Global Poverty: A Global Responsibility?

Transcription

1 Global Poverty: A Global Responsibility? Perspective: Capitalism What belief is held by adherents to this perspective? What resolution would they opt for? Who would benefit? Can you think of any other perspectives? Perspective: Local Charities and Volunteers What belief is held by this group? What resolution would they opt for? Who would benefit? GLOBAL POVERTY: A GLOBAL RESPONSIBILITY? Perspective: Government Aid What belief is held by this group? What resolution would they opt for? Who would benefit? A number of resources have been provided for you in this package. Use any/ all of the material to complete your analysis. Your Task: 1. Select an issue from the list provided. 2. Describe the issue (150 words) 3. Explain why this is an issue of justice or the common good (150 words). 4. Identify the people or groups who have a stake in the issue and analyse their perspectives on it. Why would some stakeholders not want the situation to change? (750 words) 5. Analyse the issue in terms of the principles that have been studied that promote human flourishing. Which perspective would most effectively promote the common good? (750 words) 6. In light of your analysis, and after considering the ethical questions provided, discuss how you would respond to this issue. (200 words). Perspective: Critique of unjust structures What belief is presented in this perspective? What resolution would adherents to this perspective opt for? Who would benefit? Perspective: A Christian Perspective What belief is espoused in Christian teaching? What resolution is presented in this perspective? Who would benefit? Perspective: Peter Singer s Utilitarianism What belief is held by adherents to this perspective? What resolution would they opt for? Who would benefit from this solution?

2 Background to the issue: Poverty can be understood in a variety of ways. Some university students claim they are poor. Whilst it is true than many university students experience real difficulties in meeting the costs of education and living, is one really poor if one cannot afford the latest mobile telephone? Here is a video (image and text) by the Miniature Earth Project that puts poverty into perspective. The United Nations Organisation made its Millennium Declaration in In it, representatives of 189 nations declared their commitment to spare no effort to free our fellow men, women and children from the abject and dehumanizing conditions of extreme poverty, to which more than a billion of them are currently subjected. We are committed to making the right to development a reality for everyone and to freeing the entire human race from want. See the full United Nations Millennium Declaration. Among the eight millennium goals was a goal to end extreme poverty and hunger. They took as their benchmark several statistics that cast light on what poverty really means. One of these is the number of people in a population with access to less than 1680 kcal of food a day, which is the amount of energy required for a man of about 70 kg just to stay alive. Between , 16 per cent of the world s population did not have enough food to meet their basic nutritional requirements. In , this had reduced to 13 per cent. The world s population, however, has grown. This means that in absolute numbers, the number of people who do not have access to enough food to survive has actually grown from about 840 million in 1992 to about 923 million in In Africa, there has been a thirty per cent increase in the number of people lacking access to their basic daily energy requirements from to To find out more about how the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations measures undernourishment, read their methodology document. Read more about the State of Food Insecurity in the World from the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. Read about the background to UN Millennium Declaration and find out more about the Millennium Development Goals. So what is the issue? Australians live in a relatively well-off country. Australia has very low levels of unemployment and high levels of education. The typical Australian has about $36,000 after tax at their disposal per year. Very few Australians are actually dying of hunger. An article on ABC, The Drum Opinion, gives us an insight into the typical Australian income, and you can find out more from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. At the same time, millions of people in other countries of the world are dying of starvation, or other poverty related and preventable conditions. Many more live in conditions in which any kind of flourishing as a human being is nigh impossible.

3 This raises the following questions. Given that Australians, like those in many other so-called developed countries, are relatively well-off, do they have an obligation to help those in countries who are struggling in conditions of extreme poverty? And if they do, how best should they go about putting this obligation into practice? Several approaches can be taken to answer these questions. Five are presented here for your consideration, though others, as well as combinations of these may also be found. Perspectives: There are various groups ( stakeholders ) that are involved in this issue in some way. In this section, please reflect on the information from the previous section and from the following resources. In reviewing the information from these sources, identify the perspectives and interests of each stakeholder group. Consider the questions provided on the cover sheet of this task in order to guide your reading. Perspective 1: If you can save a life: Peter Singer s Utilitarianism Watch the interview with Peter Singer on the ABC s Compass program: A Good Life: According to Peter Singer, Compass, ABC1 Melbourne, 22:13, September 13, 2009, (video), (transcript). Using a thought experiment of the drowning child, Peter Singer argues that most people would save a life if they could, even if it is at some material cost to themselves. Therefore, he argues, since it is possible to save the lives of children dying from preventable, poverty-related conditions in other parts of the world, we should. We should do this by contributing 5 per cent of our disposable incomes to reputable organisations. In this piece entitled The Singer Solution to World Poverty, published in the New York Times, in 1999, Singer takes his argument even further and with much greater repercussions for those who live in the developed world! To give you an idea of what it costs to save a child, watch this video and read the accompanying article on Malnutrition from UNICEF Australia. Ethical Questions for Reflection What would you be prepared to give up, sacrifice, or risk in order to save the life of drowning child in front of you, who you do not personally know? What would you be prepared to give up, sacrifice, or risk in order to save the life of a dying child

