Paper Example on Lifeboat Ethics: GOP Support in 2018?

A] Many issues came up with the idea of Garrett Hardin essay "Lifeboat Ethics: The Case against helping the poor." Lifeboat ethics way of not supporting the poor to the rich countries and opposing immigration so the poor can have higher survival in the rich; I believe the Republicans would support the issue in 2018. This is because they argue that America should never issue foreign aid to the poor people in other countries unless they feed America's interest or an economic form of peace keeping. Republicans argue that the poor countries aid should be like welfare, therefore, they strongly oppose unless it is of direct benefit with the United States. Besides, the Republicans believe that they should first prioritize on their own country's problems rather than using the money in helping migrants from other countries. This is in line with Hardin's idea that empowering the rich should never be supported since it disadvantages the rich too. Rather than helping the poor, developed countries such as the United States should use the money for their problem solutions for survival.

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

Save 25%

B] One of the errors made by Hardin's lifeboat ethics is the assumptions towards the poor. Hardin state that "if the poor can always draw food from the world food bank in times of need, the world food bank will have fewer resources" (586). By this, he assumes that when the poor are helped, they will give nothing in return. In his article, he states that the poor can only give back through cheap labor hence bringing political gains between countries which is a charity gain. Secondly in his assumption in his error was that when the poor are provided with the aid, they will result with the need for more help (583). These is not true since when the poor can eat they are able to look for jobs and earn their own money. These will make them richer, and thus they will require less help. Another error in lifeboat ethics that make less sense is the idea that there is less reproduction in the richer countries compared to the developing countries (589). Reason being when the rich provide more aid to the poor, the more wealth they will have. By this, it does not guarantee their reproduction remains the same.

C] No. I believe Hardin's lifeboat ethics will never add value historically since over the years there have been the same problems. In the past, poor countries such as those in Africa were enslaved by the rich white countries rather than helping them. The poor were used in many development projects for free labor which helped them gain more wealth the results being poor Africans. The poor should be treated as humans no matter whether they are rich or not. The world ought to disagree with Hardin's lifeboat as it will bring division among countries and people from different entities. Contrary to his idea when the poor are in need, they should be provided with aid as it will provide the poor with basic needs for livelihood. In instances where children are provided with assistance in the developing countries, it may be the only meal or medication they might get for a long time. Hardin was wrong to look commercials instead of viewing the future of the poor people.

Work Cited

Hardin, Garrett. "Commentary: Living on a LIFEBOAT." BioScience 24.10 (1974): 561-568.