Hunger Symposium: Panel B Hunger and people's Conscience - Part 1 Main Address - Side A

00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:09,320
I am the chairman of this meeting, which means I'm not allowed to make a speech.
 
2
00:00:09,320 --> 00:00:15,640
The choice was very cunningly contrived.
 
3
00:00:15,640 --> 00:00:23,360
I have been given a sheaf of biographical material about the consultants and participants
 
4
00:00:23,360 --> 00:00:29,560
in the symposium.
 
5
00:00:29,560 --> 00:00:33,320
I won't share the information with you.
 
6
00:00:33,320 --> 00:00:37,840
First of all, it would take time, and secondly, it's always an insult to a participant to
 
7
00:00:37,840 --> 00:00:43,440
tell people who he is because you're to assume that he's extremely well-known or he wouldn't
 
8
00:00:43,440 --> 00:00:46,320
have been invited.
 
9
00:00:46,320 --> 00:00:53,280
My function is to make sure that he doesn't speak more than the time allotted to him.
 
10
00:00:53,280 --> 00:00:59,000
So really, when you come right down to the ball fact, but I'm here to make trouble for
 
11
00:00:59,000 --> 00:01:00,000
myself.
 
12
00:01:00,000 --> 00:01:11,000
I will identify the people who will be speaking to us, saving for last the identification
 
13
00:01:11,000 --> 00:01:16,040
of the principal speaker.
 
14
00:01:16,040 --> 00:01:24,960
I will ask if at the brief identification I make of each, the speaker will kindly stand
 
15
00:01:24,960 --> 00:01:28,640
so you'll later recognize him when he's introduced.
 
16
00:01:28,640 --> 00:01:35,240
I won't have to bore you and discuss him by giving a long description of him before he
 
17
00:01:35,240 --> 00:01:40,280
stands up to speak.
 
18
00:01:40,320 --> 00:01:51,240
First of all, we have with us as one of the respondents, which means legitimate hecklers,
 
19
00:01:51,240 --> 00:01:54,400
Mr. Philip J. Scharper.
 
20
00:01:54,400 --> 00:02:00,160
Mr. Scharper and I are old friends, and we worked together on the pastoral constitution
 
21
00:02:00,160 --> 00:02:01,680
of Vatican Council II.
 
22
00:02:01,680 --> 00:02:07,080
So any of you who have an argument with that particular chapter of the Vatican Council,
 
23
00:02:07,080 --> 00:02:15,040
the fault is either Phil's or mine, and probably both of us because we usually agreed.
 
24
00:02:15,040 --> 00:02:22,840
He has a wide career in the field of writing, of editing, public speaking, the intellectual
 
25
00:02:22,840 --> 00:02:26,720
life generally.
 
26
00:02:26,720 --> 00:02:29,240
And we're delighted to have him with us.
 
27
00:02:29,240 --> 00:02:31,240
Phil, did you stand up?
 
28
00:02:31,240 --> 00:02:32,240
Good.
 
29
00:02:32,240 --> 00:02:43,720
Well, after you've patiently with me, these mics throw me off, and I never know which
 
30
00:02:43,720 --> 00:02:48,340
way to throw my voice.
 
31
00:02:48,340 --> 00:02:55,680
We have with us the Reverend Arthur Simon, who's a Lutheran clergyman of the Missouri
 
32
00:02:55,680 --> 00:02:56,680
Synod.
 
33
00:02:56,680 --> 00:03:00,560
That, by the way, is the good one.
 
34
00:03:00,560 --> 00:03:06,440
And he is the executive director of Bread for the World, which makes his presence here
 
35
00:03:06,440 --> 00:03:10,880
today particularly appropriate.
 
36
00:03:10,880 --> 00:03:15,680
His latest book is entitled Bread for the World.
 
37
00:03:15,680 --> 00:03:28,200
Mr. Simon, will you stand up, please?
 
38
00:03:28,200 --> 00:03:37,080
We have with us also among the respondents Monsignor Joseph Harnett, who through no
 
39
00:03:37,080 --> 00:03:44,400
fault of his was born in Philadelphia and educated at St. Giles Seminary in Philadelphia
 
40
00:03:44,400 --> 00:03:54,480
and then at the Major Roman Seminary in Rome, from which he has his doctorate.
 
41
00:03:54,480 --> 00:04:02,040
He has been with the Catholic Relief Service since 1947 and represented the Catholic Relief
 
42
00:04:02,040 --> 00:04:09,200
Service at the World Food Program in Rome and the UN Food and Agricultural Organization
 
43
00:04:09,200 --> 00:04:10,200
in Rome.
 
44
00:04:10,200 --> 00:04:16,000
I have a particular affection for Monsignor Harnett because he's the one through whom
 
45
00:04:16,000 --> 00:04:23,980
I'm able to transmit, as through a conduit, contributions to good works in those parts
 
46
00:04:23,980 --> 00:04:30,380
of the world which the United States law forbids you to give money to because you can't
 
47
00:04:30,380 --> 00:04:32,860
claim the tax exemption.
 
48
00:04:32,860 --> 00:04:37,340
And we can be generous, but you've got to pay for it.
 
49
00:04:37,340 --> 00:04:43,460
Monsignor Harnett helps out on that.
 
50
00:04:43,460 --> 00:04:48,460
Monsignor?
 
51
00:04:48,460 --> 00:04:55,580
Monsignor Mary Evelyn Dragan, Sisters of Notre Dame, is currently serving as educational
 
52
00:04:55,580 --> 00:04:59,620
consultant with the Catholic Relief Services.
 
53
00:04:59,620 --> 00:05:04,980
And she has recently been named the first director of the Bread for the World Educational
 
54
00:05:04,980 --> 00:05:12,500
Fund, which aims at putting concern for hunger solidly into the international commitments
 
55
00:05:12,500 --> 00:05:15,460
of Christian universities and colleges.
 
56
00:05:15,460 --> 00:05:20,260
I can't imagine any more important work or, therefore, any more important person.
 
57
00:05:20,260 --> 00:05:30,420
Sister, will you stand, please?
 
58
00:05:30,420 --> 00:05:38,540
Mr. John R. Hunting is present as a resource person.
 
59
00:05:38,540 --> 00:05:42,620
That means a person whose brain you pick.
 
60
00:05:42,780 --> 00:05:48,940
And he comes qualified to have his brains picked because his entire business career
 
61
00:05:48,940 --> 00:05:54,900
has been in the banking industry, but culminated in his appointment as chairman and chief executive
 
62
00:05:54,900 --> 00:06:00,980
officer of the First Pennsylvania Bank and First Pennsylvania Corporation.
 
63
00:06:00,980 --> 00:06:07,060
He's active in civic and educational affairs among his many memberships of the American
 
64
00:06:07,100 --> 00:06:13,300
Israeli Chamber of Commerce and the Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce.
 
65
00:06:13,300 --> 00:06:20,100
His master's degree is in economics, and he lives in Jenkintown, right outside the city.
 
66
00:06:20,100 --> 00:06:28,500
Would you stand up, please?
 
67
00:06:28,500 --> 00:06:32,180
Another resource person is Dr. Lawrence Bell.
 
68
00:06:32,700 --> 00:06:37,660
Dr. Bell obtained his doctorate in economics from Harvard, which makes him intellectually
 
69
00:06:37,660 --> 00:06:45,140
respectable, and is currently the professor of economics at St. Joseph's College in Philadelphia,
 
70
00:06:45,140 --> 00:06:49,220
which means he put his respectability to work.
 
