News / Press Release
MDC-T must source food aid to the ordinary suffering Zimbabweans
03 Feb 2016 at 12:58hrs | Views
Its difficult to source Food Aid to ordinary suffering Zimbabweans but it's an excellent strategy in being intact to the grassroots supporters of our Democratic Movement. MDC-T is a Party with the People's Will in heart but we can't just watch our supporters starving on hunger but we will need their Votes come 2018. Our Movement must try its level best in sourcing Food Aid from other countries to help the need and also as a way of unearthing our togetherness with the ordinary suffering Zimbabweans.
Between now and tomorrow morning, 200 children will starve to death. The day after tomorrow, 200 more children will die, and so on throughout this drought In a land of plenty," the number of human beings dying or suffering from hunger, malnutrition, and hunger-related diseases is staggering. at least one quarter of the country's population—live in poverty and will go hungry this year Over half of these people live in Rural areas most of the remainder in towns
The contrast between these peoples and the populations of rich nationals is a stark one. In the poor ares the mortality rate among children under the age of 5 is more than 170 deaths per thousand, while in Rich arrears is less than 1. In Zimbabwe life expectancy is 50 years, while in Europe it is 90
These contrasts raise the question of whether people living in rich arears have a moral obligation to aid those in poor areas Currently, less than 1/2 of 1% of the total gross national product is devoted to aiding poverty-stricken arrears What is the extent of our duty to poor areas
Our Democratic Movement have An Obligation to Aid Poor Citizens and it must kick-start now to source Food Aid from NGOs and other International Communities who specializes on Food Aid.
Some ethicists argue that the government's help amounts to vote buying. Our moral duty, they claim, is always to act in ways that will maximize human happiness and minimize human suffering. In the long run, aiding poor citizens will produce far more suffering than it will alleviate. Areas with the highest incidence of poverty also have the highest birthrates and are prone to draught One report estimates that more than 90% of the country's total population growth between now and the year 2025 will occur in poor arrears Providing aid to people in such placed will only allow more of them to survive and reproduce, placing ever greater demands on the nation's limited food supply. And as the populations of these areas swell, more people will be forced onto marginal and environmentally fragile lands, leading to widespread land degradation, further reducing the land available for food production. The increase in demands on the limited food supply combined with a decrease in the production of food will threaten the survival of future generations of all peoples, rich and poor.
Others claim that, even in the short-run, little benefit is derived from aiding poor Aid sent to them rarely reaches the people it was intended to benefit. Instead, it is used by oppressive local leaders to subsidize their silos or spent on projects that benefit local elites, or ends up on the black market like what Zanu-Pf is busy on. Furthermore, giving aid to starving undermines any incentive on the part of these areas to become self-sufficient through programs that would benefit the poor, such as those that would increase food production or control population growth. Food aid, for example, depresses local food prices, discouraging local food production and agricultural development. Poor dairy farmers in Mutoko have found themselves competing against free milk from the U.S. As a result of aid, many areas such as Masvingo, Manicaland have become aid dependent.
Some ethicists maintain that the principle of justice also dictates against aiding poor areas Justice requires that benefits and burdens be distributed fairly among peoples. Areas that have planned for the needs of their people by regulating food production to ensure an adequate food supply for the present, as well as a surplus for emergencies, and areas that have implemented programs to limit starvation should enjoy the benefits of their foresight. Many poor ares have irresponsibly failed to adopt policies that would stimulate food production and development. Instead, resources are spent on lavish projects country of Cote D'Ivoire. Such provinces that have failed to act responsibly should bear the consequences. It is unjust to ask provinces that have acted responsibly to now assume the burdens of those areas that have not. Otherwise we have no need for Governors in our Country with the current failed Zanu-Pf Government.
Finally, it is argued, all persons have a basic right to freedom, which includes the right to use the resources they have legitimately acquired as they freely choose. To oblige people in wealthy area to give aid to poor areas violates this right. Aiding poor provinces may be praiseworthy, but not obligatory.
