The general theme of Singer's talk was the need to rethink our system of ethical thought due to changes in the world which make everyone more interconnected. He addressed the ways he sees globalization changing the world and therefore having implications for our ethical thought.
Climate change can be seen as a paradigm case of the need for global action and for ethically thinking beyond borders, Singer said. It is a prime example of how the small decisions that individuals make can accumulate to cause harm to themselves as well as others. As Singer said, it may be pleasant for us to be able to drive our SUVs as much as we want, but this decision will have impacts on people around through the increase in global temperature and the rising of sea levels. In some ways, he said, it can be viewed as the simplest kind of ethical issue – that of dividing up a supply of limited resources fairly, or giving everyone an "equal piece of the pie." The atmosphere is a resource with which we all share its benefits and also have a share in its destruction.
The question is then how to divide up the pollution of the atmosphere fairly. Currently, 5 percent of the world's population creates 30 percent of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, much of which comes from the United States. If one were to divide up an acceptable level of dangerous emissions so that every person in the world had an equal share of it, the United States would be six times over its allowance, Singer said. The simplest solution to this problem of inequity is to divide up ability to pollute equally, as the Kyoto Protocol seeks to do.
Many developed nations, including the U.S., have problems with Kyoto because they say it binds them more than it does developing nations. This is not really a fair criticism, Singer said, because these nations, such as India and China, don't even create their theoretically equal share of pollutants. Another proposed system of regulation is the cap and trade scheme, in which nations and corporations are able to trade emissions credits for money. Singer said that all of these issues boil down into a giant example of the classic "prisoner's dilemma."
What do most people think about when they hear the term "globalization?" Singer explained many think of an increase in trade between nations and regions. While this issue is constantly discussed, Singer said he feels that "more heat than light has been shed on it." People are polarized into two opposing views – one saying that global trade is an unmitigated good thing that benefits all involved and another saying that is it simply another form of imperialism and exploitation of poor nations.
"As far as I can see," Singer said, "the truth is not exactly one and not exactly the other." The idea that the "rich have gotten richer and the poor have gotten poorer," which many critics of globalization believe, is difficult to either agree or disagree with. Almost everyone in the world has gotten to some degree better off, so there is overall absolute improvement in people's living conditions.
However, the gap between the highest and lowest groups has grown, making the rich relatively richer and the poor relatively poorer. The ethical question that arises is whether equality is something to be strived for in itself or if inequality is okay so long as everyone is somewhat better off. Singer said that he can not totally agree with the assertion that a situation which has made nearly everyone to some degree better off is bad because there is increased inequality between the best off and the worst off. He also said that it is difficult to talk about this issue without tackling the problem of defining who the "poor" are. If you look at the bottom half or even quarter of the population as the "poor," they have gotten better off. However, if you look at the very bottom of the spectrum, say the lowest 10 percent, you might find that these people are actually worse off due to globalization.
Another question to be asked about global trade, Singer said, is whether or not we have carried out the practices of global trade in ways that are ethical. This includes adhering to environmental protection standards, ensuring animal welfare, and creating fair labor and trade practices. He spoke about subsidization of the American cotton industry, an example where he does not believe that global trade is being ethically carried out. Because of subsidies for American cotton growers, U.S. cotton can be sold profitably for only 57 percent of its production cost. Therefore, even nations that have more efficient production which costs less can not compete with the low prices of American cotton. When challenged about this practice, the U.S. government will often claim sovereignty, while at the same time using its power in international organizations such as the World Trade Organizations to enforce free trade on other nations.
The issue of sovereignty also arises in the area of international law and global institutions, the third subject Singer talked about. To discuss this very broad topic, Singer focused on the current war in Iraq and the events leading up to it as indicative of larger patterns of international relations. He said that the significance of the Iraq situation is not that we went to war, but the relations that occurred between the U.S. and the United Nations leading up to it. While the U.S. originally appealed to the international body for support in enforcing UN regulations on the Iraqi government, it eventually sidestepped UN protocol when it did not get the permission it wanted. This shows, Singer said, that the first appeal to the UN by the U.S. was in bad faith, since the American government eventually disregarded the mandate and rules of that body. This was a huge blow to the authority of the UN and to international cooperation and multilaterism, Singer said, but subsequent problems in Iraq have discredited the Bush administration's unilateral approach. Despite his qualms and criticisms about the way the UN functions, Singer said he believes it should be strengthened, not undermined.
The last topic Singer covered in his lecture was that of foreign aid. Instant worldwide communication has changed the way global aid works, he said, in that we are able see and hear what's happening to people around the world, as well as able to assist them more quickly. The ethical question involved in global aid is whether people in developed and prosperous nations have a moral obligation to assist those in less fortunate nations whether or not they are responsible directly for their situation. Naturally, Singer said, if we are responsible we have an obligation to correct our wrongs, but we also ought to be doing something about poverty whether or not it is our fault. He said, "If you are not contributing to [international aid organizations] and instead go shopping, you are preferring buying a new pair of shoes to helping a dying child."
Singer said that many of the problems with foreign aid come from the ignorance of Americans about how it actually works. Studies have shown that Americans believe that our government spends too much on foreign aid and want it to be lowered to 5-10 percent of our budget. However, the actual amount of foreign aid in the federal budget is only 1 percent. Therefore, there is a disconnect between people's approval of the government's actions and what they think the government should be doing. Many Americans also believe that the U.S. is the largest supplier of foreign aide, which is true in absolute dollar terms. However, in relative measures which take into account the gross national income of countries giving aid, the U.S. is the lowest contributor among developed nations. Singer said that Americans often think that since their government is giving so much aid to people in need around the world, they are not required to do so. However, he believes that we each have an individual obligation to give and to ask our country to give more.
Singer ended by reiterating his main theme, saying that we need to move beyond focusing on our own country when looking at ethics, to try to benefit all citizens of the world. Students and faculty in the audience then asked questions on topics including animal rights in globalization, the concept of fairness, the United Nations, genetically modified foods, and putting ethical thought into practice.
-- by Caroline O'Shea '07