71
00:06:49,220 --> 00:06:57,820
He participated in the World Food Conference in Rome in 1974 and the seminar in cooperatives
 
72
00:06:57,820 --> 00:07:01,740
in Sweden in 1975.
 
73
00:07:01,740 --> 00:07:07,060
He's been involved in a number of college enterprises dealing with the problem of world
 
74
00:07:07,060 --> 00:07:08,060
hunger.
 
75
00:07:08,060 --> 00:07:17,700
Would you stand up, please, Mr. Bell?
 
76
00:07:17,700 --> 00:07:25,580
Mr. Sam Blaske is substituting for Mr. Ed Pizak, whose name is on your programs.
 
77
00:07:25,740 --> 00:07:32,620
Mr. Blaske is a lawyer who has spent many years associated with the food industry.
 
78
00:07:32,620 --> 00:07:38,980
Currently serving as manager of special projects at Mrs. Paul's Kitchens, Mr. Blaske earlier
 
79
00:07:38,980 --> 00:07:46,020
served as associate director of the Academy of Food Marketing at St. Joseph's College,
 
80
00:07:46,020 --> 00:07:47,380
Philadelphia.
 
81
00:07:47,380 --> 00:07:53,240
After some years in term with the federal program of consumer education in Washington,
 
82
00:07:53,240 --> 00:07:59,000
he returned to Philadelphia to work with his home industry, where he continues his
 
83
00:07:59,000 --> 00:08:12,040
interest in nutrition and nutrition education.
 
84
00:08:12,040 --> 00:08:21,760
Our speaker for the afternoon has extremely impressive credentials.
 
85
00:08:21,760 --> 00:08:31,400
Father J. Brian Herr is associate secretary for international justice and peace at the
 
86
00:08:31,400 --> 00:08:35,000
United States Catholic Conference.
 
87
00:08:35,000 --> 00:08:40,920
He's a visiting lecturer in social ethics at the seminary in Boston.
 
88
00:08:40,920 --> 00:08:47,840
He served as a member of the papal delegation at the General Assembly of the United Nations
 
89
00:08:47,840 --> 00:08:52,680
and an advisor to the American bishops in an extremely difficult task at the Senate
 
90
00:08:52,680 --> 00:08:56,160
of 1974.
 
91
00:08:56,160 --> 00:09:05,560
He has published widely and in all cases on subjects bound up with the preoccupation of
 
92
00:09:05,560 --> 00:09:10,840
this afternoon's meeting.
 
93
00:09:10,840 --> 00:09:18,960
His most important qualification is that he was born in Boston, where in fact the American
 
94
00:09:18,960 --> 00:09:22,760
Revolution began.
 
95
00:09:22,760 --> 00:09:29,800
This thought is not widely accepted, but nonetheless, Father Gibbie, to the contrary, notwithstanding,
 
96
00:09:29,800 --> 00:09:35,320
the nation was established in Philadelphia, but the revolution began in Boston.
 
97
00:09:35,320 --> 00:09:39,520
And so did the ecological problem, because we threw a bunch of tea into the harbor and
 
98
00:09:39,520 --> 00:09:45,080
that was the beginning of the whole business that brings us here together.
 
99
00:09:45,080 --> 00:09:48,120
We should have given the tea away.
 
100
00:09:48,120 --> 00:09:55,000
There were people who needed it then.
 
101
00:09:55,000 --> 00:10:07,520
Father Herr.
 
102
00:10:07,520 --> 00:10:10,880
I want to thank His Eminence for that kind introduction, and since I know he is watching
 
103
00:10:10,880 --> 00:10:16,260
the clock, I will move immediately to my prepared text.
 
104
00:10:16,260 --> 00:10:20,840
The task I have been assigned this afternoon is to do a work of moral analysis on some
 
105
00:10:20,840 --> 00:10:24,660
of the proposed solutions to the world food crisis.
 
106
00:10:24,660 --> 00:10:29,160
As I approach this task, I have taken for myself certain guidelines.
 
107
00:10:29,160 --> 00:10:34,400
First, the guideline laid down by Professor James Gustafson, professor of Christian ethics
 
108
00:10:34,400 --> 00:10:36,320
at Chicago University.
 
109
00:10:36,640 --> 00:10:41,560
Gustafson argues that the moralist, when he approaches a question of social morality,
 
110
00:10:41,560 --> 00:10:44,240
must approach it through the shape of the problem.
 
111
00:10:44,240 --> 00:10:49,680
That is to say, there is no ethical response that is apart from the technical data of the
 
112
00:10:49,680 --> 00:10:50,680
problem.
 
113
00:10:50,680 --> 00:10:56,480
Secondly, Gustafson argues that, in fact, there is neither any purely moral answer to
 
114
00:10:56,480 --> 00:11:00,340
a problem or any purely technical answer to a problem.
 
115
00:11:00,340 --> 00:11:04,600
Every moral answer must be articulated in terms of the framework of the nature of the
 
116
00:11:04,600 --> 00:11:06,640
issue one discusses.
 
117
00:11:06,640 --> 00:11:13,160
And every technical answer has its moral premises, its biases, its values, the way it weighs
 
118
00:11:13,160 --> 00:11:16,860
the characteristics of the problem that we confront.
 
119
00:11:16,860 --> 00:11:20,720
So I will try and move through the presentation in the following steps.
 
120
00:11:20,720 --> 00:11:24,360
First, some discussion on the shape of the food problem.
 
121
00:11:24,360 --> 00:11:30,760
Secondly, a moral analysis of the structure of some of the solutions proposed for the
 
122
00:11:30,760 --> 00:11:31,760
problem.
 
123
00:11:31,920 --> 00:11:37,760
Thirdly, a brief discussion on the sources of Christian resources as we as Christians
 
124
00:11:37,760 --> 00:11:43,280
come together with others in the world to deal with a common problem, the hungry in
 
125
00:11:43,280 --> 00:11:49,680
our midst and the food we have to share with the hungry and with those close to us.
 
126
00:11:49,680 --> 00:11:52,640
First, a discussion of the shape of the problem.
 
127
00:11:52,640 --> 00:11:57,640
I think what's important is to stress the nature of the food problem, is to situate
 
128
00:11:57,640 --> 00:12:00,680
it in the landscape of world politics.
 
129
00:12:00,680 --> 00:12:05,920
The food problem is one of those issues that today is described as a transnational problem.
 
130
00:12:05,920 --> 00:12:10,280
That is to say, the problem cuts across every nation in the globe.
 
131
00:12:10,280 --> 00:12:12,720
No nation is insulated from it.
 
132
00:12:12,720 --> 00:12:19,880
It touches all nations and there is no single nation that can solve it by itself.
 
133
00:12:19,880 --> 00:12:25,300
Transnational problems have taken on a new visibility in the international system today.
 
134
00:12:25,300 --> 00:12:30,640
One can trace a whole series of United Nations conferences since the early 60s, all of which
 
135
00:12:30,640 --> 00:12:34,920
have tried to identify the transnational problems of the day.
 
136
00:12:34,920 --> 00:12:39,760
There have been the UNCTAD conferences on trade and development, transnational issues,
 
137
00:12:39,760 --> 00:12:44,400
the UN Conference on the Environment, the UN Conference on Population, on Food, on the
 
138
00:12:44,400 --> 00:12:47,000
Law of the Sea, and on women's issues.
 
139
00:12:47,000 --> 00:12:52,160
None of those issues is contained within any single country and there is no country, no
 
140
00:12:52,160 --> 00:12:59,280
matter how powerful, that can resist the force, if you will, of the empirical data that touches
 
141
00:12:59,320 --> 00:13:01,240
those issues.
 
