The impassivity of a nation?

Came across a letter today in the newspapers and decided to highlight this particular letter. While the crux of the forum letter addressed the failure of reported child abuse cases, I emphasised the following portion:

"...SP21's reluctance to intervene in the affairs of our fellow men, even for the greater good, comes as no surprise.

The fact that we are living in one of the world's most densely-populated cities has ironically caused us to become immune to the needs of our neighbours. In crowded urban environments, the tendency is for humans to retreat into our shells, our little abodes-in-the-sky, preserving what little privacy and space we have. This cheek-by-jowl living has resulted in us living insular and anonymous lives, with an overriding fear of involvement.

Mrs Hillary Clinton wrote that it takes a village to raise a child. In the good old days, we had legions of relatives and friendly neighbours on hand to help out in any trouble. However, ensconced in our little pigeon holes, many of us seem intent on getting on with our lives, beset by our own problems. Our knowledge of and bond with our neighbours have become too superficial for us to help in times of crisis.

I live with three other families on the same floor. Doors are closed most of the time. Our one and only interaction, if you can call it that, happens by chance in the lift or in the lobby.

I am sure that many people have experienced the interminable minutes stuck in a lift with nothing at all to say to the virtual strangers who happen to live in the same block as us. In this state of affairs, is it any wonder that people have grown withdrawn and indifferent to the predicaments of others?

The problems we face are not unique. This situation is emblematic of countless other urban centres. Just walk into any crowded city and you would find the same pervasive anonymity and self-imposed isolation. Is this sense of detachment and isolation from the community an inevitable price to pay for progress and city living?...."

There are some envisaged assumptions about the brusquely chores of urban living. The author conjectured that modernistic-dense environments propogated a pernicious self-inflicted conscription of anonymity and isolation. Such a claim should not be construed as tacitly inevitable but be reconsidered as an endogenous growth within our own community. To consternate that all urban societies (who are heterogenous with different socio-cultural norms and value systems) engender this anomie perpetuates a fallacy. Similarly, one can ask the author to acknowledge her agonizing disenchantment and liberate herself from her own "self-imposed isolation" as she stated. Don't ignore the agency involved in members of a society, thats how societies change and evolve (hopefully for a positive egalitarian cause). Rather one should impugn such abject capitulation with solemn parlance to effect amiable solutions.

Incidentally, I don't wish to embellish my own blog with derogatory rhetoric of "moral decay", rather my objective is to expunge and parlay all these negativitism for positive collary with a prudent analysis, as I promised. These insight pieces, unfortunately, will be sporadic, considering the favourable circumstances to scribe and debrief them.