar, yes its extremely sad when it happens, but why walk around fearful?

Starting up your car, driving to work is statistically much more dangerous.

It's in-group bias. People feel more empathy towards people of their own group. And even more when the harm is inflicted by outer-group, the "others". Every car crash should be all over the news for days if it was about noteworthiness. Unfortunately it's not. Car crashes are not inflicted by "others" or the outer-group.

The fact that terrorist attacks in Europe are on the news 24/7 is not entirely because it's more relevant to us, it's because people have in-group bias, especially when the harm is done by the "other".

One might say Las Vegas wasn't inflicted by "others", in a sense. But it was inflicted on in-group members and it was catastrophic in terms of fatalities. That is going to get headlines. When a person of outer-group kills 2 people, that gets coverage. When a person of in-group kills 2 people, that doesn't. A clear evidence of in-group bias, it is natural because you want to protect the people of your tribe that's true, but it's not that relevant in modern times anymore. Terror attacks inflicted to your in-group should be noteworthy absolutely, but if we're speaking of actual relevancy to you, what you actually need to pay attention to is car crashes for example.

Still a significant difference.

If you want to be fair, then you should acknowledge that anything that happens far away is not as important to us. Roadworks in front of my house have more of an impact than anything Africa/Asia/North or South America/etc.. It has nothing to do with social media outrage.

I live in the DRC and the Americans and Europeans that try to (I don't know the term for it but to make someone else's cause your cause when really you don't care about that cause) angers me. These statistics are completely irrelevant and not a single one of the people who make them actually do anything to help.

My impression is that most terrorists in the West are foreigners. Yes you have some like that man who killed the people in Las Vegas but most are foreigners. Where as here in Africa our terrorism is domestic. These are two completely different types of terror and can't logically be used in a graph.

I wonder what the numbers are for children who injured themselves while their parents watched on as entertainment.

Do you ever have them weird moments where you hear something obscure for the first time that day and then it seems to crop up? Never heard of Robespierre before 8 hours ago when I started reading about the French revolution.

BBC World News tends to cover these events as they happen, or at the very least more widely than your standard news channels. It occasionally also gets aired in the early hours of the morning on BBC1. People just don't notice because they're not watching it.

No, it makes you a normal human being

He's a swimming instructor for the elderly.

Dude making it sound like Europeans got rid of their African colonies last year

Or an interesting new serial killer trying to blame 'swimming'!

that Robes quote is poignant. thanks.

Or one could just put the in effort to be informed. It's not that difficult.

If you could reduce the amount of car accidents happening, would you?

Are Europeans supposed to feel better because of that?

Then, they came for teenage swimmers, and I did not speak for I was not teenager... wait, I'm not a swimmer! I'll just support the police openly and cross my fingers.

Source: http://www.rts.ch/info/monde/9016433-le-terrorisme-tue-vingt-fois-plus-en-afrique-qu-en-europe.html Tool: infogram