142
00:13:01,240 --> 00:13:05,880
The important thing about transnational issues is not only that they touch all and they can't
 
143
00:13:05,880 --> 00:13:11,660
be solved by any single nation, but that they require a higher degree of international cooperation
 
144
00:13:11,660 --> 00:13:16,040
to deal with these questions than we have been accustomed to expect from nations on
 
145
00:13:16,040 --> 00:13:19,720
traditional problems of international politics.
 
146
00:13:19,720 --> 00:13:24,320
Now with that general statement in the background, that we're looking at a transnational question,
 
147
00:13:24,320 --> 00:13:28,940
that in a sense we can neither escape nor conquer by ourselves, let me try and deal
 
148
00:13:28,980 --> 00:13:31,860
with some of the specifics of the food problem.
 
149
00:13:31,860 --> 00:13:37,500
I would place as a general proposition that when one tries to examine at least the immediate
 
150
00:13:37,500 --> 00:13:43,140
impact of the food problem, what strikes one is that we have moved from a situation of
 
151
00:13:43,140 --> 00:13:49,640
managing surplus to a situation of managing scarcity, at least in worldwide terms.
 
152
00:13:49,640 --> 00:13:51,980
This statement needs to be qualified.
 
153
00:13:51,980 --> 00:13:56,900
In the times that we describe as surplus periods, people still went hungry.
 
154
00:13:57,060 --> 00:14:03,620
In the scarcity era, in which many describe us being in today, scarcity is a relative
 
155
00:14:03,620 --> 00:14:04,620
factor.
 
156
00:14:04,620 --> 00:14:10,380
But for the sake of understanding the problem, I think it is arguable to say that we have
 
157
00:14:10,380 --> 00:14:14,900
moved from a situation of the 60s where the problem, at least for the U.S., was managing
 
158
00:14:14,900 --> 00:14:21,340
surplus to the situation of the 70s where the long-term problem may be managing scarcities.
 
159
00:14:21,340 --> 00:14:26,700
If one wants to specify the content of what one means by scarcity, let me try and summarize
 
160
00:14:26,700 --> 00:14:33,220
in statistical terms some indicators of what I mean by moving from surplus to scarcity.
 
161
00:14:33,220 --> 00:14:40,300
First, if you take as one example of the world food situation, the world reserve, that is
 
162
00:14:40,300 --> 00:14:47,940
to say, reserves as measured in days of annual grain consumption, in 1961, the globe possessed
 
163
00:14:47,940 --> 00:14:52,020
a reserve of approximately 105 days' supply.
 
164
00:14:52,020 --> 00:14:57,460
By 1965, we still had a rather comfortable 91 days' supply.
 
165
00:14:57,460 --> 00:15:05,300
But by 1973, that global reserve was reduced to 55 days' supply, and by 1975 to 35 days'
 
166
00:15:05,300 --> 00:15:06,300
supply.
 
167
00:15:06,300 --> 00:15:10,820
If we try and look at the relationship between a time of surplus and a time of scarcity in
 
168
00:15:10,820 --> 00:15:16,740
terms of U.S. participation, for example, in food assistance, the following statistics
 
169
00:15:16,740 --> 00:15:18,340
stand out.
 
170
00:15:18,340 --> 00:15:23,460
The Public Law 480 program, the Food for Peace program as it is known, that is to say, the
 
171
00:15:23,460 --> 00:15:29,260
program by which the U.S. shared a significant degree of food over the last 15 years with
 
172
00:15:29,260 --> 00:15:35,340
others in the globe, in 1961, the value of that program was $1.1 million.
 
173
00:15:35,340 --> 00:15:39,660
In 1965, it was $1.6 million.
 
174
00:15:39,660 --> 00:15:44,940
During this period, the U.S. problem clearly was managing surplus food because one of the
 
175
00:15:44,940 --> 00:15:50,300
reasons for the PL 480 program was that we had a farm surplus that we could not put on
 
176
00:15:50,300 --> 00:15:57,140
the market domestically without depressing domestic prices, and we stored the surplus.
 
177
00:15:57,140 --> 00:16:01,580
After you stored the surplus long enough, it became, even in economical terms, cheaper
 
178
00:16:01,580 --> 00:16:03,900
to get rid of it than to continue to store it.
 
179
00:16:03,900 --> 00:16:08,420
So we were managing surplus in that sense, and the PL 480 program was a program with
 
180
00:16:08,420 --> 00:16:10,540
multiple motivations.
 
181
00:16:10,540 --> 00:16:14,660
Part of the motivation was humanitarian, but part of the motivation was economic.
 
182
00:16:15,380 --> 00:16:19,180
It was one of those rare instances in human history when enlightened economic self-interest
 
183
00:16:19,180 --> 00:16:22,140
and humanitarian concern intersected.
 
184
00:16:22,140 --> 00:16:28,260
It is precisely that intersection that rarely occurs in the time of managing surplus.
 
185
00:16:28,260 --> 00:16:34,260
And so the World Reserve problem indicates we've dropped from 105 days to 35 days supply.
 
186
00:16:34,260 --> 00:16:46,020
The PL 480 program at $1.6 billion in 1965, by 1973 had fallen to $954,000.
 
187
00:16:46,020 --> 00:16:47,700
One final statistic.
 
188
00:16:47,700 --> 00:16:54,500
Global food aid in terms of cereal grains in the mid-'60s was about 16 million tons.
 
189
00:16:54,500 --> 00:16:58,480
By the mid-'70s, that had dropped to 6 million tons.
 
190
00:16:58,480 --> 00:17:03,340
In a very sketchy summary statement then, I think the situation is the following.
 
191
00:17:03,420 --> 00:17:07,780
Although the stark possibility of famine, which faced parts of the world in the years
 
192
00:17:07,780 --> 00:17:14,340
1973 and 74, although that possibility is not as visibly with us at this time, the general
 
193
00:17:14,340 --> 00:17:19,580
condition of the 400 million people usually identified as malnourished in the globe has
 
194
00:17:19,580 --> 00:17:25,700
not been either significantly improved, nor are they significantly more secure today in
 
195
00:17:25,700 --> 00:17:32,540
terms of their daily diet against unexpected climatic changes or economic disruption.
 
196
00:17:32,540 --> 00:17:37,380
As one looks at the statistics of the food problem, it seems there are two basic issues
 
197
00:17:37,380 --> 00:17:39,820
facing the transnational problem.
 
198
00:17:39,820 --> 00:17:44,380
First, the issue of production, and secondly, the issue of distribution.
 
199
00:17:44,380 --> 00:17:50,420
As we face the 1976 harvest, the production issue looks better than it has in the early
 
200
00:17:50,420 --> 00:17:51,420
60s.
 
201
00:17:51,420 --> 00:17:57,580
It is expected that this year, the global productivity will be about 1.3 billion tons.
 
202
00:17:57,580 --> 00:18:01,980
But the distribution problem is far more delicate and far more complex.
 
203
00:18:02,420 --> 00:18:05,580
Mr. Martin McLaughlin of the Overseas Development Council, who has written extensively on the
 
204
00:18:05,580 --> 00:18:10,420
world food problem, specifies the difficulty and the complexity of the distribution issue
 
205
00:18:10,420 --> 00:18:11,420
when he says,
 
206
00:18:11,420 --> 00:18:16,540
"...the real crisis in the food issue is one of distribution, especially distribution
 
207
00:18:16,540 --> 00:18:17,940
of income.
 
