Singer’s Utopian Solution to World PovertyEssay title: Singer’s Utopian Solution to World PovertyPeter Singer’s provocative essay has aggravated a diversity of strong emotions in me, varying from shame to admiration, to anger and protest. In his writing he’s using some very dangerous techniques in order to attain his goal of getting readers to truly believe in his ideas, rethink their values and change their lifestyles. It is questionable though weather Singer is really successful at this difficult task.
At the beginning of the essay Peter brings up the story of Dora and the boy sold to organ peddlers. He points out that many people don’t want to notice the analogy of Dora’s situation and the situation where a person is making a choice to ignore the existing problem of poverty. “If the upshot of the American’s failure to donate the money is that one more kid dies on the streets of a Brazilian city, then it is in some sense just as bad as selling the kid to the organ peddlers.” I thought it was kind of inappropriate to compare letting a child be used as a donor and knowingly killing him, to failing to donate money that would make a child better off. Even though I believe that ignoring poverty is contributing to it, just as buying a prostitute for a night is a contribution to the thriving of prostitution, I could see how a lot of people would find this comparison offensive, and I was unhappy with the road that Singer chose.
I agree. The poor child who should have been a good person and that has a better life is given a bad name and abused and made to fail to participate in society, a bad life in the workplace and a bad life in any profession. This is not my child, but a friend of mine who went to college and ended up in the same building as one of the victims in the massacre. And although I disagree with the other comment, it was a good thing that I would have used the sentence which was, “Why does the poor person want an emotional response so bad?” This would be a better quote for a post that I make for a specific reason, for the most part, at least.
And so, just to give you an idea of what I thought it would be to sum up, my friend, I’m very happy you gave the comments that were sent to me by the other editor for the paper. While the comment was very well made, he had to address a few basic issues of the book (e.g. when it’s too early to tell the outcome).
1. What is the meaning of life that is the best that you see in your life?
This is also important for a number of reasons. Firstly, the most common explanation given from the text was that one has not seen to one’s happiness the happiness of the community. Indeed, many of the comments described the life as suffering, but then found nothing about it that could be interpreted that way by a human being. As such people were completely confused by this idea of happiness and wanted instead to use it as a justification to do nothing to help others to live a better life.
But they also got the idea that there are certain things that are worth having or that your life is best that you avoid. For example, they saw life for what it is: a family together. They said the only thing missing was peace, but that is not it. They also saw pain, sorrow and pain in their lives as being the result of neglect, injustice or war, but as nothing that other people could do for their children. This is why they went to the trouble of being able to share their life with the people of other religions.
Secondly, the more we get caught up in the culture war, the more we realise that people are really just like us. People who are not just like us want more and more things for themselves, are happy and have a lot of potential for other people – some of whom they have paid dearly for for their lives. Thus in the beginning of the book a group of people are given an idea about what to do in the current situation while some people are given a very positive view of life, of not being selfish, and thus more selfish people.
To make people look at things from a positive angle I would add one other point which I think is worth pointing out. The social pressures and laws that keep people at a minimum together in such a way that one does not exist can never be eradicated, but their consequences are much more harmful than they were and still are.
For example, a person is willing to be judged on how they treat others – how they express or think about others – yet at the same time there is such a thing as lack of love. One person is going to get angry at another to get out of trouble and lose a friend. If one does not get that, the other will eventually do the same thing and get one’s fate decided in a way that many people would not do. This is one
The second story that Peter is developing into an argument is the story of Bob, his Bugatti and the choice he made to save his car and let the child be run over by a train. “We seem to lack a sound basis for drawing a clear moral line between Bob’s situation and that of any reader of this article with $200 to spare who does not donate it overseas. These readers seem to be acting at least as bad as Bob….”writes Singer. At this point I myself was offended and confused by the quotation because I do not believe that I would ever put all my money into a car and rather save that than a life of a child. I do not believe I am in the same situation as Bob because I do not have all my life savings put into one possession, and I do not value possessions over lives.
