
Sherpa: They Die, We Go Home - jstreebin
http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/03/28/sherpa-they-die-we-go-home/?partner=rss&emc=rss
======
TheMagicHorsey
I'm not Nepalese, but I visit India quite a bit, and I have met Nepalese
there. Many security guards in Delhi and Bangalore come from Nepal.

There's also a Nepalese waitress at chaat cafe in SOMA who is very chatty.

The Nepalese seem to be deeply ambivalent towards mountain climbers. The
Google exec who died climbing Everest last year was a vocal supporter of the
Sherpas, but even he didn't seem to be a bit blind to the nature of his hobby.

Americans want to believe there is something courageous about flying across
the world to some exotic locale, and then creating an economy there around
some terribly dangerous activity, which encourages the locals to risk life and
limb to support.

Climbing is a hobby for a rich guy from Google. Maybe it's even spiritual. But
for Sherpas it's like plumbing or driving a taxi. They do it because it
provides resources they can use to support their families.

Are the Sherpas better off with the climbers? Perhaps. It's hard to say,
because while climbing brings a lot of money, the Sherpas might have moved to
cities, to India, or even to America if that opportunity hadn't materialized.
Maybe they would have developed some marketable crafts or products? Who knows.
Everest is their resource curse.

Like boxers and football players from ghettos in America, the Sherpas
sacrifice their bodies for American entertainment, not because they want to,
but because they have to.

~~~
sirsar
> Are the Sherpas better off with the climbers? Perhaps. It's hard to say,
> because while climbing brings a lot of money, the Sherpas might have moved
> to cities, to India, or even to America if that opportunity hadn't
> materialized.

What's wrong with allowing the Sherpas to make that choice, instead of us
moralizers trying to make it for them? Unless I'm missing something, they
still can move to cities or to India, at least to the extent they could before
the advent of the Everest industry. In fact, the revenue from guiding may even
help them with the costs associated with moving to America.

It's not like we intentionally keep Sherpas in the dark about the dangers they
face. I also don't think it's the case that the rise of the Sherpa business
destroyed other less dangerous jobs in the area, although I'm willing to be
proven wrong.

> Like boxers and football players from ghettos in America, the Sherpas
> sacrifice their bodies for American entertainment, not because they want to,
> but because they have to.

I would wager there are many boxers out there who disagree.

~~~
ebola1717
Climbers & their money do tons for the Sherpas and their communities - but
that exchange is at gunpoint: Risk your lives for us, or your wives and
children go without food & medicine. It's a no-win situation for them, and
it's precisely because it's a no-win situation for them that this is morally
fraught.

First of all, keep in mind that many of the alternatives - like going to build
the 2022 World Cup stadium in Qatar - are also dangerous. Even the safe ones
involve spending your life in a foreign country away from your family (often
including your wife and kids), & having to learn a completely new language.
For a lot of Sherpas, that's not even an option, since they're needed in their
village for the crop seasons. At best, they have a set of ugly options to pick
from.

Secondly, telling someone who has no financial security "I'll pay you to risk
your life for me" is very different from telling someone who has money. The US
military recruits heavily from the poor - and in fact that might be one of the
most significant factors
([http://surface.syr.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1002&cont...](http://surface.syr.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1002&context=soc)).
Is it fair that simply because someone was born into a lower standing, they
have fewer options to live a safe life? The morality of that question alters
drastically when you offer universal basic income.

