‘Cruel’ choices

In 1971, development ethics was inaugurated as a new field of study with the publication of “The Cruel Choice” by the theorist Denis Goulet. For Goulet, in order to truly achieve, sustain and secure the kind of society that people so desire, there are hard choices to make. People often face various ethical dilemmas because development can be both good and bad. Choices mean sacrifices on the part of individuals. The expansion of human freedom remains to be the guiding principle and, yet, we have also come to realize that the pursuit of the very same freedom in a life that we have reason to value often entails tremendous costs.

The first case that is worth mentioning is the exodus of Filipinos. The freedom of movement of people is important in today’s liberal and globalized socioeconomic order. Job opportunities available in the labor market abroad often require skills which the Philippines can easily supply with its human resource. Filipinos who work abroad are hailed as heroes, but this comes with a very hefty price to pay. For instance, young mothers are forced by circumstances here to be separated from their children in order to care for other people’s children. And then there are the children who grow to their adulthood without the guidance of a father.

Parents make the supreme sacrifice to leave their families behind for a better future but in the end, it is the children who absorb all the negative impact of the exodus of our countrymen in search of greener pastures. It is true that money sent from abroad has sustained the growth of our consumption-based economy. Yet, there is no way of measuring all the pain and suffering that thousands of Filipino domestic helpers have been subjected to while working in unimaginably difficult situations.

Another reality that needs our attention is climate change. Green energy is the way toward a cleaner and safer future, but some studies indicate that 70 percent of the power generated in the country comes from coal. We may have enough in terms of potential to produce wind or solar electricity, but coal is preferred because it is cheaper. In fact, the investment necessary to put up wind turbines is thrice more than building coal-fired power plants.

Again the point is, we need power in order to run our industries. Without a steady supply of electricity, you cannot have manufacturing plants, huge malls or BPO buildings which, in turn, give jobs to people. Coal is dirty and, yet, most Third World countries like the Philippines derive most of their energy requirements from it.

The real issue here, it can be said, is that our poor infrastructure and the lack of climate change-mitigating measures will put the lives of millions of people at risk.

President Duterte’s campaign against crime is bloody. To say that solving criminality in our streets is a difficult task is an understatement. Our law enforcers risk their lives in pursuit of criminals who victimize innocent people in the many dark alleys of city streets and even in quiet rural areas where drug dependency has become rampant. The drug problem in this country, authorities say, is a growing menace that threatens our nation’s future. Political will is necessary. The government cannot be soft in terms of dealing with criminals.

Still, the rule of law must be observed because in a democratic society, no one must be above the law. Yet, the undeniable reality today is that, rightly or wrongly, the majority of our people also trust the Duterte administration in its hard-line approach against criminality, which sooner or later will leave thousands, noticeably the poor, without any chance at reform or redemption.

Globally, the free world in which we are a part of is no longer safe. We live in a multicultural world. This also means that we have to be open to cultural and religious differences and, thus, embrace a certain degree of tolerance in terms of the way of life of other peoples. Victims of murderous dictatorial regimes need humanitarian help. What this means is that they—especially the children and women who are the most vulnerable in armed conflicts—need a country that will protect them.

Yet, the opening of borders to refugees means that national security might be at risk. On one hand, one’s moral conscience dictates that we have to extend all means possible in order to help refugees. On the other, there is a need to secure borders in order to thwart the infiltration of terrorist elements among those who are seeking asylum.

Politicians make pragmatic choices at the expense of ethical ones. The reason, perhaps, is survival. And yet, we cannot afford to live in a society that makes the value of human life secondary to that of political expediency. Real freedom cannot be achieved at the cost of another person’s. To do so is to veer away from the moral ends of society that our leaders, under the almighty grace of God, have all sworn to protect.

Christopher Ryan B. Maboloc, assistant professor of philosophy at Ateneo de Davao University, holds master’s degrees in philosophy from Ateneo de Manila University and in applied ethics from Linkoping University in Sweden.