Essay on Gandhi & Hardin: Charity vs Economic Progress

Introduction

Gandhi Mahatma and Garrett Hardin were two scholars who argued that charity was not in favor of economic progress. Their views were based on different opinions but directed to one idea. Gandhi who was an inspiring leader to many utilized his societal position in making people understand the need for leaving the gap between the rich and poor to exist. On the other hand, Hardin ensured people understood the need for the rift between the rich and the poor. His reasoning was based on metaphoric reasoning; the "lifeboat" was one of the metaphors he used. There existed some differences and similarities in the two arguments as the context explains.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Self Interest

Both Gandhi and Garrett Hardin made arguments based on the self-interests of rich people in the society. According to Gandhi, it is impossible to help people through charity yet they are not working for their living (Dasgupta 32). The rich need to consider that the poor have to work for their own interest. On the other hand, Hardin thinks that control of the "lifeboat" may be lost if the poor are allowed into the boat. This argument meant that the poor need to keep being controlled by the rich in the society for economic progress to be witnessed.

Generosity and Charity

The two scholars based their arguments on generosity and charity. Gandhi denied charity stating that it is not good for social progress. He also gave examples such as the supply of food to poor people which will, in turn, make them lazy (Dasgupta 34). Hardin also explained that generosity is bound to make more people to be allowed into the same lifeboat causing loss of control. The rich need to avoid generosity so that society can progress economically. Sharing of resources was said by Hardin to cause pollution in the same resources.

Consequences

Both the arguments were based on the consequences that were bound to happen if rich people turned generous to the poor. According to Gandhi, the provision of food to beggars is bound to make them lazy, criminals and hypocrites (Dasgupta 33). He, therefore, argued that it was better for the governments to make begging a crime that is punishable, this would ensure progress. Hardin also related the inclusion of poor people in the rich people's lifestyle to lack of control. These two descriptions are seen to be based on the consequences of charity to the poor.

To maintain the safety factor, there is a need for the rich to keep being in their boats as the poor keep knocking for entrance (The Tragedy 1:15). Through this argument by Hardin, it is clear that the poor need to keep knocking doors of the poor asking for jobs so that they can be paid for their work. The same case is with Gandhi's reasoning, he advocates for the establishment of institutions which make the beggars work hard so that they are paid for the work. This is then bound to make progress in the economic sector.

Requirements

The arguments by both Gandhi and Hardin have requirements for the rich and the poor. As per Gandhi, the rich should ensure they create opportunities to allow the poor to have income, they should also ensure they get access to cheap food (Dasgupta 35). This can help in keeping them in their place without having to supply them free resources such as food. On the other hand, Hardin argued that the rich should keep the boat capacities in their mind when dealing with the poor who keep on knocking their door. This consideration would help in keeping the two social groups apart.

Garbage

Both Gandhi and Hardin explain the effects of being charitable through the example of garbage accumulation and environmental pollution. The accumulation of garbage according to Gandhi is bound to make the poor sick hence death will be inevitable since they cannot afford health care. Hardin used pollution of the ecosystem through human activities to tell about the effects that are to be experienced when the rich are trying to be generous to the poor (The Tragedy 1: 13-22). This included all living organisms being affected; a situation that could not be controlled.

Symbolism

The uses of symbolism in expressing one's ideas making it become enjoyable. The use of "Lifeboat" by Hardin to symbolize rich people made the explanation to sound enjoyable to the audience. The poor people were placed in the swimming water to show how they were struggling. Inclusion of the poor in the boat may make the boat to lose control. The symbolism seems to be lacking from the explanations of Gandhi, he explains the way life works directly without the involvement of any object to represent another.

According to Hardin, there is no need of introduction of more cattle in a homestead yet pasture is an issue, it may make the pasture to be depleted (The Tragedy 35:00). There is a need to consider what is available in making decisions to help the poor. People should avoid the commons by avoiding sharing with the poor. This symbolism is not available in the explanation of Gandhi's idea, he used direct explanation. Involvement of garbage is used to explain how diseases may affect stability. Garbage in Hardin's context is a symbolism of what it may look like to mix the two social groups of people.

Customs and Norms

Gandhi condemned the way Christians and Hindus advocated for charity (Dasgupta 33). According to him, the two were basing their argument on the ethical view rather than the consequences. Hindus have ways of helping the poor. He seemed to think that such norms may make more people adopt bad behavior such as being criminals. Hardin did not consider religious view or norms in explaining the ideas. His ideas were placed in a general outlook to involve all cultures and religious groups. According to Gandhi, the charity cannot be a virtue, for Hardin, generosity cannot be possible when people live in their "lifeboats."

Exemptions

Exemptions are seen to be included in the discussion by Gandhi; this means that despite him being against charity, he still supports it in some contexts (Dasgupta 36). His support for charity towards the crippled, sick and other disabled people made the discussion to look considerate. Hardin did not consider any group of people as exempt from the discussion. He said that generosity is an impossible thing in the "lifeboat" context to mean that even the disabled poor should still be part of the swimmers in the water. This situation symbolizes the harsh economic challenges that people physically challenged may face.

Personal View

I support the argument that Gandhi gave, it is true that charity is bound to make people become lazy. Poor people tend to live their life as beggars; this makes them avoid working hard for money. The rich keep sympathizing with them as they offer free food and money. There is a need for everyone who is rich to offer the poor with job opportunities; this decision can make them work hard so that they can be paid. Laziness makes them develop evil minds when the rich deny them what they are begging.

I cannot agree that generosity is inevitable. According to the symbolism, it can be inevitable. But according to normal life, generosity is part of human life. Generosity brings about harmony and peace among people in society. People should care for one another for progress to be ensured. Caring for the property as explained by Hardin seemed to make the poor to look like useless in the community. In normal life, there are no limited capacities that should be considered by people. Capacities keep shifting as several developments are achieved all over the world.

To sum up, the two points of view in explaining why charity should not be part of human life serve well. Gandhi's view, however, explains properly with examples. In terms of symbolism, Hardin explains the real situation, making to be understood in different ways. Involvement of garbage in both explanations aid in showing the effects that charity and generosity can have in society. According to me, I support the idea that the rich should establish institutions that employ the poor making them to raise their income through work. Ensuring the poor get access to their necessities through affordable means is an important consideration in making the rich and the poor progress peacefully. Resources need to be shared for social progression to be witnessed over the world.

Works Cited

Dasgupta, Ajit K. Gandhi's economic thought / Ajit K. Dasgupta Routledge London; New York 1996.

Pavel Cadek. "The Tragedy of the Commons." YouTube, 17 January 2012, https://youtu.be/w1heTNwnJJ4