As for moving to the US... that's also just not a possibility for 99% of
Sherpas. Literacy & education rates are low, therefore so is knowledge about
the visa systems (the main one they'd be eligible for is the diversity visa,
which is a long-shot lottery anyway), not to mention the obvious language
barrier. By design, immigration could only work out for a fraction of the
population. Plus, a lot of them probably don't want to leave their family and
culture behind. There's maybe 10,000 Nepalese in the US, and most of them from
Kathmandu or the southern areas, which are culturally pretty different.

~~~
LordKano
_Climbers & their money do tons for the Sherpas and their communities - but
that exchange is at gunpoint_

I have a big problem with characterizing it thusly.

The Sherpas lived and died in Nepal for thousands of years before the arrival
of western adventure seekers. A people continuing to live in the same manner
as their ancestors isn't the worst thing in the world, especially if that's
what those people want.

We can best raise standards of living for people around the world by engaging
in trade with them. We bring a lot of western problems, like obesity and heart
disease but we also bring western solutions, like medical care and abundant
food sources.

 _The morality of that question alters drastically when you offer universal
basic income._

If there's a morality question with, as you describe it, offering
opportunities at gunpoint; how can there not be morality questions with taking
tax money from others, actually at gunpoint?

There's also the cultural imperialism that's implicit in your scenario. Why
would we assume that most Nepalese want to come to the US?

If travel and trade boosts their standard of living, because of their
voluntary participation, that's a good thing.

~~~
lmm
> If there's a morality question with, as you describe it, offering
> opportunities at gunpoint; how can there not be morality questions with
> taking tax money from others, actually at gunpoint?

Non-taxation is also at gunpoint. Particularly in the case of land/property
ownership (possibly the biggest factor in inequality), the thing that makes a
wealthy person's land and buildings "theirs" is ultimately their ability to
expel other people from them by force.

Ultimately you can frame anything as a negative or positive right. We as
humans need to decide what sits best with our own consciences. Personally, I
feel a visceral sense of injustice at the gross inequality of today's world -
a sense that I don't feel when we talk about taking a fraction of the incomes
of the wealthiest (provided we do so from all equally) and redistributing it
to those less well off. It's possible that I'm peculiar in this regard, but I
suspect not.

~~~
LordKano
The crux of ownership is having the right to determine who has access to
something and under what conditions.

You own your body and can use force to prevent someone from having sex with
you against your will. I wouldn't say that you're going around not having sex
with random strangers at gunpoint.

 _We as humans need to decide what sits best with our own consciences._

I can agree with that. It's just that our consciences are different.

 _I feel a visceral sense of injustice at the gross inequality of today 's
world_

It's not just today's world. There has always been inequality and injustice.
It used to be far worse. You won't be thrown into debtors prison for not being
able to repay the usurious loan you had no choice in accepting to feed your
starving children. You won't be executed for illegally killing a deer to feed
your family. You won't be worked to death on a chain gang for stealing a loaf
of bread.

~~~
lmm
> You own your body and can use force to prevent someone from having sex with
> you against your will. I wouldn't say that you're going around not having
> sex with random strangers at gunpoint.

I think that just boils down to the statement that it's very natural and
instinctively moral that you control your own body. Whereas for one individual
to control huge tracts of land or buildings that could house hundreds of other
people is not natural or instinctively moral.

------
theyeti
Nepalese national here. While I can confirm that most of the stuff in the NY
Times article is true, what bothers me the most is how helpless is the
Nepalese government with this regard. Tourism dollars and oversea migrant
workers' wages make up for a sizable (and growing) chunk of Nepal's GDP. Every
day hundreds of migrant workers leave for the middle east in search of better
work. A few of them come back in coffins, others come with disease or a youth
wasted in foreign land. Now, don't get my prospective wrong, but the situation
of Sherpas is better compared to the migrant workers. While its not the most
desirable job, its better among the ones available.

------
victorhooi
I was planning a trip to Nepal, to hike to Base Camp - Macchu Picchu was a
great experience, so I thought this would be the same.

But then a friend send me this:

[http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/brain-cells-
into-t...](http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/brain-cells-into-thin-
air/)

Apparently, hiking at altitude causes permanent changes in the brain, even at
"low" altitudes like EBC - which has kinda freaked me off about the trek.