4 somewhere else in the world, whom you neither see, nor know? If there is a difference between your responses to the former and the latter questions, how do you justify this difference? Singer s argument hinges on the idea that people are dying as a result of avoidable poverty-related conditions. They are like drowning children. What criteria might we use to decide who is dying and hence worthy of our aid? Are there any hidden or explicit biases in these criteria that would be to the detriment of other groups? If so, how do we weigh the value of the losses to those groups versus the gains to those who meet the criteria? Singer suggests that the best way to meet the challenges of global poverty is through voluntary donations by individuals to international, non-governmental, not-for-profit organisations. However, if indeed lives can be saved if sufficient money is given to such organisations, should we not make a donation to these organisations obligatory by law? If such donations were made compulsory, could they still be described as morally good deeds, given that, according to many moralists, the moral quality of the action rests in the intention of the acting person? From where else might the moral goodness or badness of an action be derived? Singer is known for the way that he applies his ethical position of utilitarianism across a range of issues. He argues, for example, that the euthanasia of severely disabled children up to one year of age might be morally permissible, if it promotes the greatest happiness for the family and society, and avoids further pain and suffering for the child. Does this affect your response to his application of a utilitarian approach to poverty? Perspective 2: Charity begins at home: Local Charity and Volunteers Watch the YouTube video about Youth Homelessness in Australia, video with subtitles, 3:02, August 21, 2011, Read the following section on page titled Who to Help from a chapter by philosopher Judith Trusted, titled Rich and Poor. In it, she addresses the question of whom we should help. Her answer is that proximity is more important than need. Hence, on this view, though we may have a responsibility to end global poverty, our charity should be directed to those closest to us: Trusted, Jennifer. Rich and Poor. In Introducing Applied Ethics, edited by Brenda Almond, Oxford: Blackwell, Look at the website of Mission Australia for an example of an organisation aimed at alleviating local poverty. Similar views can be derived from neo-darwinian and sociobiological presuppositions regarding altruism and from the ethics of

5 Saint Thomas Aquinas. For the former, watch the presentation by evolutionary biologist Martin Nowak (video only). For the ethics of St Thomas Aquinas see, for example, Thomas answer to the question of whether we ought to love more those who are connected to us by ties of blood, in question 26, article 8 of the second part of the Summa Theologica. For a different interpretation of Thomas Aquinas s Ordering of Love, see: Pope, Stephen J. Aquinas on Almsgiving, Justice and Charity: An Interpretation and Re-assessment, Heythrop Journal 32 (1991): Ethical Questions for Reflection Most religions have some version of the so-called Golden Rule, which is formulated positively in Christianity as, Do unto others as you would have them do unto you and Love your neighbour as yourself. The question of poverty, with its local and global faces, begs the question, who is my neighbour? Who is your neighbour? What does poverty look like in your city, suburb, university and local community? Discuss local charities that you know of and the work they carry out in our society. A hand up not a hand out is an expression often used. What does this mean? What is the moral difference, if any, between donating money or goods to a charity, and donating your time and efforts as a volunteer? Justify your answer. Sociobiologists argue that people do good things for other people (altruistic or eusocial behaviour) either because they are genetically related to one another, or because there is some direct or indirect benefit for the actor. Consider the inequalities between indigenous and non-indigenous people in Australia in light of this argument. Should we draw our moral norms from our biological predispositions? In other words, even if sociobiological or evolutionary analyses of altruism can explain human behaviour, can they tell us what human behaviour is, should we accept them as prescriptive for our moral behaviour? Does an is make an ought? If not, how should we decide on what we ought to do? Apply your answer to calls to close the gap between indigenous and non-indigenous Australians. Can you extend this to, for example, African or Asian countries? Should you?