208
00:18:17,940 --> 00:18:23,260
One major weakness of past programs is that they have largely ignored this controversial
 
209
00:18:23,260 --> 00:18:24,640
issue.
 
210
00:18:24,640 --> 00:18:29,220
Distribution decisions, after all, are made by politicians who decide either to allocate
 
211
00:18:29,220 --> 00:18:31,940
or to let the market allocate.
 
212
00:18:31,940 --> 00:18:35,820
These are political decisions, decisions that are beyond the realm of economics and
 
213
00:18:35,820 --> 00:18:41,420
technology alone, because these decisions require changes in social values and political
 
214
00:18:41,420 --> 00:18:42,420
power."
 
215
00:18:42,420 --> 00:18:47,020
I will return to the distribution issue in the moral analysis.
 
216
00:18:47,020 --> 00:18:52,660
As a result of the changing shape of the food landscape in the early 70s, the situation
 
217
00:18:52,660 --> 00:18:59,860
of managing scarcity, there was, in the international community, an increased concern with simply
 
218
00:18:59,860 --> 00:19:02,620
the empirical facts of the food problem.
 
219
00:19:02,620 --> 00:19:06,540
And the World Food Conference, held under the sponsorship of the United Nations in Rome
 
220
00:19:06,540 --> 00:19:14,220
in 1974, was in a sense the international response to the transnational problem of food.
 
221
00:19:14,220 --> 00:19:19,460
The conference was called for by Secretary Kissinger at the UN in 1973.
 
222
00:19:19,460 --> 00:19:23,780
And the simple dimensions of the problem meant that that call was met by the response of
 
223
00:19:23,780 --> 00:19:29,600
134 nations who met in Rome in November of 1974.
 
224
00:19:30,340 --> 00:19:35,040
What I would like to do is to outline briefly both what the conference did and what it could
 
225
00:19:35,040 --> 00:19:36,040
not do.
 
226
00:19:36,040 --> 00:19:40,240
And as I move to that second part, what it could not do, I'll begin the first section
 
227
00:19:40,240 --> 00:19:45,280
of moral analysis on responses to the food crisis, because the World Food Conference,
 
228
00:19:45,280 --> 00:19:50,800
at least in its outline of its program, is the first major response on a transnational
 
229
00:19:50,800 --> 00:19:53,680
basis to the world food problem.
 
230
00:19:53,680 --> 00:19:59,520
The problem was defined usually in terms of four interlocking characteristics that created
 
231
00:19:59,520 --> 00:20:02,760
the situation of scarcity of the early 70s.
 
232
00:20:02,760 --> 00:20:06,680
Those four causes, which I cannot examine at this time, are usually enumerated as the
 
233
00:20:06,680 --> 00:20:07,680
following.
 
234
00:20:07,680 --> 00:20:12,160
First, the relationship between available food in the world and population growth.
 
235
00:20:12,160 --> 00:20:17,240
Secondly, the relationship between available food in the world and the consumption habits
 
236
00:20:17,240 --> 00:20:22,080
of the industrialized nations and what are sometimes called the new rich in the globe.
 
237
00:20:22,080 --> 00:20:26,680
One of the problems of the early 70s was that there were rising standards of living in certain
 
238
00:20:26,680 --> 00:20:31,680
places of the globe, Eastern Europe and then ultimately in some of the Arab countries,
 
239
00:20:31,680 --> 00:20:36,440
and these countries were able to place a greater demand on the global food supply.
 
240
00:20:36,440 --> 00:20:40,840
The third problem was the relationship of the oil and energy crisis to the food problem.
 
241
00:20:40,840 --> 00:20:45,520
The fourfold rise in oil prices had a multiplier effect on the food problem.
 
242
00:20:45,520 --> 00:20:47,760
It raised the price of fertilizer.
 
243
00:20:47,760 --> 00:20:52,680
And the nations that were most touched by the food crisis were precisely those nations
 
244
00:20:52,680 --> 00:20:55,240
who had to import both food and oil.
 
245
00:20:55,240 --> 00:20:59,240
We know what happened to us when the oil price rose and how it touched our economy,
 
246
00:20:59,240 --> 00:21:01,880
but we simply do not have to import food.
 
247
00:21:01,880 --> 00:21:05,400
The nations touched in the early 70s were the nations that were caught in the matrix
 
248
00:21:05,400 --> 00:21:09,800
of both importing food as a consistent pattern and importing oil.
 
249
00:21:09,800 --> 00:21:14,240
And then finally, the climatic changes in the Sahel and other parts of the globe.
 
250
00:21:14,240 --> 00:21:18,020
These four factors were not new factors in world politics.
 
251
00:21:18,020 --> 00:21:24,120
What had happened by the early 70s that the factors interlocked to form a web or a framework,
 
252
00:21:24,120 --> 00:21:30,640
and it was within that framework that the global problem of managing scarcity emerged.
 
253
00:21:30,640 --> 00:21:34,000
Now what was the response of the World Food Conference?
 
254
00:21:34,000 --> 00:21:38,920
The response of the conference is usually summarized under three areas.
 
255
00:21:38,920 --> 00:21:45,840
First food production, secondly global food security, and thirdly food trade issues.
 
256
00:21:45,840 --> 00:21:50,480
In the area of food production, everyone agrees that the long-term answer to the problem is
 
257
00:21:50,480 --> 00:21:56,080
better productivity in what are called the food-hungry nations, those nations that consistently
 
258
00:21:56,080 --> 00:21:58,000
must import food.
 
259
00:21:58,000 --> 00:22:02,320
And so the major emphasis of the conference, or a major emphasis, was precisely on this
 
260
00:22:02,320 --> 00:22:08,040
question of how to increase agricultural development in the food-hungry nations.
 
261
00:22:08,040 --> 00:22:12,800
And the theme here was on technical and financial assistance from the industrialized countries,
 
262
00:22:12,800 --> 00:22:17,120
as well as the need for internal reforms in the food-hungry countries.
 
263
00:22:17,120 --> 00:22:21,600
One of the specific proposals that is with us today as a current issue that flowed out
 
264
00:22:21,600 --> 00:22:26,920
of this discussion was the creation of the International Fund for Agricultural Development,
 
265
00:22:26,920 --> 00:22:32,440
a $1 billion special fund proposed by the oil states, in which they promised that they
 
266
00:22:32,440 --> 00:22:39,480
would put forth 50% of the $1 billion, and then the, what are called the OECD nations,
 
267
00:22:39,480 --> 00:22:44,280
the industrialized nations, were asked to put up the other $500 million for that fund.
 
268
00:22:44,280 --> 00:22:47,200
I'll come back to that in a few moments.
 
269
00:22:47,200 --> 00:22:51,320
Secondly, under food security, the issues that were treated were usually problems of
 
270
00:22:51,320 --> 00:22:55,600
nutrition, food aid, and the global food reserve.
 
271
00:22:55,600 --> 00:22:59,320
In terms of food aid, it is estimated as a result of the conference that we will need
 
272
00:22:59,320 --> 00:23:04,580
approximately 10 million tons per year of food aid for the foreseeable future.
 
273
00:23:04,580 --> 00:23:10,080
Many argue that this is a very conservative estimate of what is necessary for food aid.
 
274
00:23:10,080 --> 00:23:15,420
No one feels that food aid is any kind of a long-term solution to the food problem.
 
275
00:23:15,420 --> 00:23:19,680
Everyone knows it is not a long-term solution, but it simply is what is necessary to keep
 
276
00:23:19,680 --> 00:23:21,540
some people alive.
 
277
00:23:21,540 --> 00:23:27,700
In 1975, we fell short of the 10 million ton figure by 2 million tons.
 