I wonder how the sherpas/local populace deal with that?

~~~
DanielStraight
Study behind the article:

[http://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(05)00674-1/fulltext](http://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343\(05\)00674-1/fulltext)

~~~
victorhooi
Yeah, I read the study - the sample size is small, but I'm still freaked out
by the science - as in, I'm worried if I go hiking to that altitude and what
the permanent effects could be.

------
tyho
I don't do alpine climbing but I do climb in the UK lots. Climbers here have
very strong views about how things should be climbed, it doesn't matter if you
got to the top if you did it in bad style. For example, if you are climbing
and you weight your equipment even for just a second, the whole ascent does
not count (there is aid climbing but that is not real climbing). If you can't
climb the route in good style, then don't climb it.

What good style is varies location to location but the lengths Everest
climbers go to in my opinion are laughable. They pay poor people to fix
ladders across crevasses? They pay poor people to fix ropes? I am not denying
that climbing Everest with these advantages is hard, it is still very hard,
but just because it is hard does not make it worthwhile.

~~~
saganus
_if you are climbing and you weight your equipment even for just a second, the
whole ascent does not count_

What do you mean by that? I read it as if using a scale to know the weigh of
your equipment makes the ascent not count.

If this is correct, why would that be so? and if not, then what did you mean
by that?

Also, why is style considered so important? I mean, is there a similar
requirement for diving for example? I know that sports with rules have...well,
rules. But for something like climbing, why would that be something to take
into account except if you are part of a league that certifies ascents in a
particular way for example.

Could you expand a bit on that? it sounds quite interesting to me.

~~~
tomn
> weight your equipment

They mean the act of putting your weight on your equipment. If you're climbing
up by pulling on the rock, and resting on ledges, that's fine, but taking a
rest by sitting back in your harness, or pulling on the rope to gain height is
not.

Climbing is an one of the more logical sports, but like all sports, arbitrary
rules have to be set if you want to accurately compare achievements between
two people. It's just a way to make sure everyone knows what you mean when you
say you've 'done' a route.

That said, I recommend ignoring this aspect of climbing -- fulfilling personal
goals is a lot more rewarding for everyone than trying to compare yourself to
others.

~~~
saganus
Very interesting indeed.

I would have never thought that the action of resting your own weigh in
different surfaces would mean different things. Also, I'm sure there's a
historical reason for that (whatever that may be), since even arbitrary rules
as they may be, have to start somewhere, and it would be interesting to see
where this one came from

I also agree that ignoring those rules and achieve personal fulfillment is
more important. Nonetheless it's funny how different sports' rules compare to
each other, i.e. "you can't rest your weigh on your equipment" vs "you can't
touch the ball with your hands" or "you have to run to this mound first, and
then this one, and then this one"

~~~
tomn
I think it's just a logical and clear place to set a benchmark -- you can use
as much safety equipment as you like to keep yourself safe, as long as you
don't use it to help you to get to the top.

Historically, climbing safety equipment was very basic compared to what is
used today -- a rope tied around your waist held by your mate at the bottom of
the pitch might stop you tumbling down the mountain, but you don't really want
to find out.

In the UK, climbing culture is pretty conservative compared to other places
(there's very little sport climbing here), so the (extremely sensible)
attitude that your safety gear is for accidents not for helping you climb
harder routes is quite prevalent.

------
collyw
“We’d like to go home to our families, but the Sherpas are worried that if we
cancel the expedition we will not get paid. We are willing to continue.”

Capitalism in its purest form.

~~~
zeveb
Were it not for capitalism, they'd be living in extreme poverty, scratching
out a marginal existence on the borders of the world. Because of capitalism,
they are far better off than they would be.

Capitalism at its finest.

~~~
shimon
Assuming the Sherpas aren't forced into this line of work, then you're right -
they're choosing it over the alternatives because it's a better option for
them.