6 Perspective 3: A rising tide lifts all boats: Free market global capitalism In the video, Power of the Market Poverty, economist Milton Friedman explains how free market capitalism solves the problem of poverty. Access the transcript, Power of the Market Poverty. Friedman s argument is based on the idea that unregulated economic systems will stimulate competition, and that this competition will in turn lead to a regulation of prices and a multiplication of opportunities as more and more people are able to consume goods produced. Therefore, one has no obligation to be charitable, but rather an obligation to be a good employer, employee and consumer. Ethical Questions for Reflection Who stands to benefit most from the free market capitalist model? Who benefits the least? Is there anyone who might not benefit at all? How have you benefitted from free market capitalism? Who, if anyone, has paid the price for these benefits? Even if there is no one who does not benefit from this model, what role should relative poverty and evidence of a widening gap between rich and poor play in our ethical reasoning? Why? What is the fundamental understanding of the human person that underpins the free market model? Do you think this is an accurate model of what it means to be a human person? What other understandings of the human person are available? How important is your understanding of what it means to be a human person in determining your moral attitudes? Perspective 4: Redistribution: Government Aid Listen to this ABC Radio Australia report, Rethinking Australia s Overseas Aid, audio and transcript, 3:49, April 20, 2012, Those in favour of government funded, and hence usually tax-funded aid, argue that without large injections of cash for infrastructure development and the provision of basic goods, poverty can never be alleviated. Since private capital can make no money from such ventures, and private charity is unreliable and often focussed on more local issues, the only solution is to include funding for international aid expenditure in government budgets. Explore the section on the need for more and better aid on the Make Poverty History campaign s website. Find out more about AUSAID, the Australian Government s (and, therefore, your) aid agency.

7 Ethical Questions for Reflection International government-sponsored aid is often closely tied up with a government s political goals. For example, the Australian Government is particularly interested in winning favour and ensuring political and economic stability in the Asian Pacific region. Given these objectives, what are the risks associated with this kind of aid? What say do you, as a voter and taxpayer, have in determining who receives aid from your Government, and under what conditions the aid is received? What happens if the Government provides aid to people you don t think should have it, or under conditions that you don t think are appropriate? As a taxpayer, a portion of your tax contributions go to funding international aid. Similarly, your tax dollars fund local social welfare programs to help the poor in Australia. Does this relieve you of any other obligation to donate money to charities or volunteer your time for the good of others? Why? Imagine it was decided that the Government should not use tax to fund aid or social welfare, resulting in a reduction of taxes on private individuals and businesses. Instead, charity would be left entirely to voluntary individual acts of good will. How might such a situation be a good thing? What problems could arise from such a situation? Who would benefit and who would gain from such a situation? On what grounds could such a policy be justified? On what grounds could such a policy be rejected? Government-funded aid is closely tied to the idea of development, which itself is closely linked to organisations like the World Trade Organisation, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank. What do you understand by the idea of development? How might development be a solution to global poverty? What downsides might there be to development? If giving to a person in need is a good act in itself, can the intention of the giver change the moral quality of the action as a whole? For example, if a person gives to a person in need because she wants to look good in the eyes of others, is her action more or less morally good? What, if any, reasons could there be that might make an apparently charitable act morally bad? Is it a morally good or a morally bad policy that government aid should be tied closely to political objectives, ideology, and the socalled stability and security of the region? What other criteria might there be for the distribution of government aid? Perspective 5: Critique of unjust structures Read the following article by Ciara Gaynor, titled Structural Injustice and MDGs, particularly from the section titled National Level Structural Injustices and the MDGs onwards. Watch the video (with subtitles), Introduction to Systemic Change What is a System? The idea of systemic change is being promoted by the so-called Vincentian family, a group of Roman Catholic Organisations inspired by St Vincent De Paul.