278
00:23:27,700 --> 00:23:31,300
We produced 8 million tons of food assistance in 1975.
 
279
00:23:31,300 --> 00:23:36,700
It is estimated in 1976 that we will reach about 9 million tons.
 
280
00:23:36,700 --> 00:23:41,360
The second issue under food security is the creation of the global food reserve.
 
281
00:23:41,360 --> 00:23:45,920
The proposed figure from the World Food Conference is that there should be created a 60 million
 
282
00:23:45,920 --> 00:23:52,200
ton reserve, which is in reserve for any kind of global disaster, and that's in addition
 
283
00:23:52,200 --> 00:23:58,240
to the 100 million tons of food that is regarded as carryover stocks from one year to another.
 
284
00:23:58,240 --> 00:24:01,720
There is some dispute about how much, how large the fund should be.
 
285
00:24:01,720 --> 00:24:06,240
The U.S. has proposed 30 million tons, although the U.S. does not include in that 30 million
 
286
00:24:06,260 --> 00:24:07,420
tons feed grains.
 
287
00:24:07,420 --> 00:24:13,060
It just includes wheat and rice, whereas the Global Food Conference talked about a 60 million
 
288
00:24:13,060 --> 00:24:16,380
ton reserve of wheat, rice, and feed grains.
 
289
00:24:16,380 --> 00:24:19,180
I will also come back to where we are on the food reserve.
 
290
00:24:19,180 --> 00:24:21,740
Finally, the issue of food trade.
 
291
00:24:21,740 --> 00:24:26,140
Of all the issues of the World Food Conference, this was the least successful issue.
 
292
00:24:26,140 --> 00:24:31,620
The industrialized countries led by the United States clearly made their point that they
 
293
00:24:31,620 --> 00:24:35,980
wanted no restrictions on their future trade negotiations placed on them by the World Food
 
294
00:24:36,720 --> 00:24:37,720
Conference.
 
295
00:24:37,720 --> 00:24:41,880
So the U.S. and other industrialized countries resisted strongly the inclusion of the trade
 
296
00:24:41,880 --> 00:24:46,400
issue in the World Food Conference discussion, and yet this is a major issue.
 
297
00:24:46,400 --> 00:24:49,320
It is a major issue in terms of several points.
 
298
00:24:49,320 --> 00:24:56,360
First, the access of developing country agricultural products to industrialized markets is a problem.
 
299
00:24:56,360 --> 00:25:02,080
Secondly, the ability of the developing countries to compete on the market and to buy food in
 
300
00:25:02,080 --> 00:25:03,640
a situation of scarcity.
 
301
00:25:03,660 --> 00:25:09,580
I'll come back to this several times, but the reason the trade is a problem is that
 
302
00:25:09,580 --> 00:25:14,820
if we've got X amount of grain and we're going to put it all on the commercial market, then
 
303
00:25:14,820 --> 00:25:19,100
India is in no competition with the Soviet Union or can't compete with the Soviet Union
 
304
00:25:19,100 --> 00:25:23,740
in terms of being able to compete for the available food.
 
305
00:25:23,740 --> 00:25:28,860
The final problem that surfaces under trade is the role and place of the large multinational
 
306
00:25:28,860 --> 00:25:33,260
corporations who are in the food business, in the production and distribution business,
 
307
00:25:33,280 --> 00:25:37,000
as they touch this transnational problem.
 
308
00:25:37,000 --> 00:25:38,140
Corporations are very large.
 
309
00:25:38,140 --> 00:25:42,200
They control significant amounts of power, and because of the nature of an international
 
310
00:25:42,200 --> 00:25:48,760
system, decentralized with no center of authority, there is no kind of extensive control or direction
 
311
00:25:48,760 --> 00:25:53,280
of these large enterprises in terms of what one might describe as a common good as one
 
312
00:25:53,280 --> 00:25:55,680
faced the international food problem.
 
313
00:25:55,680 --> 00:26:01,160
Now, those are the kinds of things that surfaced at the World Food Conference.
 
314
00:26:01,180 --> 00:26:06,660
What might one say in terms of ethical analysis, if you will, of that kind of proposal for
 
315
00:26:06,660 --> 00:26:08,460
the world food problem?
 
316
00:26:08,460 --> 00:26:13,140
As I move through the ethical analysis now of this proposal and of several others, I
 
317
00:26:13,140 --> 00:26:17,820
will quite consciously draw upon concepts drawn from Catholic social teaching, although
 
318
00:26:17,820 --> 00:26:22,260
in no way do I want to indicate that either Catholics are the only ones or the best minds
 
319
00:26:22,260 --> 00:26:26,300
working on this problem, nor do I want to indicate that that's the only place we go
 
320
00:26:26,300 --> 00:26:28,360
for our ethical concepts.
 
321
00:26:28,380 --> 00:26:32,460
But I want specifically in this context to highlight what comes out of Catholic social
 
322
00:26:32,460 --> 00:26:38,100
teaching to help us think about a problem like the hungry in our midst.
 
323
00:26:38,100 --> 00:26:43,140
The first point I think to be made about the World Food Conference is to be drawn from
 
324
00:26:43,140 --> 00:26:46,220
the writing of Pope John in Pacem in Terris.
 
325
00:26:46,220 --> 00:26:50,840
I think the World Food Conference points to what Pope John called a structural defect
 
326
00:26:50,840 --> 00:26:55,500
in the international community as it is organized in the middle of the 20th century.
 
327
00:26:55,640 --> 00:27:00,780
As Pope John described that structural defect, he meant that the scope of the problems we
 
328
00:27:00,780 --> 00:27:07,540
face, whether they be food or trade and assistance or foreign investment or population, the scope
 
329
00:27:07,540 --> 00:27:13,200
of the problems we face goes beyond the capacity of the decision-making process we have available
 
330
00:27:13,200 --> 00:27:15,240
in the international system.
 
331
00:27:15,240 --> 00:27:21,140
More precisely, we face transnational problems, but we still only have national centers of
 
332
00:27:21,140 --> 00:27:22,140
decision-making.
 
333
00:27:22,740 --> 00:27:26,580
Now to cite this problem does not mean that I expect that it's going to be overcome in
 
334
00:27:26,580 --> 00:27:27,960
my lifetime.
 
335
00:27:27,960 --> 00:27:32,360
I think what Pope John did not say, but at least I would say based on the empirical evidence
 
336
00:27:32,360 --> 00:27:37,720
I see, is that this structural gap will be the problem of international politics for
 
337
00:27:37,720 --> 00:27:39,620
the rest of the 20th century.
 
338
00:27:39,620 --> 00:27:44,180
We will continue to have problems that go beyond our capacity to make rational decisions
 
339
00:27:44,180 --> 00:27:49,920
to solve them in the sense that there is on the table, as I see it, no evidence that we're
 
340
00:27:49,920 --> 00:27:53,920
going to make a quantum leap into a higher degree of organization of the international
 
341
00:27:53,920 --> 00:27:56,800
system in any immediate sense of the term.
 
342
00:27:56,800 --> 00:28:04,200
So Pope John, in 1963, before most analysts of international politics stressed transnational
 
343
00:28:04,200 --> 00:28:08,400
problems, he identified what I think is the key moral problem.
 
344
00:28:08,400 --> 00:28:14,280
This problem of not having centers of decision-making that are capable of dealing easily with the
 
345
00:28:14,280 --> 00:28:18,720
problems we face was highlighted by the World Food Conference.
 
346
00:28:18,720 --> 00:28:24,680
Conferences like the World Food Conference perform an invaluable role.
 