That doesn't mean that it's ethical for visitors to a country to enjoy a sport
wherein they pay to transfer risk of death away from themselves and onto less
advantaged local people. I'm not against this type of deal in principle - it's
vital to the existence of institutions like EMS and the military - but when
the whole thing exists so that megalomaniacs can tick off another box on the
"hard things I've achieved" list, there is a real question of justice.

Most people who love capitalism might still draw the line at some types of
transactions -- maybe your line is at selling organs or child prostitution,
but it probably exists somewhere.

~~~
chc
> _Assuming the Sherpas aren 't forced into this line of work, then you're
> right - they're choosing it over the alternatives because it's a better
> option for them_

> _That doesn 't mean that it's ethical for visitors to a country to enjoy a
> sport wherein they pay to transfer risk of death away from themselves and
> onto less advantaged local people._

I have trouble seeing how it's more ethical to remove the choice from their
hands and force them to do things that they demonstrably would rather not do.

~~~
shimon
That's hardly the only alternative. A visitor could instead pay them to be a
guide, even a mountaineering guide on another thrilling but less suicidal
trek.

------
kylehotchkiss
> dhal bhat-induced gastrointestinal disaster

LOL. Been to Nepal twice and despite eating this every meal (nearly flavorless
rice & lentil soup), can't say it had any side effects. The water situation in
Nepal is dire, take a heavy filter with you, but if the food wasn't purchased
on the street or wasn't an unwashed fruit, you're likely fine.

~~~
sirtastic
> The water situation in Nepal is dire, take a heavy filter with you,

I spent over a month backpacking around the Annapurna region of Nepal without
a filter drinking from both stream and well water without treatment the entire
time I was there. Never had a problem. If you are referring to water in /
around a village you could say water of every country is dire since that water
is almost always contaminated somehow. The water coming straight off a
mountain is almost always perfectly fine in my experience which is the case
anywhere you go. I'll also add I spoke with several people who also went
without a filter and drank from both village wells and streams without any
issues. Matter of fact I know of no one who got sick in Nepal. I also ate tons
of street food and dhal baht from some of the most hole in the wall places, no
issues. As always your mileage may vary but I think calling the situation dire
is a stretch.

~~~
pg_bot
You must have incredible gastrointestinal fortitude because I haven't met any
westerners who would share your opinion. For others reading this, if you are
going to Nepal or some other third world country don't trust the water. Bring
a filter and use it religiously, unless you want to spend a day glued to a
toilet like I did.

------
cornholio
I wonder if ignoring the prevailing wage of the labor market is the correct
approach. Since sherpa wages are one of the principal expenses, this will
automatically lead to higher costs for the climbers, therefore less demand and
less jobs. In an environment where significantly higher wages are paid to
select few, you will have corruption in recruiting (a significant part of the
wage will go to middlemen, not to the workers) and even stronger abuse by the
team leaders since there is more to lose if you are fired. Also, if western
companies decide to provide these "ethical wages", it opens up a large market
for Chinese or Nepalese companies who might treat workers even worse.

It goes without saying that no expense should be spared in protecting lives,
sherpa should not be exposed to more risks than absolutely necessary and
should be covered by comprehensive insurance. If need be, this should be
imposed by the regulatory power of the Nepalese state.

------
dschiptsov
This probably should not be here. The whole business is an ugly affair, full
of arrogant, rich, narcissistic fat cats, local corruption and fraud, and
striking inequality.

Nevertheless, it is a self-sustained ecosystem, fueled by relatively big money
of narcissistic bastards (starting from $50k per head and up to $150, which
some Japanese guy paid to reach the top at the age of above 75 - I don't
remember exactly) which is certainly a huge money for Nepal. A small
percentage of these money (the most of it sank into bottomless pockets of
agency owners and govt officials) buys all the manual labor required to place
a tourist on the top, from yak caravans carrying supplies of food and cooking
gas from Lukla to porters carrying tourist's luggage, cooks, guides who fix
the ropes, managers, etc.

