Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Alex's avatar

George Orwell reference in the 5th paragraph!

Clarity & Spectacle's avatar

There are people who would be moved to act if they understood the suffering of others, people who would not be, and there are people who actually take pleasure in seeing and even causing suffering. Finally, and most oddly, there are people who have accepted racial, political, or philosophical dogmas that cause them to actively fight aid for others.

It has been essential to the success of humankind that each of us focus greater attention on those nearest to us, to family, to neighbor, to community, etc.. Where the moral dillema becomes obvious, I think, is when a person has all the wealth they could possibly need to minimize their suffering and the suffering of those close to them and they choose to convert every additional increment of wealth into indulgence.

You theorized about the English professor justifying the evils committed on the people of Russia and the Soviet Union for the supposed greater good, but just last year, we had the wealthiest man in the world, in the employ of another billionaire, end the vast majority of programs operated by USAID. The decline in health and the present and future loss of life that has resulted is rarely discussed, but even the lowest estimates are devastating. I tend to think the first of these two men was motivated by wrongheaded racial and political ideas, while the man who employed him was motivated by cruelty and selfishness. Neither would be moved were they more proximate to the suffering.

The (now frozen) USAID cut impact counter: https://www.impactcounter.com/dashboard?view=table&sort=title&order=asc

UCLA study of impact of USAID cuts: https://ph.ucla.edu/news-events/news/research-finds-more-14-million-preventable-deaths-2030-if-usaid-defunding

Lancet study: https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140-6736(25)01186-9/fulltext

19 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?