8 This perspective argues that poverty is a consequence of unjust structures, and unless we change the structures in which we are all embedded, poverty can never be eradicated. This means advocating for change at all levels of society to create more just economic and political systems that do not trap people in cycles of poverty, violence, and humiliation. Ethical Questions for Reflection The figure of justice is traditionally depicted as a blindfolded woman carrying a pair of scales and a sword. What do these symbols have to do with how we understand justice? Why is justice blind? Australians often talk about being given a fair go. What conditions are necessary for someone to be deemed to have had a fair go? What structures, be they political or economic, might limit how fair a go a person really gets? Is being free just about having a right to choose, or is it also about having the means to exercise that right? What is the tension between rights to freedom from limitations, and rights to have certain goods like education, political participation, basic shelter met? Who should ensure these rights, and what obligation do the beneficiaries of these rights have? Democracy is one way of contributing to a more just society because it gives each person a voice in determining how their country should be run. Therefore, democracy is often hailed as the solution to unjust structures in the developing world. If democracy can be instituted, justice will have been achieved and poverty will eventually be eradicated. Is this necessarily true? In other words, from the perspective of those who are poorest, what are the moral risks inherent in giving the political franchise to all people? Is it just to lend money to someone who cannot repay you? Is it just to charge higher interest to those people who are less likely to be able to pay you back? Is it just for banks to charge higher interest on loans to poor people? Is it just for development agencies to charge higher interest to developing countries on the basis that there is greater risk of government or economic collapse or default? Why or why not? Is it just to demand repayment from a woman whose husband has died and left her with massive debts over which she had no say in incurring in the first place? Is it just to demand repayment from democratically elected governments for debts that were incurred when the country was governed by a dictatorial regime? Why or why not? Does Australia, or do Australians, participate, knowingly or unknowingly, in unjust structures of global economics, aid, politics, and militarism? How, and is there anything one can do to change this? Where were your shoes made? What may labour conditions be like there?

9 Perspective 6: A Christian Perspective The critique of unjust structures (as per the above perspective) is a key theme in Christian documents addressing the issue of global poverty. In 2006, the World Council of Churches (WCC) met to discuss alternatives to globalisation for the eradication of poverty. Compelled by the AGAPE call the call to love and action 1 the WCC committed themselves to work for the eradication of poverty and inequality through developing economies of solidarity and sustainable communities, and to hold their governments and the international institutions accountable to implement their commitments on poverty eradication and sustainability. 2 Read the introduction to the plenary document for information about their mandate: Commission for Justice, Peace and Creation, World Council of Churches, Alternative Globalization Addressing People and Earth AGAPE: A Call to Love and Action, February 14, 2006, preparatory-and-background-documents/alternative-globalization-addressing-people-and-earth-agape.html. On the scandal of poverty and growing inequality, the World Council of Churches states: Poverty threatens life and human dignity. It is not a destiny, but the very result of the methods and structures of wealth creation and distribution of wealth in individual societies and worldwide. Inequality increases not by accident, but by the way economic and political processes are structured and function. Poverty undermines the very basis of life of billions of children, women and men who are denied not only the benefits of growing wealth, but even of access to basic necessities of life. Over-consumption and over-development on the one side correspond to hunger, disease and suffering on the other. To view the issue of poverty in light of Christian principles is to understand the mandate for action. At the heart of Christian teaching is the call to solidarity with the poor; such solidarity implies the need for action to promote change. Amid the 2007 Federal election campaign, the National Council of Churches in Australia (NCCA) called for action by the Australian government and the community to ensure that Australia s commitments to the Millennium Development Goals are met. Read the Media Release to find out more about this unprecedented step by the NCCA. The call to action underpins the values and work of many charities, including the Catholic charity, Caritas Australia. Caritas mission, to end poverty, promote justice, uphold dignity, is centred on the values and principles of Catholic teaching: Caritas: Our Values. Browse the Caritas website to find out more about the important work they do in their mission to eradicate poverty. 1 Commission for Justice, Peace and Creation, World Council of Churches, Alternative Globalization Addressing Peoples and Earth (AGAPE): A Background Document, (Geneva: World Council of Churches, 2005), 2 Commission for Justice, Peace and Creation, World Council of Churches, Alternative Globalization Addressing People and Earth AGAPE: A Call to Love and Action, February 14, 2006,

10 Ethical Questions: There are numerous questions we need to ask, from an ethical point of view, in relation to the issue of global poverty. Many of these questions have been asked through the examination of the various perspectives. Can you think of any more? Which approach would most effectively promote the common good? Consider all that you have read in this module. Think about the history and background to the issue, and the diversity of perspectives and interests among the various stakeholders. Think about the ethical questions, and how the different positions dispose us to thinking differently about what the stakeholders should or should not do. Now ask yourself what the best course of action would be for securing the common good. What should the Australian Government do to bring about the common good? What should the international community do to bring about the common good? How will the common good be realized in this situation, and who must contribute? And what about us? What should we do? This package has provided you with more than enough resources to complete your task, but if you are hungry for more, visit the ACU library guide: Global Poverty: A Global Responsibility?