Poll: ZOMG THE GUILT!!!!

[Billion Backs]

There is no guilt because to be guilty about something unfair that you haven't even directly affected would be to assume that the world is fair and that it would be a good thing for the world to be fair.

Which it isn't. Life's a *****, and then you die. I would be thankful for my current somewhat mediocre position in life if there was anyone to thank, but as a non-spiritual nihilist there really isn't anything to thank aside from random chance which isn't exactly a sapient entity in the first place. Thanking it would be like thanking gravity, an utter waste of time.

And given the current economic systems in place, you really can't fix it that easily or at all, if you care about fixing world poverty and all that shit. It's a lot more complicated, you can't solve these problems by just throwing money at it.

I never really said that money is the answer. I used the word wealth which could be anything from money (as you say) to the ability to access water that won't give you Cholera.

Actually I was somewhat referring to the idea of charity.

Which tends to be the same as throwing money into an already corrupt system with little positive outcome except certain smart people getting mansions and yachts.

Or it gets even worse if you involve a religion into it. "Hay guys, we've got food and medsupplies but before we give them to you, accept the power of Jeeeeebus!" Fuck those guys.

Inevitably, the best course of action is to just let it play out without our help. Sure, people will die, but at least some kind of stable economy might appear. Just relying on outside help doesn't do shit. Maybe the reason there are so many people there is because we've been trying to help them too hard. If we didn't, all the excess people would simply die out and sooner or later it would even out everything. Basically, the nature's approach.

 

[jef91]

There is no guilt because to be guilty about something unfair that you haven't even directly affected would be to assume that the world is fair and that it would be a good thing for the world to be fair.

Which it isn't. Life's a *****, and then you die. I would be thankful for my current somewhat mediocre position in life if there was anyone to thank, but as a non-spiritual nihilist there really isn't anything to thank aside from random chance which isn't exactly a sapient entity in the first place. Thanking it would be like thanking gravity, an utter waste of time.

And given the current economic systems in place, you really can't fix it that easily or at all, if you care about fixing world poverty and all that shit. It's a lot more complicated, you can't solve these problems by just throwing money at it.

I never really said that money is the answer. I used the word wealth which could be anything from money (as you say) to the ability to access water that won't give you Cholera.

Actually I was somewhat referring to the idea of charity.

Which tends to be the same as throwing money into an already corrupt system with little positive outcome except certain smart people getting mansions and yachts.

Or it gets even worse if you involve a religion into it. "Hay guys, we've got food and medsupplies but before we give them to you, accept the power of Jeeeeebus!" Fuck those guys.

Inevitably, the best course of action is to just let it play out without our help. Sure, people will die, but at least some kind of stable economy might appear. Just relying on outside help doesn't do shit. Maybe the reason there are so many people there is because we've been trying to help them too hard. If we didn't, all the excess people would simply die out and sooner or later it would even out everything. Basically, the nature's approach.

As much corruption as there is, lets steer away from a religious debate yeh?

 

[Billion Backs]

So labelling my dilemma as White Guilt enabled you to call me a racist lol nice. I understand what you're saying, however in the case of slavery, nothing can be done to change the past. In the case of the distribution of wealth - this issue will continue for a loooooong time I think. So, to counter your aggressive tone, using the label "white guilt" is fucking stupid.

I don't remember calling you racist.

In my humble experiences, "you" can be a rather broad word helping you establish more personal level with the reader. Same goes for my apparent "aggressive tone".

Poverty has to exist for our current economic systems to work. It always did. To get rid of poverty, you must get rid of, you know, being rich. If you've got a working model of communism that isn't shit, you're welcome to try it. Otherwise, all you can do is treat symptoms and not the disease - because apparently you expect life to be fair for everyone, so I assume you would view things that make it less fair as something negative. No harm in that.

Now that's somewhat aggressive tone =p

 

[Valiance]

Clearly, you're a terrible terrible person for being born where you were and being brought up how you were.

Hey, you can always toss money in a donation jar, that might alleviate some of your guilt for the day.

 

[Billion Backs]

As much corruption as there is, lets steer away from a religious debate yeh?

