Human Jackals in Benevolent Clothing

Via Drudge, we get this load of charmers from the UK's The Independent: Could the tsunami disaster be a turning point for the world?

THE RIGHT REV TIM STEVENS, Bishop of Leicester

I am hopeful, but we must see a real commitment to changing the economic relationships between the West and the poorer countries. As well as charitable giving, we need to tackle these fundamental issues.

Be wary of anyone who wants to "change the economic relationships" among anyone outside of the consent of those within the relationship. I have little doubt Bishop Stevens, when pressed, would advocate the use of force and coercion to make those changes.

RORY BREMNER, Comedian

On an individual level, it is not just about what we are prepared to give, but what we are prepared to give up. Having left Afghanistan and Iraq in their wake, can our leaders be trusted to fight a war on poverty?

And just to whom does he expect us to give up our wealth? The first comment should be seen for what it really is: a near-naked call for people to surrender their property to the state/NGO as the state/NGO sees fit.

His second comment has a twinkling of potential, but he ruins it with wanting another disastrous "war on something" and those wars always end up hurting the peaceful noncombatants more than the intended target.

KANYA KING, Founder, Mobo awards

No longer can we exist in isolation when we see lives and livelihoods being destroyed. All of us need to be pro-active to change things, but we have shown that public opinion and the media can influence government.

Actually, I can exist in isolation when I see lives and livelihoods being destroyed. I've generally done it since I was little and I continue to do it today. The magnitude of the tsunami disaster doesn't change fundamental aspects of reality.

STEPHEN TINDALE, Executive director, Greenpeace

It seems churlish to say it, but while it's relatively easy for most of us to give £50, it would be much harder for us to make the changes in our modern lifestyles that are needed if we are to move to a fairer world.

churl•ish
adj.

1. Of, like, or befitting a churl; boorish or vulgar.
   
2. Having a bad disposition; surly: “as valiant as the lion, churlish as the bear” (Shakespeare).
   
3. Difficult to work with, such as soil; intractable.

The bastards aren't satisfied with your money. They want to you live your life on their terms and according to their values.

DR GHAYASUDDIN SIDDIQUI, Leader of Muslim Parliament

Compassion, care and concern for mankind joins each of us - whatever our faith or ethnicity. The tragedy has shown there is a formula on which all mankind can be united to help each other. Mankind has moved forward.

Finally, something that isn't a demand for the government to tinker with our lives even more. While I am an atheist and I think those who base their lives on faith have special problems of their own, I don't think the values prized above are negative.

BILL BAILEY, Comedian

It was the same after 11 September. Everyone said it was a great opportunity to try to understand the world but it was used by the US as a reason to go on a rampaging adventure in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Man, is it getting trendy in here, or is it just me?

MO MOWLAM, Former cabinet minister

I think most people will simply forget. Some charities say people will even forget how much they pledged to give. I wish it would change our attitudes to other people in other countries, but I'm afraid that it won't.

A realist! Better than most of the previous, I can't deny.

SIR JONATHON PORRITT, Environmentalist

The response reveals a deep sense of empathy that could be of lasting value. If it is just a philanthropic flash, then we have seen those before, but if people gain a sense of their interdependence, we will be better off.

I'm only as interdependent as I choose to be, Sir. Only the value I place on civilized living and social interaction keeps me from just trotting off into the wilderness with a large middle finger painted on the back of my jacket. The deep woven links among consumers, producers, distributors, and the like I value as well. Trade interdependence is something I'm fine with, but in a proper free market, there is no real "dependence" - only the desire for stability, value, and good relations.

DINOS CHAPMAN, Artist

Western capitalism demands that people must be impoverished. I cannot think that anything will change this year, because we are the ones who have made the world the way it is. I don't believe in altruism.

If you don't believe in altruism (that has got to be a typo or something), then what sort of system do you propose replace western capitalism? It certainly has little to do with altruism on a fundamental level.

If I cared for his explanation, I'd ask this guy a few things. If "Western capitalism demands that people must be impoverished," then

• How would businesses make money off the destitute masses? A giant share of economic activity occurs among the middle and upper classes.
  
• What is the reason for the massive levels of corporate charity to all manner of anti-poverty causes?
  
• Why does the West have the best standards of living compared to the rest of the planet?

This is a man who is deeply confused about the world.

LORD HURD OF WESTWELL, Former foreign secretary

The danger is that resources which might have gone to Africa will go to this instead. While huge publicity continues to be given to the tsunami, human beings are killing each other in Iraq, and places like Darfur.

Here we have the classic bureaucrat dilemma: to whom should get all this wonderful coerced wealth? Everyone has differing opinions as to the importance of helping the various troubled areas of the world. This is one reason to let people keep their wealth to distribute as they see fit.

SIR MAX HASTINGS, Journalist and historian

We have to bear in mind that we have been here before. There have been tragedies before, and many fine things have been said, a lot of them by the US. We just have to hope that in this case they will follow through.

"Your government promised $200 million for the relief efforts."

"And?"

"Your government hasn't followed through with its promise."

"So? That money doesn't belong to the government. We gave it to the state under its threat of violence against us and our property."

"But those people need the money, your government knows where it should go, and other governments have taken into account the United States' pledge to contribute."

"It isn't a contribution when it isn't yours to begin with, so if you want my money, you better at least have the guts to ask me for it first. If not, you better have the balls to take it."

J G BALLARD, Novelist

It would be one of the biggest breakthroughs mankind has ever experienced if we pooled our wealth in order to look after the poorer people of the world. Sadly, I don't think it will happen.

Sadly, it's already happening, you commie jackass.

SUE MACGREGOR, Broadcaster

I hope politicians will take note of the public reaction. But it is difficult to tell whether it will do anything to change the way politicians see things, when our own Prime Minister chose not to break his holiday.

Politicians see things in ways wholly different from the subjects they rule over, Dear. Get used to it.

TONY BENN, Former cabinet minister

It may make people realise that the UN needs to be well-equipped and funded. If people diverted money from weapons and war, we have the technology and money to be able to help - if we decide to do that.

If that wealth diversion was conducted under a free market, then fine. But it isn't. In any event, the UN is a singularly poor organization with which to entrust money for critical needs. The reasons for that are myriad, but simple.

SIR RICHARD BRANSON, Entrepreneur

I think that politicians must realise that people do care about these issues and want them to do more. If 2005 could become the year when people make a real effort, then it could make a real difference.

©2005 Independent Digital (UK) Ltd. All rights reserved

People caring about the welfare of strangers is a Good Thing.

People demanding ever-increasing amounts of an individual's wealth to be handed over to others is a Bad Thing.

Posted by Drizzten at January 04, 2005 09:23 AM