Introduction
The term perpetual war is used to refer to unending or continuous warfare (Vidal 14). Thus, perpetual peace refers to everlasting peace (Vidal 14). Since World War I, the world has had several other significant wars that have shaped the course of history, the present, and the future. Using the concepts presented in “perpetual war for perpetual peace” (Vidal 7) one can argue that the wars that have happened in the past have significantly contributed to the wars that are happening now, and that also affects the absence or presence of peace.
On the same note, in the search for peace, governments have developed policies and other activities that have caused conflict. This essay looks into the works of Helen Keller, General Smedley Butler, Frederick Douglass, and Henry David Thoreau in regards to the concept of war. The concepts suggested by the stated critics will be compared to those made by Gore Vidal, who came up with the phrase “perpetual war for perpetual peace”. The paper will prove that the search for peace by governments has led to more war.
Definition of War
There are many definitions of war. Goldberg defines it as a state of armed battle over a certain cause that is valued by all the parties involved (50). For instance, World War II saw the division of states as they fought against each other for territory and status. However, it is important to note that not all war is physical. For example, the Cold War was not a physical war, yet, still had devastating results.
Goldberg argues that there has been a lot of debate on the importance of war in the world (51). Some critics have argued that there has to be the war for there to be peace. Additionally, the concept of “perpetual war for perpetual peace” has been debated upon. In this premise, the definition of warfare is tied to the definition of peace, and vice versa. Butler defines war as a racket. The racket is defined as something that is not well understood by the majority, but whose right meaning is secretly held by a minority (Butler).
Discussion
The premise that the search for peace has heavily contributed to the presence of war is supported by various studies, literature, and scholars. For instance, Keller notes that every modern war has had some type of exploitation associated with it. For example, the war against terrorism led the US to invade some countries such as Iran and Iraq. Whereas terrorism was the initial reason for attacking these countries, the US military still stayed, and the government continued to manipulate the country’s government, despite neutralizing the threat.
There have been arguments that the main reason behind the attack on Iran and Iraq was access to oil, a highly valuable commodity. Keller goes further to state that the US government is fully capable of ending the wars it started. However, due to the fact that the government has to protect the investments of some influential people, they choose not to do so (Keller).
Thoreau argues that a good and effective government does not govern everyone. The scholar states that war is a machine, and the US citizens have been used as objects, similar to guns and bullets. This argument suggests that the soldiers that offer their lives to fight for their country are not valued. Indeed, going back to the thesis, one can argue that the government has created a relevant narrative where soldiers are seen as national heroes.
This narrative encourages some citizens to join the armed forces. They are then deployed to different war zones, where the US government supposedly seeks to establish peace. In many cases, these soldiers die or are badly hurt, and this causes more uproar in the US. The circle begins with citizens calling for more action against such countries, thereby, proving the “perpetual war for perpetual peace” concept.
As stated, Butler sees war as a racket. Butler believes that war is profitable and it is for this reason that the best wars are perpetual. One way in which some people benefit from war is through the sale of war-related merchandise. Some countries are fully focused on inventing the best weapons due to the fact that any war requires such merchandise. In fact, the side with the best weapons has a higher probability of winning the war. On the same note, countries spend a lot of money buying weapons regardless of whether they are going to war or not. Secondly, countries can make profits from the war due to deals made in the name of international relations.
For instance, the involvement of the US government in World War II established it as one of the greatest governments in the world. It was at this time that the term “superpower” was coined to refer to both the US and the USSR. Soon after the Cold War, the US was declared as the only superpower. One can argue that the US wanted the Cold War to happen in order to become the only world superpower. With such a status, the government was able to manipulate others to get what it wanted.
Such realizations have led to some people not only hating war, but also the soldiers who fight in such battles. For instance, Douglass states that he wished all the soldiers who had fought in the Mexican War to have died there. Such anger, again, supports the thesis provided. Whereas the American government stated that the Mexican war was conducted to establish peace, it ended up also making people angrier and eager for more war. Additionally, the same argument proves Vidal’s argument true. One can argue that the perpetual war is fueled by the wars of the past. The decisions made by the US government to either invade or help allies in war have led to continuous fighting.
Conclusion
In conclusion, there are many things that can cause war. However, one constant fact is that the search for peace has led to more battles than anything else. The US government has argued over the years that they are in search of securing the safety of the citizens and helping other countries fight off invaders. However, this action has led to more war. The profitability of battles has encouraged investors to seek perpetual war, therefore, also seek perpetual peace.
