Analysis of "Lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against Helping the Poor"
Hardin, in his article, “Lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against Helping the poor,” purposes to address the question about helping the poor countries by the rich countries. He illustrates his idea using the lifeboat metaphor by explaining the possible dangers in accommodating more people than the capacity or alternatively the dilemma of picking ten people from the one hundred desperate others to fill the boat to a maximum capacity of sixty people hence endangering the whole lot. Analyzing the article, Hardin succeeds in his purpose of informing and persuading the readers by articulating his claims, however, he fails to explore all the related options in solving the problem. Hardin’s target audience is the countries wanting to help the poor and the international humanitarian organizations. He also tries to elaborate the possible harm that can result from the assistance.
Hardin’s Main Argument on Population Increase and Lack of Responsibility
In the article, Hardin’s main argument revolves around population increase and the general lack of responsibility. For instance, he portrays the impossibility of accommodating all the one hundred desperate people swimming around the lifeboat. He likens this scenario with the two thirds poor countries that look up to the one-third rich countries. Moreover, there is a great disparity in population increase between the rich countries and the poor countries with a 0.8% and 3.3% annual increase respectively (Hardin). This argument makes sense to the intended audience. In his illustration of the United States assisting an equal population from poor as its current one, the U.S. would eventually be outweighed population wise by almost a ratio of 1:8 in just 21 years. In addition, Hardin states the lack of responsibility of the poor countries to plan for the future population increase and emergencies adding up to the depletion of both food and common resources and ultimately further destruction (Hardin).
Other Claims Against Giving Aid to Poor Countries
Hardin puts across several other claims in his bid to discourage the giving of aid to poor countries as identified from the article. These include; the existence of selfish interest groups seeking to benefit from the aid policies. Hardin supports this claim with the illustration of how the food for peace programs led to gains to the farmers, transport sector, shipping lines and grain elevators. Secondly, poor planning by poor countries from as simple as saving surplus produce for the sake of unpredictable food shortage emergencies. In this claim, he goes on to support it with the biblical narrative of how Joseph taught pharaoh in Egypt more than two millenniums ago. The third is the destruction of natural resources which he refers to as the ‘commons’, due to an overload in population. In support of this claim, he acknowledges that food supply to everybody can be met but clean air, clean beaches and an environment capable of sustaining the population cannot be achieved. He supports this claim with the ‘tragedy of the commons’ stating that a crowded world will inevitably encounter a mutual uncontrollable ruin (Hardin).
Evaluation of Hardin’s Claims
In the evaluation of Hardin’s claims, Hardin convincingly used numbers, history and probable arguments to support all his claims. It is evident that the evidence is typical, accurate and have relevance in relation to the problem. However, they are insufficient in the case that aid should not only be monetary or in the form of food. Therefore, it is right to say that Hardin has partially examined the arguments of opposing opinions. However, he failed to explore other aspects of aid that rich countries can offer to elevate the poverty state in the unprivileged countries such as investment, advice, market provision and education that can indirectly solve the poverty problem without interfering with the rich countries' resources or even leading to immigration. Hence the article does not factor in all the related options and knowledge in the subject matter.
Consistency and Organization of the Article
The article was consistent and well organized. There was an impeccable flow of claims with supporting and practical arguments. This makes it readable and easy to understand. Hardin establishes his credibility through the use of real data and examples while his simplicity such as the story of Joseph and Pharaoh makes it easy for a reader to believe him.
References
Hardin, Garrett. "Lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against Helping The Poor By Garrett Hardin - The
Garrett Hardin Society - Articles." Garretthardinsociety.org. N.p., 2015. Web. 26 Feb.
2018.