One should understand that Nepal is still a traditionally caste-based and
inherently unequal society, no matter what the communist infested govt is
saying. What tourists call "Sherpa" is not just one ethic group of Nepalese
Sherpas - natives of the Solukhumbu region, but a mix of several tribes, among
whom Sherpas are majority.

As strange as it sounds, there is not much tension about different castes
(even among Sherpas there are a few castes) involved on this business. Lower
castes do manual labor for small wages, higher castes do the "management" for
relatively big profits, but everyone are satisfied with their lot. This is how
local economy works for hundreds of years.

Moreover, Nepalese society, being segregated among more than 40 different
tribes, is a remarkable example of tolerance and cross-ethnic respect for a so
diverse nation. If you boarding an intercity bus in Kathmandu you will
encounter members of at least 10 different tribes, and, in a deep contrast to
Western cultures, there will be not a slight tension among people. It has
something to do with less selfishness, arrogance and narcissism of competitive
individualistic societies.

BTW, in case of an avalanche everyone is equal - the guides and the porters.
So there is nothing much to dramatize and sensationalize. Yes, it is a hard,
risk taking field work. But no one forces anyone to take this job.

What really annoying are these office stooges, who are routinely trying to
make a publicity for themselves with all these meaningless PR actions,
publications, etc. Go there, and pay more cash to the wage laborers, rise the
wages of your staff by keeping less in your pockets, by spending less on your
own status and comfort - this will worth more that all your hypocrite
"projects" combined.

Avalanches is not the main problem in Himalaya. Corruption and hypocrisy is.

~~~
j1vms
> The whole business is an ugly affair, full of arrogant, rich, narcissistic
> fat cats, local corruption and fraud, and striking inequality.

So it's essentially modern human history and current human affairs, in a
microcosm. That might be coming across cynical, but at the same time,
hopefully there is light at the end of our collective tunnel - so to speak.

------
reedlaw
What would it take to put a stop to Everest climbing? The author repeatedly
points to the irrationality of the situation:

 _But as irrational as it may sound, a part of my subconscious was worried
that if we didn’t continue, I would be cursed to come back for a third
attempt._

 _Everest induces vertigo on your reasoning processes._

 _" As a dice roll for someone paying to reach the summit, the dangers of
climbing can perhaps be rationalized. There’s no other service industry in the
world that so frequently kills and maims its workers for the benefit of paying
clients.”_

Despite knowing all this, people still climb which means there is some other
factor at work. If there was a greater respect for life (for the lives of
climbers themselves and for the lives of Sherpas) perhaps there wouldn't be so
many willing to take great risks to scale the mountain.

------
mchahn
Is it true that climbers on Everest pass by frozen dead climbers that are
permanently there?

~~~
Stratoscope
Yes. But sometimes they disappear!

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Boots](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Boots)

------
engates
If you feel bad for the sherpas, don't go climb Mt Everest. Or, pay them what
you think they're worth. Tip them big time if you feel they aren't getting
paid enough.

------
landryraccoon
It feels to me like climbing Mount Everest, in its current form, is selfish
and socially and environmentally irresponsible. What does it prove other than
that one is wealthy and willing to risk life and the lives of local people
(and needlessly polluting the environment) while spending a ton of money just
for some selfie opportunities?

------
ignoramous
I followed the Everest Avalanche episode in 2014 with great despair. I was
following Natgeo's account on Instagram where they had updates every hour it
seemed. It was heartbreaking.

Donations: [http://everestavalanchetragedy.com/sherpa-
fund.html](http://everestavalanchetragedy.com/sherpa-fund.html)

Sherpas earning way below what they deserve is an open secret, yet they are
better paid than rest of the country. Nepalese government support after the
avalanche hit was telling. There's no formal support structure whatsoever. The
members of the British Expedition that first summited the Everest opened up
schools and charities for the Sherpas there [0]. The Government needs to get
its act together too, and tighten regulations.