The concept of war has also been used to manipulate citizens. In the US, soldiers are considered heroes despite the fact that they are treated as replaceable objects needed only for war. The US government has the power to stop all its wars. Despite this, the government has used excuses that revolve around international relations and diplomacy to engage in war.
Works Cited
Butler, Smedley. War is a Racket. Dauphin Publications, 2018. Archive E-books. Web.
Douglass, Frederick. “History is a Weapon. Address to the New England Convention.” Defcon, 1849, Faneuil Hall, Boston. Lecture.
Goldberg, Jeffrey. “The Lessons of Henry Kissinger.” Atlantic, vol. 318, no. 5, 2016, pp. 50-57.
Keller, Helen. “Strike against War.” Women’s Peace Party and the Labor Forum. 1916, Carnegie Hall, New York City. Lecture.
Thoreau, D. Henry. Civil Disobedience. Dover Publications, 1849. X-Roads Virginia E-books. Web.
Vidal, Gore. Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace. Caxton Printers, 1953.
Helping Others: Examining An Ethical Dilemma
Introduction
As a rule, society considers helping others to be a virtuous and noble deed. If you approach anyone on the street and ask them if helping others is a good thing to do, the answer would most likely be “Yes.” However, after getting this initial affirmation, there are many other subsequent questions that need to be asked: Who should we help? When should we help? How substantial should our assistance be? Are all those in need entitled to receiving help? How do you determine the line between those who need help and those who do not (Ford 637)?
Through asking these questions, it is possible to conclude that not everyone needs, or deserves, help. Assisting others is easy when it is convenient and does not necessitate much effort. Each of us is prone to acts of kindness every once in a while, be that helping an old woman across the street, lifting heavy bags for someone, or giving some change to a beggar. These acts do not take much and can make a person feel good about themselves.
However, when pressed to act kindly on a more frequent basis, kindness can start to seem more like a chore. This is especially true when a request for help comes at an inconvenient time. In this paper, I will investigate a personal ethical dilemma, which revolves around helping others even at the most inconvenient of times.
Philosophical Reflection
The situation I am about to describe happened roughly 4 years ago when I used to live in a rented apartment in a large apartment block. Two stories below lived a lonely old woman who often struggled with getting her shopping up the stairs. I assisted her with her bags whenever I met her, out of the kindness of my heart. This continued until one day she showed up at my doorstep, asking me to buy some groceries for her.
Since she was old and frail, I agreed. Before too long, I started assisting her in all kinds of matters: I bought groceries for her, kept her company when she wanted to talk to someone and loaned her small sums of money, which she always returned. None of these things were particularly difficult to do, but they did start to increasingly impose on my time. Although tolerable at first, eventually I was beginning to grow weary of helping her. My weariness slowly grew into resentment, and I started to pretend to be away, refusing to answer her knocks on my door or to provide the company she desired.
The dilemma I faced was that of whether or not I had an obligation to help her out versus my entitlement to private time. Every time, I had a choice to either help out and, thus, suppress my resentment and desire for peace, or refuse to do so by coming up with excuses for myself and for the old lady in question. This constituted an ethical dilemma. For me, the key concerns in the situation I have described are those of duty versus inclination, as well as virtue versus self-indulgence.
Another thought to consider is whether or not the old lady required my assistance as much as she said she did. The questions considered within the scope of this reflection can be viewed through the prism of various philosophers who have addressed the issues of duty, virtue, and the accumulated well. I will analyze the dilemma from the standpoint of two philosophers, Emmanuel Kant and John Mill.
Critical Analysis
To analyze the situation described above from an ethical perspective, I chose two differing frameworks: Kant’s deontological ethics and John Mill’s utilitarian ethics. These philosophical views offer two different outlooks on the issue based on virtues and duties to be upheld in a healthy society, as well as the total amount of pleasure accumulated as the result of my actions. To put matters into perspective, a standardized situation relating to my dilemma will be used to determine the most ethical course of action:
– Situation: I am in my room playing computer games and indulging in otherwise non-essential activities. I receive a knock on the door and go to open it. The old woman in question asks me to go buy groceries for her. It is late, and if I do not go right now, chances are the shop will be closed by the time I finish with my leisure time. I have no desire to go to the shop. What is the most ethical course of action?
