|
Well, I wouldnt say unprovoked. Not following UN regulations for a decade gave the ample plenty of time to get their stuff together.
Regarding your comments on freedom and democracy, they seem unrelated to children starving. It is the citizens responsibility to feed the hungry and care for the sick, not the governments. As for crime, it may be an necc evil, but we still have a duty to punish it. I don't need crime to get by. Crime, more often than not, its an action of lazyness rather than neccesity. Most people don't steal to eat. While I feel for those who do steal to eat, I have no problem with them going to jail. They broke the law, and this isn't a monarchy where we are starving everyone but the elite. I feel our laws are just. There is plenty to be had, you just have to get it. I know it is difficult for many to do, but so what? The ease with which one is to procure such things is not established, it varies. Nobody should be helped nor hindered based on their starting position. The best they can do is attempt to better themselves, in order to advance the starting position of those they leave behind.
I know this may sound heartless, and perhaps it is to a degree. I think our role as the citzenry is to take care of our fellow citizens. Depending on the government simply won't work, and it shouldnt have to. Because of the government's current role, I think many institutions have stopped playing the role they should play in our society. While our religious groups do great things for the community, they generally arent the shelter for the poor and the sick and the hungry like they once were. Volunteer groups have options the government does not. It is much easier to kick people out of your home than it is for the government to stop supporting someone without means. Thus, people are often able to take advantage of the government's generosity, and much of the general public feels slighted by this. If the government held a lesser role in the charitable support community, I think people would be more willing to help. The government is impersonal, and red-tape often prevents the establishment of who really is in need and who is not. As citizens, we can tell who provides for their family and who spends it on less essential things. The upper class and the conservatives in this country are not against the poor. They are usually rebelling against the accusations of the left and the poor, which often proclaim that the rich hold no regard for them. However, from the perspective of the wealthy, they are not only paying a substantial tax burden, but also are expected to contribute charitably. So in essence, they are paying for them with their taxes, often paying through charity, and yet are still scorned by many in society. It is similar to America's role with the UN, in that we would be much more willing to contribute on all fronts if the world would acknowledge the good things we do. Similarly, I feel that a shift in the way this country supports those in need and in the attitude of some towards those who have, would open a different avenue of help and would force ordinary citizens to reach out to those who need it.
|