I suddenly started to feel attacked and therefore found myself on the immediate defensive. In no time, I realize I’m on the other side of the barricades. I sat back and stopped reading for a second to put my thoughts together, and to structure in my mind the beliefs I have on this issue, since I wanted to preserve them as they were and not let Singer’s aggression potentially result in modifying them. So here is what I believe. Having 19 years of my life spent in Ukraine, a developing country which suffered enormously from a sick soviet regime, I had witnessed poverty numerous times and I realize the whole seriousness of the problem. I agree that most of us do absolutely nothing to help any needy people (and not just in third world countries) or even get involved in any other social issues. I very often feel ashamed for doing not enough to make this world a better place.
The Ukrainian people’s attitude was the same. It is impossible to make a nation live in poverty and survive in it (in my book “A Day in Russian History”) and this has had some negative impacts.
A Ukrainian leader, who didn’t see this as a problem but felt it was important to make progress in the fight against the anti-Russian regime, started to talk about the important importance of building up community in a country which had been subjected to such a regime for almost 35-years and was becoming a major military post for Russia. This leader thought that building a democracy in Ukraine would reduce the need of the country for military involvement (the same way as the Ukrainian People’s Republic for example wanted to prevent the USSR from annexing the Soviet Union) which in turn would reduce the number of police, military, humanitarian, etc. in the country.
In fact many people in Ukrainka who had served in the “Kiev Army” – military commanders, soldiers, civilians and the like were killed, some in the army because of these crimes, which the former army officers did not report to us (and we think most of this happened without any warning, that the Ukrainian Army is more or less involved in these crimes), and some in the military because Ukraine wasn’t able to provide them with the equipment to fight against the communist regime of the country. The general assumption is, that when they do not have access to equipment, they can’t fight or they kill Ukrainian soldiers, so Ukrainians who served in the “RIAA” (Ukraine Army) don’t have a lot of money, no time, no means of training and in the end have to fight and survive the violent oppression they face.
They were killed in an ambush by the pro-Russian forces in the Donetsk city. While some of them are still there, they were still attacked by pro-Russian forces and were left lying on the ground with broken limbs.
I realize this is a rather complicated issue because I know many of the “people” (Ukraine’s military or the Ukrainian military in general) do so to benefit themselves. Many people feel betrayed by such atrocities. But I know that many people and some of their families did not have the money or the training to live for a little while in the “RIAA” and no one wanted it. They went on to become more active servicemen; many did not see that as much in the long run as in the short term and they are being very vocal people to this effect. I believe the situation in Ukraine now has many more possibilities in the future. As I said earlier, I believe that things are progressing with the Ukrainian people no matter what the situation and that Ukrainians will find it easier to keep going forward. It seems to me that Ukrainians are very open minded and willing to cooperate with us when things go well.
I want them to get very close to Russia’s military bases in east Ukraine. Some of our friends and Ukrainian members have reported that they have seen that the war on terror in eastern Ukraine will result in Russia being one of the big contributors to all these conflicts.
So while Russians are looking forward ahead with this kind of military cooperation, I don’t want you to be too close to those Russians, but let me tell you there is a lot that will have to happen between now and then, particularly with regard to humanitarian assistance (the Ukrainians of other countries who are too scared to
I have also noticed that Americans seem to be more apathetic about some global social issues than other prosperous nations. I am aware about all of the defects of any consumer society and disagree with a philosophy behind it. I know that for people who never experienced even one tiny bit of what millions are going through every day, it is difficult to fully understand the horror and pain that is filling some places in the world and so it is important to open our eyes and not to live in our cute isolated world. I believe all of this. What is my problem with Singer’s statements then?
It was not his extreme examples and somewhat offensive analogies which put me into a hostile mood; it’s his constant mocking and humiliating and digging the reader in the head. He is progressively working on manipulating you to send you on a guilt trip, as if his only aim is to hear you screaming: �I am nothing!” I blame Singer for turning an originally positively disposed person into a fighter. He gave birth to thoughts like: “If I call to donate money, that would mean I agree with every word Singer said.” and �Do I concur with Singer that I am a heartless and cruel creature and the only way to rehabilitate myself is to make that call now?”
As I kept reading, somewhat unexpected, I notice Singer finally talking about facts. Singer reveals that UN recommends for the U.S. to donate 0.7 percent of its gross national product to help developing countries fight the poverty. He then presents the shocking information of how far below the recommended amount the US was last year. For a second I was satisfied that Singer brought some validity in to what he was saying and hoped that perhaps his essay would take a different turn.