A World Where Money and Power Trump All
I think we live in a world we seldomly have any control.
People die, people perish.
Only those who wield power, possess wealth, can excel in a world full of constraints and dismay.
Poor people have no choice but to beg for their lives. Rich people have plenty and live a well life.
In a world like this, I can see why Marx wanted to change it for the better goods.
The root of these problems lies on the resource distribution.
Who shall have the best resources? Who should not?
Rich people? Or powerful people? Or the people in actual need?
I believe every country’s healthcare system tries to distribute medical resources to the people in actual need, however, to accomplish this in real life is extremely hard.
You can have a system where you are automatically assigned to “appropriate” care, or a system where money trumps all, or, a system which mixes the previous two systems together.
Majority vs Minority
Also, there’s this moral question, should we save the majority?
This is a hard question.
Who will contribute the better goods to the overall welfare of a society? The minority? Or the majority?
In movies and TV shows, we often see our big heroes save the innocents on the street from the evil grips of crazy villains or monsters. They are executing justice for most people. But what about the people that are in the buildings crashed by the heroes? Or the people die trying to help heroes? We often sugarcoat these behaviors as justifiable, and justice, seems to have a price.
So, let’s say you’re on a railroad, as the head of a train. The train is speeding quickly into a fork, whereas there is a person on the right track, and three people on the left track. They are completely strapped to the tracks, and now you don’t have enough time to stop the train. So comes the life and death problem–who, shall you save?
People may answer with to save those three people, because three lives matter more than one. But, why is that exactly? Why three people’s lives can weigh heavier than one person’s?
So if the situation changes a little bit. Let’s say, the right track is strapped with Einstein. And the left track is those three ordinary people. Who shall you save?
Einstein has much much more value to us humans than all of those three people combined, is it justifiable, to save Einstein, instead of those three people?
There’s no answer to this question, and meanwhile, all answers are correct. But none of them are justifiable on a grand scale, they are only, individually, or perspectively justifiable.
This is where moral debates come from.