|
The Wells School of Philosophy
Roll Call
3rd October 2023, Hare Lane, 1000-1200 hrs:
Tutors:
Linda (L),
Steve (S)
Pupils:
Julia (JA),
Alexis (A),
David (DR),
Margie (M),
Viki (M),
Gavi(G)
Critiques of the Preparatory Material
- The Moral Maze programme[1] was frustrating and the discussion a bit weedy, with none of the regulars shifting position as a result of the debate.
- The New York Times article[3] from 1964 was difficult to access. (The full text is attached at the end of this summary.)
Damaging the Environment
- Climate change is clearly happening. This year saw massive fires then floods in Greece, for example.(D)
- Cement production apparently produces 8% of the world's greenhouse gases.(V)
- One flight in Europe undoes all the good done by a vegan's avoidance of meat for a year.(V)
- The government should stop subsidising aircraft fuel.(V)
- We should reduce our spending on clothes, food from overseas, building works etc.(M)
- Greta Thunberg recommends we consider the environmental impact of every daily activity, such as clothes-washing.(M)
- But many families are too busy to do this.(L)
- An analogy to our climatic future: if the world knew it faced annihilation in five years from impact with an asteroid unless scientists worked together to divert it, would they do so? Or would in-fighting between nations be too disruptive?(V)
- Some organisations over-egg the pudding: there was a recent newspaper story of an academic who felt forced to slant his recent paper toward climate change in order to achieve acceptance. And in the West Country, a notice claimed that a clifftop tower was being moved for a second time in its existence because of climate change when erosion of the cliff face has been happening for millennia.(V)
The Ballot Box
- When people vote in parliamentary elections, they usually have mixed, conflicting motives: self-interest vs. what they believe is best for society.(S)
- There are huge forces acting on government when compared to the impact of one individual: big business, lobby groups, unions etc.(L)
- If in a hypothetical UK parliamentary election, Party A gets 40% of the vote, Party B gets 30% and Party C also gets 30%, then Party A forms the government, even though they were voted in by a minority. It may be that on a particular issue, they think one way, whereas Parties B and C both a different, but identical way—so on that issue, the view of the absolute majority are not implemented.(L)
- So is democracy fundamentally flawed?(S)
- Are there some issues which are so qualitatively different (to the norm)—perhaps existential for huge swathes of humanity—that they justify breaking the law?(S)
- And isn't the UK government breaking the law on its own Net Zero commitments?(S)
- Sunak seems to be targeting the pet peeves of special interest groups—for instance, some motorists' dislike for ULEZ and 20mph zones.(A)
- Like Trump, he seems to be exploiting suspicions of a deep state acting against our interests.(S)
- The Lib Dems seem, in general, to have a policy of not building on the Green Belt in order to win rural Tory seats.(S)
- We're not getting the people we want in power because of the absence of proportional representation.(L)
- Instead we have a government of very little talent.(M)
Law-breaking, Civil Disobedience, and Nuisance
- Rawls says that civil disobedience is acceptable, provided it is organised and employed as a last resort, after much letter-writing.(L)
- One cannot contemplate law-breaking on a whim. The issue must be sufficiently significant.(V)
- Unlike Just Stop Oil, Extinction Rebellion does not try to antagonise the public.(M)
- We are talking about ethical law-breaking, where the offender believes their act is for the good of society—not criminal activity out of malice or for personal gain.(V)
- There are huge chunks of the population who cannot consider breaking the law because it could endanger their jobs.(G)
Unlawful Acts intended primarily to Advertise a Cause
- For example, climbing onto gantries over the M25.
Unlawful Acts intended primarily to Disrupt a Disliked Activity
- For example, blowing up oil pipelines. Showcased on the Chris Packham programme[2], this was felt to be a step too far.
- Should there be a Hippocratic Oath for activists, to ensure harm is not intended?(S)
- But Catholics gained the right to stand for parliament in Northern Ireland in part because of violent IRA activity.(V)
Unlawful Acts intended primarily to Demonstrate Strength of Support
- The Poll Tax demonstrations were violent but effective.(A)
And lastly, Capitalism
- Big business, the media and newspapers are encouraging rampant consumerism.
- People have to accept negative economic growth.(JA)
- We should develop Citizens Assemblies to encourage citizen involvement in their local communities.(S)
Other topics touched on
- Volunteers at the National Trust resigning after being forced to wear Pride badges, and the need for more minorities in the Trust,
- Waitrose and a nine-storey block in Hersham,
- The sense among Palestinians that they are fighting a war,
- M&S Food in Claygate, and
- The ending of apartheid South Africa 1989-1994 as a consequence of the collapse of the Soviet Union and its impact on the funding of armed forces in Namibia, Angola and Mozambique.
Books Plugged:
- Jon Alexander (2022). Citizens: Why the Key to Fixing Everything is All of Us. Canbury.
- William MacAskill (2022). What We Owe The Future: A Million-Year View. Oneworld.
- John Rawls (1971). A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press.
References
|