347
00:28:24,680 --> 00:28:26,080
I'm afraid of the technology too.
 
348
00:28:26,080 --> 00:28:29,360
No, I won't.
 
349
00:28:29,360 --> 00:28:32,400
Not with the time passing.
 
350
00:28:32,400 --> 00:28:35,220
These conferences perform an invaluable role.
 
351
00:28:35,220 --> 00:28:37,920
What they do is first they call attention to a problem.
 
352
00:28:37,920 --> 00:28:42,760
You saw the world food problem on TV partly because there was a conference coming up and
 
353
00:28:42,760 --> 00:28:48,160
the major networks covered India and the Sahel and other areas for months before the conference.
 
354
00:28:48,600 --> 00:28:52,560
Secondly, they force governments to show some interest in the problem.
 
355
00:28:52,560 --> 00:28:54,480
It's a question of peer relationships.
 
356
00:28:54,480 --> 00:28:59,160
If 134 nations are going to a conference, you don't want to be the 135th who isn't going.
 
357
00:28:59,160 --> 00:29:06,000
It identifies for the reading public and the commentating public the nature of the problem.
 
358
00:29:06,000 --> 00:29:11,200
And finally, conferences like that can lay out a rational, systematic plan that does
 
359
00:29:11,200 --> 00:29:14,480
have the scope of the problem in mind.
 
360
00:29:14,480 --> 00:29:21,640
However, what a conference like that cannot do is to take any effective decisions that
 
361
00:29:21,640 --> 00:29:28,080
in any way would bind a nation to meet the standards of the plan.
 
362
00:29:28,080 --> 00:29:30,920
After they draw up the plan, everybody goes home.
 
363
00:29:30,920 --> 00:29:36,760
And when they go home, the action starts because the action is in the national decision-making
 
364
00:29:36,760 --> 00:29:37,760
centers.
 
365
00:29:37,760 --> 00:29:42,600
And so, for example, if you look at the World Food Conference plan of action, when the developed
 
366
00:29:42,720 --> 00:29:47,040
countries say, we don't want to talk about trade, all you get out of that conference
 
367
00:29:47,040 --> 00:29:50,760
is a statement that we ought to study the problems between trade and the food problem.
 
368
00:29:50,760 --> 00:29:55,720
Secondly, in the underdeveloped countries, one of the key problems is internal reform,
 
369
00:29:55,720 --> 00:29:56,720
land reform.
 
370
00:29:56,720 --> 00:30:01,880
There is no significant way of moving toward organized action through that plan because
 
371
00:30:01,880 --> 00:30:06,240
there is no significant center of authority that can force any nation to take steps like
 
372
00:30:06,240 --> 00:30:08,680
that.
 
373
00:30:08,760 --> 00:30:15,000
Because when we go home is the time the action starts, the significance of a national constituency
 
374
00:30:15,000 --> 00:30:21,200
with a transnational concern will be a repeated theme for me for the rest of this talk.
 
375
00:30:21,200 --> 00:30:26,280
The key concept here, I think, is again a concept developed by Pope John in modern Magister,
 
376
00:30:26,280 --> 00:30:30,120
at least for the first time in Catholic teaching it was stated in these terms.
 
377
00:30:30,120 --> 00:30:34,840
John talked about the international common good, and that concept has been developed
 
378
00:30:34,840 --> 00:30:39,000
in subsequent teaching of the Catholic Church since that time.
 
379
00:30:39,000 --> 00:30:43,280
The common good, of course, is a very traditional concept in Catholic thought.
 
380
00:30:43,280 --> 00:30:48,880
It is to say that there is an obligation on a society to produce that complex of conditions
 
381
00:30:48,880 --> 00:30:53,800
that makes it possible for each person in the society to live a life of human dignity.
 
382
00:30:53,800 --> 00:30:58,440
But normally the common good, at least by implication, referred to the local community,
 
383
00:30:58,440 --> 00:31:00,400
at most to the nation.
 
384
00:31:00,400 --> 00:31:04,240
Pope John expanded the concept to include the international common good.
 
385
00:31:04,640 --> 00:31:09,360
Now, the practical conclusion of that concept is that when one goes to judge the justice
 
386
00:31:09,360 --> 00:31:14,440
of a nation's policy, the first question one might ask is how that policy affects its own
 
387
00:31:14,440 --> 00:31:15,480
citizens.
 
388
00:31:15,480 --> 00:31:19,260
But if one takes the international common good seriously, a second question that now
 
389
00:31:19,260 --> 00:31:24,880
must be asked is how that policy affects other people in other parts of the globe.
 
390
00:31:24,880 --> 00:31:29,320
When you're in a situation of managing scarcity, if you take the international common good
 
391
00:31:29,320 --> 00:31:35,360
seriously, you get a whole agenda of questions that never arise if you do not take it seriously.
 
392
00:31:35,360 --> 00:31:38,400
I'll be very precise in terms of U.S. policy.
 
393
00:31:38,400 --> 00:31:42,840
Secretary Butts always regarded our relationship to the rest of the world as a relation that
 
394
00:31:42,840 --> 00:31:44,640
was an option for us.
 
395
00:31:44,640 --> 00:31:49,600
If we were moved by charity to deal with their problems, so much the better for them and
 
396
00:31:49,600 --> 00:31:50,600
for us.
 
397
00:31:50,600 --> 00:31:55,160
But there was no structural obligation in conscience to deal with that problem because
 
398
00:31:55,160 --> 00:31:57,040
they lay outside the borders.
 
399
00:31:57,040 --> 00:32:02,680
It was always a problem of charity or philanthropy, never a problem of what in Catholic terms
 
400
00:32:02,680 --> 00:32:08,520
one would describe as social justice, a problem of policy.
 
401
00:32:08,520 --> 00:32:14,200
That in terms of the key kind of ethical concept that comes out of the World Food Conference
 
402
00:32:14,200 --> 00:32:16,600
is to me the central concern.
 
403
00:32:16,600 --> 00:32:23,100
The scope of the plan is significantly developed, but the authority to implement the plan lies
 
404
00:32:23,100 --> 00:32:24,560
in the national communities.
 
405
00:32:25,240 --> 00:32:28,960
Now if one wants to look at U.S. policy in light of what happened when we came home from
 
406
00:32:28,960 --> 00:32:34,120
the World Food Conference, let me just summarize again the three categories of the conference.
 
407
00:32:34,120 --> 00:32:38,680
In terms of food production and assistance, significant steps have been made through the
 
408
00:32:38,680 --> 00:32:44,620
act that was passed by Congress in the winter of 1975 called the International Development
 
409
00:32:44,620 --> 00:32:46,480
and Food Assistance Act.
 
410
00:32:46,480 --> 00:32:53,840
In terms of authorization for foreign development, there was appropriate authorized for fiscal
 
411
00:32:53,840 --> 00:33:00,720
year 1976, $1.5 billion, and for fiscal year 1977, $1.4 million.
 
412
00:33:00,720 --> 00:33:06,320
The Congress has authorized the $200 million contribution by the U.S. to the International
 
413
00:33:06,320 --> 00:33:10,900
Fund for Agricultural Development, although as yet it has not been appropriated.
 
414
00:33:10,900 --> 00:33:17,820
In terms of food security, U.S. food assistance last year amounted to 6 million tons.
 
415
00:33:17,820 --> 00:33:23,740
We have promised to guarantee 4 million tons or to do our best to guarantee 4 million tons
 
416
00:33:23,740 --> 00:33:28,540
of the expected 10 million we will need every year for the foreseeable future.
 
