Last week I wrote how moral outrage and moral opposition are not the same. One example I gave was protesting the draft was not the same as opposing war. Now, a recent Newsweek headline about Boko Haram, the Nigerian based Islamic terror organization, makes it necessary to point out how economic outrage and moral outrage are not the same either. Economic outrage appears moral on the surface, but it often ignores the actual moral issue.
Now, we’ve all heard about someone who was shot and killed over a small sum of money. I can recall an incident when the disputed amount was $150, but what disturbed me more than the desperation of the shooter was the economic reaction to the deed.
Appalled by the amount, most people said, “Over 150 bucks!” Or they questioned, “Why would you kill someone over chump change?” or “He (the shooter) threw his life away over that?”
The moral failing of the shooter was he valued the purchasing power of $150 over human life. But the reaction to the deed was not directed toward this moral failing. The quotes were economic outrage.
These people sounded like the victim would still be alive if the shooter conducted a cost benefit analysis and concluded the reward was too low for the risk. (But what if the amount was $150,000, would the reward be worth the risk?)
Now, Newsweek’s headline said: Boko Haram paid would-be teenage suicide bomber ‘less than $1’. The first sentence of the article mentioned: Boko Haram militants paid her just 200 Naira ($0.64) to blow herself up in a city in North East Nigeria.
About Post Author