Climbing Everest has long become a mis-placed adventure. A notorious incident
where a solo Spanish climber was left for dead whilst other climbers on-trail
just watched him die, comes to mind... there's nothing they could have done
though, to help him... how can an experience like that amount to an
"adventure"? [1] A Chinese business-woman, I think, summited Everest right
after the disaster struck. She flew across the icefall in a heli, what many
"climbers" consider "cheating" [2].

Sherpas, in addition to their favourable genetic make-up custom built for
high-altitude are known for their bravery too. There are recored instances of
Sherpas putting their life in danger to save their client's life. It is almost
a given that the Sherpa wouldn't abandon you, even if the chances of survival
were really grim. An unfortunate incident that happened at K2 in '08 serves as
a reminder and a proof of this. It fills me with extreme sadness, every time I
read it. The perils of high-altitude climbing are many-- HAPE, HACE,
Blindness, Oxygen starvation (this has the most dire consequence imaginable,
it takes away one's ability to act rationally), and most of the climbers don't
worry too much, because the Sherpas got their back.

Mt. Godwin Austin (K2) is considered to be the deadliest and toughest of the
8000'ers to climb. It isn't as commercialized. Speaking of K2... the history
of the first-ever expedition (from Italy) to successfully summit the K2 is
fraught with fraud, spite, and hubris [4]. High-altitude climbing is one of
those things that is hard to understand for people not emotionally invested in
it.

[0] [http://himalayantrust.org/](http://himalayantrust.org/)

[1] [http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20151008-the-graveyard-in-
th...](http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20151008-the-graveyard-in-the-clouds-
everests-200-dead-bodies)

[2]
[http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/08/140805-mount...](http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/08/140805-mount-
everest-sherpa-mountain-climbing-jing-wang-avalanche/)

[3]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_K2_disaster](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_K2_disaster)

[4]
[http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-28696985](http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-28696985)

------
hyperliner
This is going to be controversial, but I think it needs to be said. IMHO, this
scenario is an example of "top of first world problem" meets "bottom of third
world problem" and the outcome is not pretty. You have a number of folks with
tons of resources, hiding behind for-profit companies that aggregate demand,
and hire the cheapest form of back-breaking help they can get. This help does
not have any other options, and because the agreement is with the companies,
they have very little connection with the buyer.

This happens with:

\- Car washers (sorry, but can you please redo my car because you left a
streak here and I paid $8).

\- Nannies (sorry, have to cancel today. Sorry you cant reschedule other
people but my fiance rescheduled our dining / wining outing)

\- Home cleaning services (sorry, but I have a headache and can't have noise
at the house. Sorry you can't reschedule and will have to miss my money to
make rent)

\- Drivers (sorry, i just wanted to go one block but did not want to scratch
my brand new $400 shoes)

\- Immigrant laborers picking your fruit (send them back!)

\- Sherpas (read the article)

This is why if I have to use an Uber ride for < $5, I add a $10 on top
directly to the driver.

I think the Everest situation is actually a little sillier, in that you have a
bunch of people coming home saying "I climbed Everest!" and everybody forgets
the little detail that they had personal staff prepping their every way.

I have a lot of appreciation for others though who do this challenge
overcoming real obstacles such as blindness, missing a body part, or some
other personal tragedy which must be conquered through conquering the big
mountain, so I am not referring to these situations in my comments.

Downvotes expected.

~~~
sosborn
>I think the Everest situation is actually a little sillier, in that you have
a bunch of people coming home saying "I climbed Everest!" and everybody
forgets the little detail that they had personal staff prepping their every
way.

This doesn't really invalidate the accomplishment though. Everest is so
extreme that getting to the top, even with support staff, is damn impressive.

~~~
hyperliner
I don't disagree with your point, but my point is that we need to imagine what
it must be for the guys carrying the heaviest of the loads!