It's not a religious debate. No matter how I might like to bash religion at times, this isn't it.

I'm just stating the facts. A lot of charities are religious in nature. Out of all those people, it's pretty safe to assume a good portion are nice folk who are realistically trying to help out.

That, however, doesn't mean that the scenario I described is any less disgusting then it is. It's basic manipulation. If you're a charity, religious or secular, perhaps you should be focusing on actually helping the situation instead of spending money building churches and manipulating the native population into your religion using food and medicine as a leverage. Okay, the latter applies more to some religious charities, I'm not aware of any secular churches.

You know, sort of like that ol' South Park episode.

Guess what I'm trying to say is that any kind of manipulation in this case would probably be considered immoral by people following some sort of moral code, no matter what the origins of said manipulation are, religious or secular. I can't think up of a secular example at the moment, but I guess any type of exploitation of the native folk for your own reasons under pretense of charity, using supplies as a leverage, would be a pretty despicable thing from some kind of moral perspective.

 

[SonOfIkaros]

I do feel guilty. I can never get myself to do anything about it though, and I suppose that's where all the guilt's coming from. Still, it's depressing to think about how I spend enough money on silly things like video games and music to feed several families in Third World countries.

What's also bugging me is that I love video games, and I play them frequently, but it's a luxury hobby that consumes an awful lot of resources. I think it's sad that a lot of resources have to be spent just so I can shoot random dudes in the face. And still I can't get myself do the slightest thing about it.

 

[AVATAR_RAGE]

I care but dont feel guity about it because it is ot my fault

 

[Hurr Durr Derp]

The way things are right now, if everything was distributed equally everyone would be poor.

Things could stand to be a lot more equal than they are now of course, but I think it's best to take things step by step. How can we even hope to improve the economy of the third world when we can barely keep our own economies running? Why would we try to give people in Africa a better life when there are still people living on the streets in our own countries?

I'd say everyone should look at their own problems before meddling with someone else's. After all, decades of foreign aid have done little but strengthen the receiving nations' reliance on that aid.

 

[jef91]

I do feel guilty. I can never get myself to do anything about it though, and I suppose that's where all the guilt's coming from. Still, it's depressing to think about how I spend enough money on silly things like video games and music to feed several families in Third World countries.

What's also bugging me is that I love video games, and I play them frequently, but it's a luxury hobby that consumes an awful lot of resources. I think it's sad that a lot of resources have to be spent just so I can shoot random dudes in the face. And still I can't get myself do the slightest thing about it.

This is very similar to how I feel. I still love gaming, and I would even go so far as to say I am addicted to it. I love music even more I just wish everyone could enjoy a more acceptable lifestyle, relatively speaking. At least music is something that can't be taken away from you.

 

[jef91]

The way things are right now, if everything was distributed equally everyone would be poor.

Things could stand to be a lot more equal than they are now of course, but I think it's best to take things step by step. How can we even hope to improve the economy of the third world when we can barely keep our own economies running? Why would we try to give people in Africa a better life when there are still people living on the streets in our own countries?

I'd say everyone should look at their own problems before meddling with someone else's. After all, decades of foreign aid have done little but strengthen the receiving nations' reliance on that aid.

Hmm yes this is true, however in situations where the aid is carefully controlled and organised this doesn't happen. These situations use the aid as a stepping stone to the people being able to help themselves e.g. tradespeople get sent overseas to places like iraq to teach people carpentry, building etc. in order to rebuild their community after a period of war.

 

[Billion Backs]

The way things are right now, if everything was distributed equally everyone would be poor.

Things could stand to be a lot more equal than they are now of course, but I think it's best to take things step by step. How can we even hope to improve the economy of the third world when we can barely keep our own economies running? Why would we try to give people in Africa a better life when there are still people living on the streets in our own countries?

I'd say everyone should look at their own problems before meddling with someone else's. After all, decades of foreign aid have done little but strengthen the receiving nations' reliance on that aid.

Now that, that is thinking I can agree with.

