Writing Sample 5: The following is an excerpt from a college essay I wrote on the Syrian refugee crisis and the ethical implications of the crisis on a global scale. (This essay was written in 2014 and may not reflect more updated data sets regarding the crisis).
--
Syrian Refugee Crisis
In Peter Singer’s, “Famine, Affluence, and Morality”, he uses the the Bengal emergency as a case study to explore what our moral obligation as human beings is. In it he states, “…there is nothing unique about this situation except its magnitude”. Similar things can be said about the Syrian refugee crisis. Currently, the Zaatari Refugee camp is the second largest in the world (second only to the Dadaab refugee camp in Kenya), and stands as the fourth largest city in Jordan, housing over 144,000 Syrian refugees. Despite the fact that the piece was written in 1971, many striking parallels can still be drawn between the two crises. Just as the situation in Bengal saw few people speaking up against the obvious injustice faced by Bengal refugees, such is the case regarding the plight of Syrians. “Generally speaking, people have not given large sums to relief funds; they have not written to their parliamentary representatives demanding increased government assistance; they have not demonstrated in the streets, held symbolic fasts, or done anything else directed toward providing the refugees with the means to satisfy their essential needs” (Singer 835). While some may be under the impression that conditions in refugee camps like Zaatari are “ok”, the fact remains that poor living conditions have been a source of violence and instability within the camp itself. Syrians have seemingly escaped from one injustice to another.
Thus, one is left asking what should be done? According to Singer, “if it is in our power to prevent something very bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything morally significant, we out, morally, to do it” (Singer 837). He argues that distance does not affect one's moral obligation in any way. As long as nothing of comparable moral importance is being sacrificed, morally one ought to act. Whether a person is 10 feet away or 10,000 miles away, if it is within our power to help, we have an obligation to do so. Singer reinforces his argument by asserting that technological advancements render us more morally responsible because “instant communication” and “swift transportation” have changed the game.
Globalization has changed our moral situation, though it often goes unrecognized. Seeing that it is now 2014, and the article was originally published in 1971, it would seem that we have not progressed much in the moral arena. Communication has become vastly more advanced, and the opportunity to give is much easier with the advent of credit cards, the internet, and numerous non-profits working directly on the ground to bring much needed aid to those affected by the conflict. Singer goes on to posit that just as distance does not reduce one’s moral obligation to help when they can, neither does the number of people being affected. Each individual is responsible for doing their part, regardless of whether others are acting or not. He uses the example of many people watching a child drown, and that ultimately one individual cannot be less obliged to take action simply because others around them are standing by idly. Finally, Singer addresses what has been termed “supererogatory”; an act that is good to do, but isn’t necessarily bad to abstain from. He disagrees with this completely writing, “On the contrary, we ought to give the money away, and it is wrong not to do so” (Singer 840). According to Singer, the way to address the Syrian refugee crisis would be for everyone to recognize their moral obligation, and then to act upon it swiftly. Charity is not just a good thing to do, it is a moral obligation and every individual is responsible.