practical ethics: poppies, hunger and heroin
I rarely keep up with the news lately, I find quick scan of the headlines on the BBC website is enough to be going on with. The other day though I was at a loss for what to do for half an hour or so and switched on the telly. Sadly, the only thing that was worth watching was the ITV news, which had an extended report from an embedded journalist in Helmand province in Afghanistan.
One of the operations that the British are carrying out is aimed at eradicating opium poppy growth in the province. Apparently (according to ITV), 93% of the worlds opium comes from Afghanistan. Of course, a reasonable quantity of that gets sold in the UK as heroin.
Now, I’m aware that drug abuse is a bad thing, and that the easy availability of certain drugs, including heroin, have contributed to the serious decline of some towns in the UK. I can also believe that the Taleban - who I’ll describe as “not the party that I’d vote for - make money from the trafficking of opium. And as I say, I’m not their biggest fan.
On the other hand, the operation that was described in the ITV footage consisted in completely trashing the opium fields in the area. It could be argued that it’s illegal, but quite frankly it’s the major cash crop of the region and pretty much sustains the entire economy - not just the armed forces, but all the other men, women and children in the area.
It made me think about ethics. I have no idea what anyone is trying to do to reduce the dependency of the economy on opium, but just trashing the crop seems unethical. What are people expected to live on? On the other hand, heroin causes misery across the world - is the suffering of a few people that much more important than the suffering of many?
I think, my preferred solution would be to legalise hard drugs, then the opium crop wouldn’t be illegal, the trade could be taxed which would make money for the government to invest in infrastructure. And as a happy side benefit, much of the additional crime associated with illegal drugs - theft for enough cash to get a fix - might be reduced.
What does anyone else think?
Popularity: 33% [?]
Tagged by a History Meme
I was tagged by the chaplain for a history meme. This doesn’t stray too far off topic, I promise.
The rules are:
- Link to the person who tagged you.
- List 7 random/weird things about your favourite historical figure.
- Tag seven more people at the end of your blog and link to theirs.
- Let the person know they have been tagged by leaving a note on their blog.
I like to think that my favourite historical figure is an unusual one. Thomas More was an English politician, lawyer and scholar from the 16th century. Oh, and he’s a canonised saint and martyr in the Catholic Church.
Trivia about Thomas More:
- He popularised the term Utopia for a hypothetical perfect place in his book of the same name (it’s actually Latin for nowhere).
- He was the first secular Chancellor of England, following in the footsteps of Cardinal Wolsey.
- He co-wrote the pamphlet Assertio Septem Sacramentorum Martinum Lutherum (Declaration of the Seven Sacraments Against Martin Luther) which caused the Pope to confer the title Defender of the Faith on Henry VIII. This title has been used by all subsequent English/British monarchs.
- He took part in the persecution of William Tyndale, one of the pre-eminent early English Protestants, whose translation of the Bible strongly influenced the King James version.
- He was friends with Erasmus, whose satirical attack on the Catholic Church In Praise of Folly was dedicated to More.
- He was the first English patron of Hans Holbein, who is famous for his court paintings of Henry VIII, particularly that showing the King with his third wife Jane Seymour and his three children Mary, Elizabeth and Edward.
- He cemented the reputation of Richard III as a tyrant through his early work The History of Richard III. This reputation was later popularised further by Shakespeare of course.
Thomas More has been my favourite historical figure for a long time, certainly pre-dating my atheism. There’s much in his life that I think is unethical, immoral, and plain wrong - he certainly would have had no compunction in burning me at the stake.
One of the things that I do admire, is his willingness to stand up for his beliefs, even though he knew that they were likely to lead him into serious trouble. Of course, he believed that he would be rewarded in the next life, but even so, it can’t have been easy.
I tend to judge historical figures by two sets of rules, my own, and those of the period in which they lived. Thomas More was certainly an ethical man by his own standards, and those of many other people who lived at the same time. By my own, he was a lot less so.
I’m not tagging, because I don’t feel like I want to force it on people (I didn’t feel forced myself by the way), but if you feel so inclined, consider yourself tagged.
Popularity: 39% [?]