MDC-T have an Obligation to Aid Starving Zimbabwe citizens
Many maintain that citizens have an obligation to aid poor areas regardless of their affiliation First, some have argued, all persons have a moral obligation to prevent harm when doing so would not cause comparable harm to themselves. It is clear that suffering and death from starvation are harms. It is also clear that minor financial sacrifices on the part of people of rich areas can prevent massive amounts of suffering and death from starvation. Thus, they conclude, people in rich areas have a moral obligation to aid poor citizens Every week more than a quarter of a thousand children die from malnutrition and illness. Many of these deaths are preventable. For example, the diarrhea disease and respiratory infections that claim the lives of 16,000 children every year could be prevented by 10 cent packets of oral rehydration salts or by antibiotics usually costing under a dollar. The aid needed to prevent the great majority of child illness and death due to malnutrition in the next decade is equal to the amount of money spent imto advertise cigarettes. It is well within the capacity of the rich as collectives or as individuals to prevent these avoidable deaths and to reduce this misery without sacrificing anything of comparable
Just how much we will think ourselves obliged to give up will depend on what we consider to be of comparable moral significance to the poverty we could prevent: color television, stylish clothes, expensive dinners, a sophisticated stereo system, overseas holidays, a (second ?) car, a larger house, private schools for our children . . . none of these is likely to be of comparable significance to the reduction of absolute poverty.
Giving aid to the poor in other places may require some inconvenience or some sacrifice of luxury on the part of peoples of rich areas but to ignore the plight of starving people is as morally reprehensible as failing to save a child drowning in a pool because of the inconvenience of getting one's clothes wet.
In fact, allowing a person to die from hunger when it is easily within one's means to prevent it is no different, morally speaking, from killing another human being. If I purchase a car or spend money I don't need, knowing that I could instead have given my money to some relief agency that could have prevented some deaths from starvation, I am morally responsible for those deaths. The objection that I didn't intend for anyone to die is irrelevant. If I speed though an intersection and, as a result, kill a pedestrian, I am morally responsible for that death whether I intended it or not.
In making a case for aid to the starving others appeal to the principle of justice. Justice demands that people be compensated for the harms and injustices suffered at the hands of others. Much of the starving they argue, is the result of unjust and exploitative policies of governments and corporations in power
Those who support aid to the starving also counter the argument that aid to poor areas rarely accomplishes what it was intended to accomplish. As a result of aid, they point out, many countries have significantly reduced poverty and moved from dependence to self reliance. Aid has allowed Indonesia, for example, to reduce poverty from 58% to 17% in less than a generation. There are, unfortunately, instances in which the poor haven't benefitted from aid, but such cases only move us to find more effective ways to combat poverty in these countries, be it canceling debts, lowering trade restrictions, or improving distribution mechanisms for direct aid.
Finally, it is argued, all human beings have dignity deserving of respect and are entitled to what is necessary to live in dignity, including a right to life and a right to the goods necessary to satisfy one's basic needs. This right to satisfy basic needs takes precedence over the rights of others to accumulate wealth.
What's your say on this Strategy fellow Democrats for us to be intact with the Grassroots Supporters?????
MDC-T : Equal Opportunity For All
MDC-T Chipinge West Constituency
R M Simango
Between now and tomorrow morning, 200 children will starve to death. The day after tomorrow, 200 more children will die, and so on throughout this drought In a land of plenty," the number of human beings dying or suffering from hunger, malnutrition, and hunger-related diseases is staggering. at least one quarter of the country's population—live in poverty and will go hungry this year Over half of these people live in Rural areas most of the remainder in towns
The contrast between these peoples and the populations of rich nationals is a stark one. In the poor ares the mortality rate among children under the age of 5 is more than 170 deaths per thousand, while in Rich arrears is less than 1. In Zimbabwe life expectancy is 50 years, while in Europe it is 90
These contrasts raise the question of whether people living in rich arears have a moral obligation to aid those in poor areas Currently, less than 1/2 of 1% of the total gross national product is devoted to aiding poverty-stricken arrears What is the extent of our duty to poor areas
Our Democratic Movement have An Obligation to Aid Poor Citizens and it must kick-start now to source Food Aid from NGOs and other International Communities who specializes on Food Aid.
Some ethicists argue that the government's help amounts to vote buying. Our moral duty, they claim, is always to act in ways that will maximize human happiness and minimize human suffering. In the long run, aiding poor citizens will produce far more suffering than it will alleviate. Areas with the highest incidence of poverty also have the highest birthrates and are prone to draught One report estimates that more than 90% of the country's total population growth between now and the year 2025 will occur in poor arrears Providing aid to people in such placed will only allow more of them to survive and reproduce, placing ever greater demands on the nation's limited food supply. And as the populations of these areas swell, more people will be forced onto marginal and environmentally fragile lands, leading to widespread land degradation, further reducing the land available for food production. The increase in demands on the limited food supply combined with a decrease in the production of food will threaten the survival of future generations of all peoples, rich and poor.
