Monday, August 24, 2020

Does Nonpolitical Altruism Ignore the Root of the Problem?

As mentioned in yesterday's post, my new book makes the case that citizens should forgo political engagement for more impactful forms of altruism, such as raising funds for effective charities. The basic idea is that time and resources allocated to preparing and casting a good vote are time and resources not allocated to altruistic endeavors that actually make a difference. Casting a vote won't result in any person getting fed who otherwise wouldn't get fed, but donating money to an underfunded food bank will. So if you are concerned about food insecurity, you ought to spend the time you would have spent researching and casting a vote for the candidate who is best on food insecurity working overtime and donating the extra income to the food bank.

A standard objection to this style of argument is that private altruism doesn't address the root cause of social problems but merely treats the symptoms. I'm unpersuaded by this objection, however, because most of us are simply not in a position to fix the root of social problems. As I write in the book:

Acknowledging the limits of our individual impact and acting accordingly does not imply the moral insignificance of systemic problems; rather, it’s a sober recognition of the reality of our situation. If you can ameliorate the effects of something harmful but not the root cause, then by all means ameliorate the effects. By analogy, boarding your windows, evacuating town, and setting up shelter for displaced residents before a hurricane hits does not imply that you endorse “quietism” about the hurricane. Rather, you are simply responding rationally to that which is in your control (mitigating some of the harmful effects of the hurricane) and that which is not (whether or not the hurricane strikes). Criticizing poverty relief for not addressing the root cause of poverty is like criticizing hurricane relief for not addressing the root cause of hurricanes.

Of course, if you are in a position to fix the root cause of a problem, you should do so. But there's nothing wrong with a division of labor. It's appropriate for general practitioners to treat the symptoms of a cold if they are not in a position to work on a cure. Similarly, it is appropriate for citizens to take direct action to feed the hungry and shelter the homeless if they are not in a position to change the policies that govern the distribution of food and housing.