Kant’s definition of duty and virtue is characterized by using the Categorical Imperative (Kohl 332). Helping others, according to Kant, is an imperfect duty, as while it is desirable that helping others all the time would be a universal rule, it is impossible to determine the exact amount of assistance the provider should give or the amount the recipient should receive (Stern 31). Thus, according to deontological ethics, while it would be an ethical duty to provide assistance of some kind, the amount should be left to the provider’s discretion.
I find this approach compelling because it reaffirms the necessity to help others in need while providing alternative ways of assistance. In the situation described above, I could have shared some of the food I already owned or asked one of my friends to help in my stead. Either way, I would not have left the old woman without some kind of assistance.
John Mill’s utilitarian ethics has a different approach to determining the most ethical solution to the problem. Namely, his idea is to calculate the amount of pleasure received by both parties and compare it with the number of negative emotions in both cases. What separates Mill’s ethics from Bentham’s utilitarianism is his differentiation of pleasure; from base pleasure, a lower form of pleasure, and higher pleasure, which has inherently more value. Base pleasures are satisfied by completing certain physiological wants and needs, whereas higher pleasures are based on aesthetical and moral accomplishments (Philp and Rosen 54). If we apply utilitarian ethics to the dilemma presented above, we will derive two different equations:
- If I refuse to help out, I will satisfy my base desire for entertainment. At the same time, I will suffer from what my consciousness perceives as an immoral action. The old woman would not have her base needs satisfied and will suffer from hunger, as well as from my rejection. Net pleasure: Negative.
- If I help out, I will not satisfy my base desire for entertainment. After the deed is completed, I will receive higher pleasure from overcoming my own laziness in order to help out another. The old woman will have her base desires for nourishment satisfied and will feel grateful for my help. Net pleasure: Positive.
I found John Mill’s approach to utilitarianism useful, as it provided clear and calculable reasons for acting virtuously rather than selfishly. It shows that if I helped out, my personal net pleasure would have grown as well, as higher pleasures are considered superior to base pleasures. At the same time, my net pleasure would have been negative if I refused, for the same reasons.
Conclusion
If someone approached me with a similar situation, I would advise the person to analyze it from several angles. Assuming that the dilemma revolves around helping/not helping others, the most important questions to consider are the following (Becket et al. 107):
- Is the person in question objectively capable of performing the task they are asking you to do?
- How hard would it be for them? How hard would it be for you?
- Are you capable of completing the task without compromising your own agenda?
- Does postponing the task compromise its purpose? Will your agenda be compromised if you postpone it?
- Can the task be delegated to someone else?
- Can it be replaced with an alternative?
- What is the total happiness/grief balance if you accept or refuse?
As it is possible to see, the questions posed above are the amalgamation of Kantian ethics and utilitarian ethics. While Kant would advise providing assistance, either way, John Mill does not rule out the possibility of refusing assistance altogether. It can be argued that Kantian deontological ethics could also be used to justify denying assistance in an event where the person is fully capable of completing the task on their own. In that situation, it is unethical of them to ask for assistance in the first place, forcing another person to work extra hard.
The questions I would not recommend focusing on would be those of personal gain. If there are any monetary rewards involved, besides the moral satisfaction of assisting another, then the question moves from the realm of helping to the realm of service provision, which would require a different analysis and a different set of questions to outline the ethical playing field. The concept of helping is defined as selfless assistance without any explicit financial or emotional gain. While helping others often results in gratitude and happiness, it should not be expected as a form of payment.
My advice to the person in question would change depending on the physical, intellectual, and economic standing of the person asking for my advice. Different people, by nature, have different capabilities of providing assistance (Howe 15). While a healthy and young person could be expected to help an elderly person out by offering them a seat on the bus, it would not be as appropriate for another elderly person to do the same, in similar circumstances.
Likewise, the amount of money spent on charity should be different if the person in question is richer or poorer. The personal qualities and capabilities of the individual looking for advice would affect the answers given to the list of questions provided above. In addition, familial ties to the person asking for help may prove to be a crucial determinant in deciding the course of the action.
Kantian and utilitarian ethics work well together, as one helps determine the course of action based on the notion of duty in relation to the common good, while utilitarian equations provide adequate explanations to what good actually is. While neither may have the perfect answers for every possible situation, they constitute a solid framework for simpler ethical dilemmas encountered in our day-to-day activities.
Works Cited
Becket, Chris, et al. Values and Ethics in Social Work. 3rd ed., Sage, 2017.
