United Liberty

I know this seems like somewhat of a stupid question, especially given the magnitude and images of the human tragedy in Haiti, but it’s one that we should be asking nonetheless.  Many of us would say “well of course we should be donating to the Haiti relief efforts; why wouldn’t we?”  However, there are parts of libertarian philosophy and some libertarian thought leaders who would argue that not only do we have no obligation to donate to the relief efforts in Haiti, but that in fact we should not donate.  Ayn Rand was anti-charity (remember the discussion of borrowing a friend’s car after Dagny Taggart first arrived in Galt’s Gulch), but the most eloquent defense of not donating to the Haiti relief came from one of my listeners via Facebook:

“We don’t owe Haiti anything. There is no moral obligation to aid a nation that squanders all it receives on meeting the “needs” of its people rather than developing the free market enterprises to become self-sustained.”

I will not argue about the obvious and numerous problems in Haiti; as GA-8 candidate Valerie Meyers pointed out to me (also on Facebook), the United States has sent $46 billion in foreign aid to Haiti in the last 35 years.  Obviously, Haiti has had bad leadership (which the people have, at the very least, not opposed) and there is no such thing as a free market, as made evident by the recent story about cruise ships still docking in Haiti after the earthquake (providing jobs for Haitians via a small tourism industry, which should be strong considering its geography):

“[Royal Caribbean] recently spent $55m updating Labadee. It employs 230 Haitians and the firm estimates 300 more benefit from the market. The development has been regarded as a beacon of private investment in Haiti; Bill Clinton visited in October. Some Haitians have decried the leasing of the peninsula as effective privatisation of part of the republic’s coastline.”

If Haitians are complaining about as basic a free market principle as the privatization of part of Haiti’s coastline, obviously there is little interest in economic freedom.  So given that they have shunned the free market economics that could pull their nation out of its abject poverty, why should we as libertarians open our wallets to help Haitians after the devastating earthquake of last week if we can reasonably assume that much of it may be squandered, especially considering that we are already being forced to donate $100 million to the relief efforts?

While in my mind the best reason to not be generous with our own money is the fact that the federal government is already forcing us, through our tax dollars (or at least borrowed Chinese dollars) to send our money to Haiti, as libertarians we should still be as generous as we can.  After all, whether in Haiti, New Orleans, or anywhere else, do we not want to show that the free market and private sector charity can outperform government?  How can we as libertarians maintain that private sector charity can do what government does, only better, if we are sitting on our wallets when we could be helping?  I will not make a moral case for or against donations, but just from a practical and philosophical standpoint if we are going to try to convince Americans (or Haitians, for that matter) that government is not necessary to cure this or that societal ill, how can we sit out such a catastrophic tragedy as the earthquake in Haiti?

In short, if you believe that free market charity is the best charity, prove it.  Donate what you can to the Haiti relief effort.  Give to established and reputable charities like the Red Cross or Salvation Army, or to local churches.  The Red Cross and the Salvation Army have both made it easy to give quick $10 donations by texting HAITI to 90999 (Red Cross) or to 52000 (Salvation Army).  Please give what you can.