Thousands Murdered in Burma Massacre

Please pray for Burma:

The most senior officer to defect from Burma told The Daily Mail that the junta has killed thousands of protesters and that the bodies of hundreds of executed monks have been dumped in the jungle.

The BBC reports that thousands of monks detained in Rangoon will be sent to prisons in the far north of the country. Smaller-scale protests continued around the country. Burmese bloggers fear reprisals.

The ruling generals refused to meet with the UN envoy for the third day in a row.

In an unexpected turn of events, Sylvester Stallone and his Rambo sequel movie crew have witnessed human atrocities while filming along the Burmese border.

The rest of the world is learning about much of this thanks to many techno-savvy students and bloggers inside Burma:

The government has made an effort to block sites, restrict Internet access and cut off phone service but to no avail - the intrepid bloggers have found ways around the clumsy efforts. So as the Junta issues “statements” and the government-controlled TV stations provide ridiculous claims of calm, the bloggers have given the world’s media access to videos and photographs as to the severity of the crackdown shot with cell phones or digital cameras and in some cases transmitted live.

In the past totalitarian governments have controlled and restricted the media. But today they now face the problem of every citizen potentially being the press. This unfortunately won’t stop the bloodshed, but it makes it impossible to deny, and the world is no longer able to turn a blind eye to such events. This may very well influence the outcome.

It seems technology is playing an important role in decreasing the power of despots. I hope this trend continues.

I've been thinking about what I know about public choice and economics in general and how these insights apply to Burma. I'm trying to figure out what people can do on a practical level to influence the Burmese government to stop these atrocities? I wish I had more answers than I do.

Unfortunately, the countries with the largest economic interest in Burma are the most silent and the ones who are most vocal about the atrocities have the smallest influence. From a public choice perspective, this correlation makes sense. The further removed we are from having actual influence on a situation, the easier it is to posture and moralize about it. After all, the costs and consequences of doing so are almost zero.

The benefit of taking costless moral stands is that it makes us feel good about ourselves. The danger is that we end up in pursuit of feeling good about ourselves rather than seeking meaningful change. That is the main message of Thomas Sowell's excellent book, The Vision of the Anointed. It is a book every political and religious leader ought to read.

So the question becomes how do we step beyond simply moralizing about Burma? I am concerned our response will be no different than that of Rwanda and Darfur. If so, Burma will learn the lesson that tyranny pays.

People seem to have a tendency to clamor to politicians, expecting them to solve the world's problems. I don't know if you've noticed, but they don't have a good track record at that sort of thing. Surely there has to be a better way?

One of the key lessons of economics is the power of a decentralized system like a market to unleash the creative energies of millions of people. It does so by taking advantage of dispersed knowledge and resources of individuals. The innovativeness of the market is far greater than that of any political decision-making process.

I am convinced this same basic insight holds true with situations like Burma as well. If enough decentralized groups of people, churches, and other organizations are motivated to work towards making a positive influence in small ways, their aggregate behavior just might change Burma and the world.

Questions: What can we do as citizens in the US to try to effect change in Burma? Try and think beyond only political solutions. On a small scale, is there anything an individual or group can do to help out a few citizens in Burma in a way that has positively aligned incentives for both parties? How do we minimize the effect of the "Samaritan's Dilemma"? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

---

Here is a roundup of bloggers showing solidarity with the protesters (via Pajamas Media):

Belmont Club: “I would be dishonest if I said that the road to freedom was anything else but long, wearying and full of pain. But I know that is the road that you long to take.”

Gina Cobb: “The exact death toll will never be known. It’s a travesty just the same.”

Ace of Spades: “Compare the media’s rather upfront branding of the insane Burmese regime as murderous with their solicitousness of Iran’s madmen.”

Jules Crittenden: “Maybe if America, Europe and Asia were to signal to China that “Made in China” is a no go … Beijing Olympics, no go … Supporting the sham that China is actually anything like a modern nation, no go … I bet China would hate that. Never mind the political prisoners in China. The last thing the Peoples Republic of China wants people to do is associate the Beijing Olympics, cheap toys, etc., with piles of rotting monks in the Burmese jungle.”

Talk Left: “As for what’s being done about it, not much that I can tell. The U.N. Envoy was scheduled to meet with the leaders of the Myanmar military junta but it’s now been delayed.”

Gateway Pundit: “1,974 monks and nuns who are currently being detained in InnSein GTI (General Institute of Technology) will now be transferred to Ka Baw Valley (which is a kind of prison) in Sagaing, in order to suppress their movement completely.”

Real Clear Politics: “Regimes like the SPDC do not improve with age; therefore, the Burma problem must be addressed urgently.”

JunkYardBlog: “Totalitarian governments can do this sort of thing pretty well. It’s not perfect; there are little holes and gaps, and it’s not up to the standard set forth in 1984, but they’re working on it. Governments like the PRC and Burma’s regime spend a lot of money to jam, filter, suppress, and torture sources of opposition to their rule, because they know that this technology—surveillance, blocking, and brutality—the Orwell Machine—is what keeps them in power.”

The Glittering Eye: “Whatever the reasons for the connections, China is indubitably connected with all of these countries and their ruling regimes and I believe there’s some point at which trade and aid becomes support for the regimes that rule these countries.”

Blue Crab Boulevard: “The west is talking, the junta is acting. People are dying as a result.”

Transterrestial Musings: “But such regimes can always find people who will not refuse (and some who will even take pleasure). If there is a solution to tyranny and dictatorship, it does not lie in passivity and non-violence.”

A colombo-americana’s perspective has a roundup of articles.