The latest edition of our World News in Brief bulletin includes updates on an aid convoy attacked in South Sudan, the impact of the Ebola outbreak on poverty and the UN’s continued commitment to ending the death penalty.
https://t.co/cUKKCjUkvC
#country
UN News
Cross-Border & Refugee Crisis
1 engagementsNO, ELON MUSK DID NOT MURDER THIRD WORLD PEOPLE WHO DIED BECAUSE OF THEIR OWN PEOPLE’S FAILURES:
Let’s review @NickKristo’s morally illiterate assertion about who @elonmusk “killed” these people who may or may not be any more real than Nick’s fanciful rape dog victims:
“Yamah Freeman was a 23-year-old woman who died in childbirth because you stopped paying for the diesel for ambulances in her part of Liberia.“
What is the name of someone who didn’t kill Yamah? Because no one else in the world paid for her diesel. Also, where did the obligation to pay for ambulance diesel arise such that the failure to pay for it makes Elon responsible for the consequences of their lack of diesel? Why would the United States be responsible to buy Liberia diesel? Isn’t that Liberia job?
“Gbessey Kiadu, age 1, died of malaria because of your cuts in Liberia.“
How exactly is Elon responsible for a kid dying of malaria? If there was a moral obligation to provide him medicine, and his own country won’t do it, isn’t the entire world responsible for the death? Why is it uniquely America’s responsibility, and specifically Elon’s?
“Ibrahim Koroma, an infant, died of AIDS in Sierra Leone after you interrupted HIV supplies…Achol Deng was an 8-year-old girl with HIV in South Sudan who died when you cut funding for the health care worker who provided her medicines.”
Did Elon Musk cause their parents to have the unprotected sex that we’ve spent billions educating people like the parents not to have? Again, hasn’t literally everyone else on earth not bought the AIDS supplies referenced here? Why is it Elon who killed them? Does anyone else have joint or several responsibility for these deaths, like, I don’t know, the parents who had unprotected sex despite decades of education and free prophylactics we paid for?
In this moral construction, there’s no limiting principle. Apparently, we are directly responsible for ameliorating the consequences of people in the Third World's actions. No, there is no such liability in law. There’s no such liability in any common-sense moral construction. This is a rhetorical ploy designed to appeal to stupid people.
There is no moral obligation for the United States to save every Third World person. The United States must make choices about its spending, recognizing that every dollar it spends is borrowed from future American generations. Note also that @NickKristof expects absolutely nothing from the people of the Third World. They are helpless and without agency. Sounds pretty racist to me.
In any case, if Nicholas wanted to help support my view, which is that we must cut foreign aid dramatically, I couldn’t ask for more. His insistence that any help we provide be provided in perpetuity and that we assume moral responsibility for anyone we help is the best possible way I can think of to convince people not to help at all in the future, because once they do, they can never stop or change, no matter what the circumstances are for themselves. They are permanently responsible for foreign people, who, incidentally, continue to do many of the things that cause their own problems, such as having unprotected sex despite endless dollars spent to teach them not to.
Way to go, Nick. Thanks for the help.
#country
Kurt Schlichter✓
Cross-Border & Refugee Crisis
6 engagements