Others claim that, even in the short-run, little benefit is derived from aiding poor Aid sent to them rarely reaches the people it was intended to benefit. Instead, it is used by oppressive local leaders to subsidize their silos or spent on projects that benefit local elites, or ends up on the black market like what Zanu-Pf is busy on. Furthermore, giving aid to starving undermines any incentive on the part of these areas to become self-sufficient through programs that would benefit the poor, such as those that would increase food production or control population growth. Food aid, for example, depresses local food prices, discouraging local food production and agricultural development. Poor dairy farmers in Mutoko have found themselves competing against free milk from the U.S. As a result of aid, many areas such as Masvingo, Manicaland have become aid dependent.
Some ethicists maintain that the principle of justice also dictates against aiding poor areas Justice requires that benefits and burdens be distributed fairly among peoples. Areas that have planned for the needs of their people by regulating food production to ensure an adequate food supply for the present, as well as a surplus for emergencies, and areas that have implemented programs to limit starvation should enjoy the benefits of their foresight. Many poor ares have irresponsibly failed to adopt policies that would stimulate food production and development. Instead, resources are spent on lavish projects country of Cote D'Ivoire. Such provinces that have failed to act responsibly should bear the consequences. It is unjust to ask provinces that have acted responsibly to now assume the burdens of those areas that have not. Otherwise we have no need for Governors in our Country with the current failed Zanu-Pf Government.
Finally, it is argued, all persons have a basic right to freedom, which includes the right to use the resources they have legitimately acquired as they freely choose. To oblige people in wealthy area to give aid to poor areas violates this right. Aiding poor provinces may be praiseworthy, but not obligatory.
MDC-T have an Obligation to Aid Starving Zimbabwe citizens
Many maintain that citizens have an obligation to aid poor areas regardless of their affiliation First, some have argued, all persons have a moral obligation to prevent harm when doing so would not cause comparable harm to themselves. It is clear that suffering and death from starvation are harms. It is also clear that minor financial sacrifices on the part of people of rich areas can prevent massive amounts of suffering and death from starvation. Thus, they conclude, people in rich areas have a moral obligation to aid poor citizens Every week more than a quarter of a thousand children die from malnutrition and illness. Many of these deaths are preventable. For example, the diarrhea disease and respiratory infections that claim the lives of 16,000 children every year could be prevented by 10 cent packets of oral rehydration salts or by antibiotics usually costing under a dollar. The aid needed to prevent the great majority of child illness and death due to malnutrition in the next decade is equal to the amount of money spent imto advertise cigarettes. It is well within the capacity of the rich as collectives or as individuals to prevent these avoidable deaths and to reduce this misery without sacrificing anything of comparable
Just how much we will think ourselves obliged to give up will depend on what we consider to be of comparable moral significance to the poverty we could prevent: color television, stylish clothes, expensive dinners, a sophisticated stereo system, overseas holidays, a (second ?) car, a larger house, private schools for our children . . . none of these is likely to be of comparable significance to the reduction of absolute poverty.
Giving aid to the poor in other places may require some inconvenience or some sacrifice of luxury on the part of peoples of rich areas but to ignore the plight of starving people is as morally reprehensible as failing to save a child drowning in a pool because of the inconvenience of getting one's clothes wet.
In fact, allowing a person to die from hunger when it is easily within one's means to prevent it is no different, morally speaking, from killing another human being. If I purchase a car or spend money I don't need, knowing that I could instead have given my money to some relief agency that could have prevented some deaths from starvation, I am morally responsible for those deaths. The objection that I didn't intend for anyone to die is irrelevant. If I speed though an intersection and, as a result, kill a pedestrian, I am morally responsible for that death whether I intended it or not.
In making a case for aid to the starving others appeal to the principle of justice. Justice demands that people be compensated for the harms and injustices suffered at the hands of others. Much of the starving they argue, is the result of unjust and exploitative policies of governments and corporations in power
Those who support aid to the starving also counter the argument that aid to poor areas rarely accomplishes what it was intended to accomplish. As a result of aid, they point out, many countries have significantly reduced poverty and moved from dependence to self reliance. Aid has allowed Indonesia, for example, to reduce poverty from 58% to 17% in less than a generation. There are, unfortunately, instances in which the poor haven't benefitted from aid, but such cases only move us to find more effective ways to combat poverty in these countries, be it canceling debts, lowering trade restrictions, or improving distribution mechanisms for direct aid.
Finally, it is argued, all human beings have dignity deserving of respect and are entitled to what is necessary to live in dignity, including a right to life and a right to the goods necessary to satisfy one's basic needs. This right to satisfy basic needs takes precedence over the rights of others to accumulate wealth.
What's your say on this Strategy fellow Democrats for us to be intact with the Grassroots Supporters?????
MDC-T : Equal Opportunity For All
MDC-T Chipinge West Constituency
R M Simango
Source - R M Simango
