Famine, Affluence and Morality

The title essay of this book first came out in 1972 at the time of a vast refugee crisis involving 9 million people East Bengal. It was originally published in Philosophy and Public Affairs and has continued to create a huge stir around the world. Bill and Melinda Gates contribute the foreword, where they remark that child mortality before the age of five has dropped from 20% in 1960 to 5% now, but that still represents 6.3 million a year from conditions like diarrhoea, pneumonia or malaria that we know how to prevent or cure. Even back then, Singer had become a vegetarian and was giving 10% his income to Oxfam. In his new preface, he gives examples of readers who have founded inspiring initiatives and reflects on the uncomfortable conclusion of his article that very few of us are living fully ethical lives.

This becomes clear when one considers that in some cases as little as $200 can save the life of a child. Most of us could afford this sum, but we choose to spend our money on other things, including luxuries like dining out, or in my case wine. His argument is straightforward: 'if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally, to do it.' Of course, millions of people are in a similar situation and do not, for instance, contribute $5 five to a cause - in which case, Singer argues, we are still morally obliged to contribute as much as we can. This is not just out of charity, but rather duty. Putting figures on his argument, suggests that if a household earns $50,000 and spends $30,000 on necessities, they should give away $20,000. The household earning $100,000 can give away $70,000 (although more tax would be deducted). When he applies this analysis to the top 10% all Americans, giving away between one third one of the top and 10% at the bottom would generate $404 billion a year, while the cost of fully meeting the millennium development goals is only $189 billion a year. Lester Brown applies a similar argument to governments, but in either event it is clear that there is a lack of political will and/or personal moral commitment. Every reader will need to gauge their own response to this powerful plea.