417
00:33:28,540 --> 00:33:32,180
And there have been significant changes in the structure of the aid program, the food
 
418
00:33:32,180 --> 00:33:38,400
aid program, so that the food, at least today, is to be judged primarily by the need of others
 
419
00:33:38,400 --> 00:33:41,540
and not by where they stand on the political spectrum.
 
420
00:33:41,540 --> 00:33:48,060
There were clearly some very clear and flagrant abuses of the PL-480 program in the late 60s
 
421
00:33:48,060 --> 00:33:49,340
and early 70s.
 
422
00:33:49,340 --> 00:33:53,060
As one looked at that program and where our aid went, even though the aid was declining
 
423
00:33:53,100 --> 00:33:56,780
all the time, you not only had to be hungry, but you had to be hungry and strategically
 
424
00:33:56,780 --> 00:33:59,700
well-placed to be available for that food.
 
425
00:33:59,700 --> 00:34:03,140
If you were in Egypt, you were in much better condition than if you were in Africa, and
 
426
00:34:03,140 --> 00:34:06,460
if you were in South Vietnam, you were in much better condition than if you were in
 
427
00:34:06,460 --> 00:34:08,320
India.
 
428
00:34:08,320 --> 00:34:13,620
So the Congress has taken steps to set a new set of criteria for the determination of where
 
429
00:34:13,620 --> 00:34:15,380
the food aid goes.
 
430
00:34:15,380 --> 00:34:20,260
In terms of the food reserve, there is a commitment by the U.S. to enter the food reserve, but
 
431
00:34:20,260 --> 00:34:25,460
to be fair, that commitment is now caught in bureaucratic bargaining within the administration.
 
432
00:34:25,460 --> 00:34:29,420
There are several unanswered questions, both internationally and within the U.S. policy
 
433
00:34:29,420 --> 00:34:34,620
process about what the style and shape of the food reserve program ought to be.
 
434
00:34:34,620 --> 00:34:38,660
There is an initial commitment by the U.S., but there's going to need to be significant
 
435
00:34:38,660 --> 00:34:42,900
public demonstration that we want to take part in that reserve system, I think, if that
 
436
00:34:42,900 --> 00:34:45,620
commitment is to be translated into reality.
 
437
00:34:45,620 --> 00:34:51,020
In terms of the food trade problem, there has been no commitment from the U.S., no planned
 
438
00:34:51,020 --> 00:34:55,180
commitment that would touch our trade policy that I know of, for example, in the way that
 
439
00:34:55,180 --> 00:34:59,220
we have already planned how we are going to deal with the Soviet Union over the next few
 
440
00:34:59,220 --> 00:35:00,220
years on food.
 
441
00:35:00,220 --> 00:35:06,420
There has been no kind of setting aside of any kind of dimension of the U.S. crop production
 
442
00:35:06,420 --> 00:35:12,660
in terms of either a food reserve system or, secondly, in terms of a food assistance system.
 
443
00:35:13,260 --> 00:35:17,900
Now, let me move off the World Food Conference and proceed to some other of the proposed
 
444
00:35:17,900 --> 00:35:20,340
solutions in the U.S.
 
445
00:35:20,340 --> 00:35:25,740
Since I am arguing that a national constituency with a transnational conscience is crucial,
 
446
00:35:25,740 --> 00:35:30,060
and the reason I'm arguing that point is I would argue that that series of steps that
 
447
00:35:30,060 --> 00:35:34,380
I have just outlined, taken by the United States Congress on food policy, would not
 
448
00:35:34,380 --> 00:35:38,780
have been taken without significant public interest in that problem over the last two
 
449
00:35:38,780 --> 00:35:39,780
years.
 
450
00:35:39,900 --> 00:35:42,820
The argument that I know about the process from the limited experience I have within
 
451
00:35:42,820 --> 00:35:49,060
Washington says that you had to demonstrate a broad-scale public concern for that problem
 
452
00:35:49,060 --> 00:35:53,920
to generate several of the steps involved in that, and I think that broad-scale public
 
453
00:35:53,920 --> 00:35:57,660
concern was manifested but is going to have to continue to be manifested.
 
454
00:35:57,660 --> 00:36:02,860
Now, because the national constituencies are so crucial, then the tone and the theme of
 
455
00:36:02,860 --> 00:36:06,900
the national debate on food policy is of great importance.
 
456
00:36:07,020 --> 00:36:11,300
I would argue a transnational policy has to have a constituency.
 
457
00:36:11,300 --> 00:36:15,020
On this issue, it has to be a constituency of conscience.
 
458
00:36:15,020 --> 00:36:19,700
That is to say, a constituency of conscience that was once defined as those who have a
 
459
00:36:19,700 --> 00:36:24,740
care but not an interest, a care for the problem but not an interest to be gained necessarily
 
460
00:36:24,740 --> 00:36:28,100
by the steps taken in the policy process.
 
461
00:36:28,100 --> 00:36:34,180
I am now going to present some of the proposals advanced in the U.S. as possible solutions
 
462
00:36:34,180 --> 00:36:35,940
to the food problem.
 
463
00:36:35,980 --> 00:36:41,860
I will advance them precisely for the task of setting out some moral analysis of the
 
464
00:36:41,860 --> 00:36:42,860
problem.
 
465
00:36:42,860 --> 00:36:47,900
I ought to say that some of the proposals I am going to mention are particularly American,
 
466
00:36:47,900 --> 00:36:49,100
if you will.
 
467
00:36:49,100 --> 00:36:53,300
There is a discussion going on in another room here where the superior of the Jesuits
 
468
00:36:53,300 --> 00:36:57,620
and about four international bishops are responding to him, and if they heard the first of these
 
469
00:36:57,620 --> 00:37:01,420
proposals that I am going to talk about, I think there'd be deafening silence in the
 
470
00:37:01,420 --> 00:37:02,420
room.
 
471
00:37:02,420 --> 00:37:04,640
I don't think they could believe we'd talk on those terms.
 
472
00:37:04,840 --> 00:37:08,520
This is part of the national debate, and so I need to talk on these terms.
 
473
00:37:08,520 --> 00:37:12,440
I'm going to look at three models of responses to the world food problem.
 
474
00:37:12,440 --> 00:37:15,000
First I'll call the lifeboat ethic model.
 
475
00:37:15,000 --> 00:37:17,960
Secondly, the family table model.
 
476
00:37:17,960 --> 00:37:20,540
And the third, the spaceship earth model.
 
477
00:37:20,540 --> 00:37:25,120
What I'll do in each case is to identify what's being proposed, to indicate who some of the
 
478
00:37:25,120 --> 00:37:31,680
proponents are, and then to do a moral sketch, and it only is a sketch.
 
479
00:37:31,680 --> 00:37:33,800
First the lifeboat ethic model.
 
480
00:37:33,960 --> 00:37:38,640
Under this title, the lifeboat ethic, there is more than one proposal contained.
 
481
00:37:38,640 --> 00:37:43,600
Specifically, there have been advanced in the last four or five years both the proposal
 
482
00:37:43,600 --> 00:37:49,440
of a lifeboat ethic and of a triage system as the way to resolve the choices before US
 
483
00:37:49,440 --> 00:37:50,440
food policy.
 
484
00:37:50,440 --> 00:37:52,280
They are usually grouped together.
 
485
00:37:52,280 --> 00:37:56,280
I don't think they go together, so I'll outline each of them and then distinguish the two
 
486
00:37:56,280 --> 00:37:59,980
proposals, the lifeboat ethic and the triage system.
 
