What's Your Tropical Disease?

I am continually amazed by how so little, can go such a long way. Most recently, through a tale shared of an American doctorate student in Zambia. Having contracted a disease, the student found that the local medical facilities were not prepared to deal with such an illness. He was surprised to learn that the standard procedure was simply to try and make those who had been infected as comfortable as possible while they died. The student wrote home, urgently requesting that his sister mail him the best textbook she could find covering "tropical diseases." The book not only saved his life, but revolutionized that particular Zambian facility where it is often referenced, helping to save the lives of many who might otherwise be dead.

There are so many directions I could go in talking about this, that I am at a loss where to even begin. Part of me wants to focus on the raw and copious privilege experienced by the American student, but then I remind myself that former Zambian President Kenneth Kaunda (this happened while Kaunda was in office) also experienced privilege, and certainly had access to medical textbooks, and even more so than the student, had the wealth and power necessary to procure them. So why didn't he? I believe that these two types of privilege intersect.

Why did the student seek to supply the hospital with the text? Was it because he wanted to do so out of some sort of altruistic kindness? Or was it because he had fallen victim, and feared for his life? Comparatively, although great privilege can also be attributed to Kenneth Kaunda, he was no more interested in his own countries' state of medical readiness than a random foreigner. Yet, had it been Kaunda that fell prey to the disease, would he not have acted similarly, in order to preserve his own life?

As I ponder this, my thoughts wander to Durkheim. You all are probably familiar with his theory that society is like a living organism. That each individual within the community is a cell, contributing to the functionality of the greater whole. On the one hand, Durkheim used this to explain the necessity of having a division of labor. While on the other, he made a compelling argument that because we are all connected, metaphorically, groups are a lot like organs. If one is damaged or hurting, then this would eventually have a cascading effect throughout the rest of the body, or rather, society.

Still, we harbor these strange notions that we are disconnected from the rest of the world. We speak of walls and borders as if these were capable of further ensuring a disablement of that connection, when in reality we are all inseparably linked. It is because of this that I am at a loss to understand why ignorance seems to be a prevailing condition of privilege. Because if privilege is truly self-interested, then doesn't it stand to reason that somewhere, somehow, the logic of self preservation would kick in? Resulting in the powers that be taking a greater interest in the well-being of the whole?

And yet we wait, until a situation is so far gone, all we can do is react. Like children, plugging dams with nothing but their thumbs, and a quick 'phew' as brows are wiped, *one more crisis averted*. I realize there are many who would love to associate privilege and power with conspiracy theory, but as time passes, the fat that floats to the top appears to be more or less unchecked stupidity. Played like this, it's a defeatist's game, and there can be no winners.