CNN.com - World

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

Water Buffaloes v. Killing Babies.

4 Generations is a short video about how an American living in China, Robert Thompson, helped set up a gift of a water buffalo to a family in a small Chinese village. They picked one water buffalo and one family that seemed to need it most. It ended up going to a family with a great-grandmother, grandmother, father, and daughter.

The first difference that I was aware of between Singer's essay and this video was the immediate emotional response. Unlike the essay, in which I was skeptical and a bit annoyed, to be honest, this short video was very moving. This is the sort of thing that just might inspire us to help out people in need around the world. Again, unlike Singer's essay, this video did not point fingers and try to guilt-trip us into compliance - instead, it highlighted the greatest aspects of human kindness. Instead of showing the consequences, it showed the rewards.

There was none of the forced logic that made me raise an eyebrow to the Singer Solution to World Poverty. While the essay told us that in order to lead morally correct lives, we needed to donate all the money that we didn't absolutely need (which is rubbish), the video showed us that we had the ability to change a life in a positive manner. The best part, for me, was the lack of pretenciousness. There were no statistics, twisting logic, questioning of our morality, or "clever" analogies. It was just the documentation of the action. This was the most powerful bit, because unlike Singer's theoretical argument, they actually went out and helped a family. Because of this, there was never a time where I questioned what Robert Thompson was trying to do. Singer's essay left me feeling jaded and wondering whether Singer was a hypocrite (after all, there was no evidence of him donating $200).

So, in essence, 4 Generations is everything the Singer Solution isn't, but should have been. There's an analogy in all of this, somewhere. The closest one seems to involve my favorite institution to rag on, PETA. Singer's method of changing the world is basically the same as PETA's. He makes us feel like we're killing African babies by eating an expensive dessert, just like PETA makes us feel like we're lining up baby cows and beating them with police batons whenever we consume veal (strangely enough, both of them involve delicious food). I don't know if it's just me, but I would rather see PETA advertising puppies getting new homes, and cattle roaming freely in the fields than to see cattle flopping around on the blood-stained floor of a slaughterhouse. Yes, it's the same message, but with two hugely different executions.

I'm sure both the Singer Solution and 4 Gen. had the same well-meaning intentions in mind. But in this world of apathetic materialists, it's all about how we convince people. And while guilt may work in police confessions, I have a feeling that seeing the joy a water buffalo can bring to a family might help us get involved a little bit better.

2 comments:

Alysha said...

idk if commenting was part of my hw but i'll do it anyways in case...well i agree with your opinion...a first ya? lol singer sorta told us that if we werent donating all the money we could, countless children around the world were dying because of our actions. thompson however showed us that a simple act of kindness, a water buffalo worth about $200 (was that the price) would touch a family more than an envelope of money signed by himself would. I disagree about your PETA statement...eddie, why are u always ranting about them...just leave them alone. theyre educating people on what really goes on in slaughter houses and stuff so people can make a difference by protesting real fur (although i think this im not about to become a vegetarian)PETA is telling everyone about the horrible but true facts so that someone can do something about them
-alysha

Clocktower Violinist said...

I agree with your post. The essay and the movie gave me opposite reactions as well. Although I don't know anything about PETA, I think that it was an excelent point to make on how the positive request is better than the negative request in many cases, not only on this subject.