Too much foreign aid to underdeveloped countries tends to promote reliance on said aid, rarely improving the situation and only making it all worse in the end - not only the people you're trying to help are still living in a shithole, they're also siphoning your own money.

No matter how inhumane this might sound, I think sometimes it might be a better idea to leave it be. Nature will take care of the rest. There's a reason why when there are too many of one specie for it's environment, a famine starts and a lot of them die out.

While we tend to look at humans at something more then animals, I don't think we have the resources to fix it otherwise unless very extreme measures take place, but even then the fix is not guaranteed to be permanent or even at all lasting. Just let the nature take it's course, it's pretty clear that those countries can't support so many people and unless you're going to emigrate them (where?) there's not much to do.

On an unrelated note, it's kind of funny how various "natural non-modified food" movements tend to act all humanitarian despite the fact that modified crops is the only thing that allowed us to accumulate such large population. Without certain advances in genetically modified grains in the middle of 20th century, I'd wager there would be some billion less people or more.

 

[thekrimzonguard]

Hey, the top 1% of Americans hold 95% of all Americans' wealth. I imagine it's similar here in the UK. Do you think they feel guilty? Relative wealth is an important thing when it comes to perception of quality of life. Many subsistence farmers are happier than millionaires.

That said, the proportion of the world population that lacks access to food, sanitation and clean water is something we should feel guilty about. The resources imbalance is just as important and unfair as the wealth imbalance.

 

[Chrono212]

Can you directly attribute other peoples suffering to you?

If not, then you have no reason to feel guilty as it is not you who is making them suffer.

...and now someone will say 'but teh societyz'. Just had 13 years of that, didn't work out too good.

 

[TheRundownRabbit]

My fellow escapists...

I encountered a moral dilemma today and am interested in surveying you guys:

20% of the world's population has 80% of the wealth (this comes from Pareto's Principle)

I live in a very wealthy country, and as I consume my quality goods and services, I can never shake this guilt. I wonder: "How is this at all fair? My laptop costs more than a great number of people in the world earn in a year".

How does this make you feel?

P.S. I understand a lot of you will reply with things like "just stop caring, thats how I get through the day", or "perhaps you've never had a double quarter pounder while you're sobering up after a night out partying in the city". Do not waste your time, go to another thread.

Dont feel guikty if you worked hard to earn your money or goods. If you did do the work, you deserve it. So did you work for your money?

 

[Nanaki316]

I'm hugely grateful for everything I have. From my material possessions to my two beautiful children.
I do feel guilty, not constantly but I do get pangs of it sometimes from something as simple as a little waste of food. I hate it because I know there are people starving out there and stuff.
Don't get me wrong I'm by no means rich. Me and my partner struggle to make ends meet but I am always aware that we have some things that some people could only ever dream of.

 

[BlindMessiah94]

Considering how life isn't exactly a cake walk for me, and I've had to earn everything I have, I will never feel guilty, nor should I. The people that feel guilty for the things they have in life need to ask themselves why they feel said guilt. If they acquired everything they own through hard work and sacrifice then what is there to feel guilty about?

 

[jef91]

My fellow escapists...

I encountered a moral dilemma today and am interested in surveying you guys:

20% of the world's population has 80% of the wealth (this comes from Pareto's Principle)

I live in a very wealthy country, and as I consume my quality goods and services, I can never shake this guilt. I wonder: "How is this at all fair? My laptop costs more than a great number of people in the world earn in a year".

How does this make you feel?

P.S. I understand a lot of you will reply with things like "just stop caring, thats how I get through the day", or "perhaps you've never had a double quarter pounder while you're sobering up after a night out partying in the city". Do not waste your time, go to another thread.

Dont feel guikty if you worked hard to earn your money or goods. If you did do the work, you deserve it. So did you work for your money?

I suppose so, I never got pocket money or anything without some sort of work involved. And then after I left home I've worked for my money as well.

 

[Danny Ocean]

I do feel guilt, but only for those who can't live through no fault of their own. I don't feel guilt for the Shao-Lin monks, for example. I bet they're all pretty happy chappies. They chose to live poor.

This does extend, into the intranational sphere, too. I help the homeless whenever I can.