487
00:37:59,980 --> 00:38:07,700
The lifeboat ethic has been most notably proposed by Dr. Garrett Hardin.
 
488
00:38:07,700 --> 00:38:15,140
Hardin is a biochemist, I believe, and has written extensively in the area of resources,
 
489
00:38:15,140 --> 00:38:18,820
population, and policy decisions.
 
490
00:38:18,820 --> 00:38:23,820
Hardin is an intelligent man, and I am doing a sketch of a very complicated presentation,
 
491
00:38:23,820 --> 00:38:28,300
and so you will understand the limits of this commentary.
 
492
00:38:28,300 --> 00:38:31,820
As Hardin describes the problem, we ought to look at it in the following way.
 
493
00:38:31,820 --> 00:38:36,780
The world is divided into the desperately poor, two-thirds of the world, and the comparatively
 
494
00:38:36,780 --> 00:38:38,900
rich, one-third of the world.
 
495
00:38:38,900 --> 00:38:43,100
Each nation in the world ought to be pictured as being in a lifeboat.
 
496
00:38:43,100 --> 00:38:45,380
The rich are in safe lifeboats.
 
497
00:38:45,380 --> 00:38:49,500
The boats can stay afloat, and we even have room for a few more passengers.
 
498
00:38:49,500 --> 00:38:54,820
The poor increasingly are in overcrowded lifeboats, and eventually some of the poor fall out into
 
499
00:38:54,820 --> 00:38:56,140
the water.
 
500
00:38:56,140 --> 00:39:00,180
When they get into the water, they swim toward the rich boats, and they want to get in.
 
501
00:39:00,180 --> 00:39:04,860
And Hardin says the question is, what are we going to do if we're in the rich boat?
 
502
00:39:04,860 --> 00:39:08,460
He proposes three kinds of responses that can be made.
 
503
00:39:08,460 --> 00:39:13,900
First, he says we can adopt the sharing ethic, and interestingly enough, he says the sharing
 
504
00:39:13,900 --> 00:39:19,540
ethic can either be based on Marxist criteria, that we share what we have according to need,
 
505
00:39:19,540 --> 00:39:21,540
or it can be based on Christian criteria.
 
506
00:39:21,540 --> 00:39:24,880
That is to say, we regard those in the water as our brothers and sisters, and therefore
 
507
00:39:24,880 --> 00:39:27,120
we have an obligation toward them.
 
508
00:39:27,120 --> 00:39:32,560
He says the problem with the sharing ethic is that it leads to disaster, and so his proposal
 
509
00:39:32,560 --> 00:39:37,920
for the American public is to guard against the sharing ethic having any impact on people's
 
510
00:39:37,920 --> 00:39:38,920
consciences.
 
511
00:39:38,920 --> 00:39:43,120
He says we have got to have an educational campaign so that people can immediately identify
 
512
00:39:43,120 --> 00:39:47,840
the sharing ethic when it is proposed, and then they'll recognize that it's a disaster.
 
513
00:39:47,840 --> 00:39:49,960
Now why is it a disaster?
 
514
00:39:49,960 --> 00:39:54,040
He says that it's a disaster because to make the sharing ethic work, there would have to
 
515
00:39:54,200 --> 00:39:59,880
be some central authority that could correlate rights and responsibilities of the poor and
 
516
00:39:59,880 --> 00:40:01,440
the rich across the globe.
 
517
00:40:01,440 --> 00:40:05,680
So like Pope John, he senses the need that there is no centralized authority.
 
518
00:40:05,680 --> 00:40:09,440
But he says because there's no centralized authority, the difficulty with the sharing
 
519
00:40:09,440 --> 00:40:16,040
ethic is that it allows people to claim rights without exercising responsibility.
 
520
00:40:16,040 --> 00:40:20,920
What that translates out to be is that the poor can claim they have a right to food,
 
521
00:40:20,920 --> 00:40:26,680
and they don't exercise any responsible policy regarding their productivity of children.
 
522
00:40:26,680 --> 00:40:29,720
Population is the key theme in the Hardin analysis.
 
523
00:40:29,720 --> 00:40:34,320
In the end, therefore, if we adopt the sharing ethic, they sink our boat.
 
524
00:40:34,320 --> 00:40:37,560
So that destroys the idealists who were the sharing advocates.
 
525
00:40:37,560 --> 00:40:42,080
Secondly, it simply delays the day of reckoning for the poor boats because eventually they'll
 
526
00:40:42,080 --> 00:40:43,480
go down anyway.
 
527
00:40:43,480 --> 00:40:49,320
And thirdly, it disrupts what Hardin calls the normal cycle of nature, which is translated
 
528
00:40:49,320 --> 00:40:54,080
out to mean that it's survival of the fittest, and you just have to bring your population
 
529
00:40:54,080 --> 00:40:55,880
into line with your food supply.
 
530
00:40:55,880 --> 00:40:59,440
And if that means that some have to die in order to do that, then a food aid program
 
531
00:40:59,440 --> 00:41:02,320
simply delays that process.
 
532
00:41:02,320 --> 00:41:07,720
It's interesting to hear Dr. Daniel Callahan and his commentary on Hardin's critique of
 
533
00:41:07,720 --> 00:41:09,000
the sharing ethic.
 
534
00:41:09,000 --> 00:41:13,560
Callahan argues Hardin's proposal amounts to nothing less than a deliberate decision
 
535
00:41:13,560 --> 00:41:18,560
to allow people who might otherwise survive, at least for a time, to die of starvation
 
536
00:41:18,560 --> 00:41:19,560
and disease.
 
537
00:41:19,560 --> 00:41:22,960
Hardin says, however, there is a second response.
 
538
00:41:22,960 --> 00:41:24,520
You don't have to adopt the sharing ethic.
 
539
00:41:24,520 --> 00:41:26,920
You just bring some people into the boat.
 
540
00:41:26,920 --> 00:41:30,420
But he says this simply complicates the problem because how are you going to choose who comes
 
541
00:41:30,420 --> 00:41:31,420
into the boat?
 
542
00:41:31,420 --> 00:41:34,440
If you're going to get 10 extra spaces in the rich boat, how are you going to choose
 
543
00:41:34,440 --> 00:41:35,920
which 10 get in?
 
544
00:41:35,920 --> 00:41:39,700
And besides, he says, you destroy your own safety factor in the rich boats.
 
545
00:41:39,700 --> 00:41:41,480
So therefore, that's bad policy.
 
546
00:41:41,480 --> 00:41:43,120
You can't save everyone anyway.
 
547
00:41:43,120 --> 00:41:46,760
You're going to have to make difficult choices, and you're going to reduce your own safety
 
548
00:41:46,760 --> 00:41:48,160
factor.
 
549
00:41:48,160 --> 00:41:52,840
So Hardin proposes what one ought to do is if you're in the rich boat, you ought to prevent
 
550
00:41:52,840 --> 00:41:55,680
access by others into your boat.
 
551
00:41:55,680 --> 00:41:59,920
And he says, for those who can't take this ethic, for those who say, I feel guilty about
 
552
00:41:59,920 --> 00:42:04,060
that, he said, you have to get them out of the boat because you have to eliminate their
 
553
00:42:04,060 --> 00:42:07,040
voice from the debate.
 
554
00:42:07,040 --> 00:42:12,040
That is the lifeboat ethic in very cryptic terms.
 
555
00:42:12,040 --> 00:42:13,760
This is the end of side one.
 
556
00:42:13,760 --> 00:42:17,280
To hear the remainder of the panel, stop the tape and turn it over here.