The Singer Solution to World Poverty
3-16-06
Communism has led to the production of what could potentially be the worst man-made disaster ever. We are taught from our very first Social Studies class that communism is a form of evil, that we should shun it, and that we should fight it. Trying to achieve it under another name does not make it any more right. I believe that this is what Mr. Singer is suggesting. And while his intentions are right (as Karl Marx’s were) they only look good on paper. They are doomed to failure and/or a country-wide lowered standard of living.
Mr. Singer is suggesting that we turn our lifestyles to an extreme form of Socialism in which we keep just enough of our earned money to live a basic life and we give all of the excess money to starving children in other countries that cannot earn their own money. While donating money to these children is a wonderful idea, donating as much as you can is not such a great idea.
Singer’s original idea of giving $200 to save the life of one child is a reasonable idea. It would be a great start and a great step. To give all excess money would defeat the purpose of the capitalist society our founding fathers have worked to hard to build.
There is always an answerless question in the scenario of Bob and his car versus the child at the other end of the tracks. Your personal value and comfort, or the life of someone you never knew? In a way, it is like all of us who know how badly animals are mistreated but continue to eat meat because we like it so much. That question and that guilt will always be there. And there will always be someone somewhere who thinks you are a horribly selfish person for not giving humanity your all.
But, either way, whether you give these children all the money you can or not, humanity will destroy itself. Whether it is from overpopulation of little children from Third World countries or from overpopulation of obese Americans is really up to the money holders. And since we had to be selfish to get to the point where we had all this money to begin with, it is futile to even dream about Americans giving up all of their hard earned excess money.
As sad and upsetting as this truth may be, there is little more to be said. Our very first animal instinct is survival, and more specifically, survival of the fittest. Trying to outdo such a simple calling, is like trying to walk up Niagara Falls. It is futile to even hope.
I smell half developped ideals and definitions of value and selfishness. Were I asked to write this assignment now, it would be different. But I'll leave it as it is. My opinion is well stated, but as usual there is little evidence to back except a reliance on generalities.
Communism has led to the production of what could potentially be the worst man-made disaster ever. We are taught from our very first Social Studies class that communism is a form of evil, that we should shun it, and that we should fight it. Trying to achieve it under another name does not make it any more right. I believe that this is what Mr. Singer is suggesting. And while his intentions are right (as Karl Marx’s were) they only look good on paper. They are doomed to failure and/or a country-wide lowered standard of living.
Mr. Singer is suggesting that we turn our lifestyles to an extreme form of Socialism in which we keep just enough of our earned money to live a basic life and we give all of the excess money to starving children in other countries that cannot earn their own money. While donating money to these children is a wonderful idea, donating as much as you can is not such a great idea.
Singer’s original idea of giving $200 to save the life of one child is a reasonable idea. It would be a great start and a great step. To give all excess money would defeat the purpose of the capitalist society our founding fathers have worked to hard to build.
There is always an answerless question in the scenario of Bob and his car versus the child at the other end of the tracks. Your personal value and comfort, or the life of someone you never knew? In a way, it is like all of us who know how badly animals are mistreated but continue to eat meat because we like it so much. That question and that guilt will always be there. And there will always be someone somewhere who thinks you are a horribly selfish person for not giving humanity your all.
But, either way, whether you give these children all the money you can or not, humanity will destroy itself. Whether it is from overpopulation of little children from Third World countries or from overpopulation of obese Americans is really up to the money holders. And since we had to be selfish to get to the point where we had all this money to begin with, it is futile to even dream about Americans giving up all of their hard earned excess money.
As sad and upsetting as this truth may be, there is little more to be said. Our very first animal instinct is survival, and more specifically, survival of the fittest. Trying to outdo such a simple calling, is like trying to walk up Niagara Falls. It is futile to even hope.
I smell half developped ideals and definitions of value and selfishness. Were I asked to write this assignment now, it would be different. But I'll leave it as it is. My opinion is well stated, but as usual there is little evidence to back except a reliance on generalities.
posted by Andy | 6:02 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home