Posts in "Disaster Relief"

By Josh Jackson at 10:01AM

May 4, 2011

Disaster relief: Beat the government to it

This post was originally intended for my Facebook friends in Alabama, however, everyone who advocates liberty and non-compulsory forms of assiting your fellow man can find a way to assist or support those recently devastated by the tornadoes in Alabama and the southeast. As those who hold true the principle "that voluntary action is the only ethical behavior" let us constantly be mindful of those in need around us. This has been a widely abused sentiment used to expand the role of government with perilous consequences to our economy and civil liberties.

I wanted to take some time to remind everyone as the semester winds down -- and you have time to do something besides stress over exams -- to consider investing some time in the Alabama (and surrounding states) tornado relief efforts. This is the perfect opportunity to invest in your community and demonstrate your commitment to a more peaceful and prosperous society.

I know that many of you are already participating in the relief efforts. Awesome! I can't wait to join you in a few weeks!

It is likely that it will take several months (probably even longer) to complete clean-up and relief efforts. Remember that there are dozens of smaller communities beyond Tuscaloosa and Birmingham who need as much help as the major cities and may tend to be overlooked by people seeking to volunteer.

Should the US Military Go into Haiti?

Laurence Vance says no, and I agree. Why not? Well, as has been discussed here at the YAL blog already, it's wrong for the US government to respond to this horrible situation with forced charity. Where the military specifically is concerned, it's also a complete violation of military purpose:

The main reason the U.S. military has no business going to Haiti is simply that the purpose of the military should be to defend the United States against attack or invasion. Nothing more (like invading other countries), and nothing less (like failing to defend its own headquarters on 9/11). Using the military to establish democracy, spread goodwill, change regimes, train foreign armies, open foreign markets, enforce no-fly zones, protect U.S. commercial interests, serve as peacekeepers, furnish security in other countries, contain communism, and provide disaster relief and humanitarian aid perverts the purpose of the military.

Moreover, there are other good reasons no to take the secretary of defense up on his offer to send in the troops. Vance particularly mentions three: First, this is what private charity is for -- and private organizations, I'd add, are much better at actually aiding those in need:

Private charities have an incentive toward greater efficiency and effectiveness since they are competing with other charities for money and volunteers. If they fail in their mission, they may experience declining contributions, possibly to the point where operations will cease. In simple economic terms, the amount of assistance that reaches the recipients of government welfare benefits are only a fraction of the resources consumed by the supporting bureaucracy.

I did extensive original research resulting in a 70-page paper on exactly this subject and I can tell you, he's right.