Ford, Robert. “Who Should We Help? An Experimental Test of Discrimination in the British Welfare State.” Political Studies, vol. 64, no. 3, 2016, pp. 630-650.
Howe, David. An Introduction to Social Work Theory. Routledge, 2017.
Kohl, Markus. “Kant on Determinism and the Categorical Imperative.” Ethics, vol. 125, no. 2, 2015, pp. 331-356.
Philp, Mark, and Frederick Rosen. Editors. John Stuart Mill on Liberty, Utilitarianism, and Other Essays. Oxford University Press, 2015.
Stern, Robert. Kantian Ethics: Value, Agency, and Obligation. Oxford University Press, 2015.
A Plan To Reduce Racism In Medicine
Introduction
The theme of racism, which is increasingly emerging in the healthcare sector, is disastrous in terms of medical and nursing ethics and is fraught with severe patient outcomes. Therefore, this issue is relevant and discussed both at the local level, that is, in separate clinics and globally as the topic for disputes in various medical communities. Racism as a phenomenon in healthcare is unacceptable, and the prejudiced attitude of medical specialists to patients is the indicator of personnel’s incompetence and unpreparedness for essential work.
Problem Description
The possibility of receiving medical care has always been considered the inalienable right of any citizen. Nevertheless, such a contentious concept as racism is an obstacle to qualified and full-fledged assistance. Today, the prejudices caused by racial beliefs and confidence in inequality are the causes of many people’s dissatisfaction with the quality of care. Despite the fact that the forms of manifestation of bias have changed over the past time due to the course of socialization promoted among the population, residual phenomena still exist. White et al. (2017) cite the notion of aversive racism, which differs from the overtone in that there is no apparent bias, but the attitude and quality of medical staff’s work in relation to the representatives of different races are worse than to other population groups. Non and Gravlee (2015) also consider the hidden forms of inequality manifestation and consider the concept of academic, or scientific racism in American medicine. According to the authors, it is reflected in premature conclusions about certain theories and beliefs that have insufficient justification (Non & Gravlee, 2015). All these facts allow talking about the relevance of the issue and the need to find ways to avoid it.
A Plan to Reduce Racism in Medicine
In order to exclude such a phenomenon as racism from the healthcare sector, it is necessary to take certain measures. A special action plan may be useful as a guide to medical staff. It can include the following items:
- Medical personnel should participate in specific courses and training devoted to the promotion of equality as one of the central social values. Psychologists and sociologists should explain to the staff the importance of the same approach to all patients without exception. The knowledge of doctors and nurses about the specifics of care for all population groups is to be checked.
- Senior management should control the activities of personnel in relation to patients of different races and prevent any manifestations of bias timely. The leaders of structural units are to take responsibility for monitoring the situation. Explanatory work should be carried out to describe the basic positions of the theory of equality.
- The population should be informed about the policy of openness of medical care and free access to services. In case people are aware of possible sanctions against unscrupulous medical personnel, they will have an opportunity to appeal against inappropriate behavior. All information may be disseminated through social advertising of the new policy.
- Volunteer help can be required for additional work with those employees who do not have an opportunity to attend special courses. The representatives of medical communities may conduct joint seminars, discuss the problem of racism, and suggest ways of fighting. Information on the recruitment of such groups can be disseminated by the management of clinics.
- Government participation is desirable. The members of the authorities may be involved in the joint struggle against racism and should support all stakeholders in the fight against this social remnant. Officials can also provide relevant sponsorship for the promotion of the program.
Conclusion
Such a phenomenon as racism in medicine is unacceptable since the prejudiced attitude of healthcare workers towards patients is contrary to the basics of their work. Regardless of the forms of inequality, appropriate measures should be taken with respect to this problem. A special action plan can help to improve the knowledge of both medical personnel and the public concerning the issue. The participation of different stakeholders is desirable because joint efforts contribute to a more effective fight against prejudices.
References
Non, A. L., & Gravlee, C. C. (2015). Biology and culture beyond the genome: Race, racism, and health. American Anthropologist, 117(4), 737-738. Web.
White, A. A., Logghe, H. J., Goodenough, D. A., Barnes, L. L., Hallward, A., Allen, I. M.,… Llerena-Quinn, R. (2017). Self-awareness and cultural identity as an effort to reduce bias in medicine. Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities, 5(1), 34-49. Web.