Thomas Pogge claims to close the gap between proponents of large-scale humanitarian aid to the third world, and those opposing such policy. Pogge turns this last group into his target audience by...Show moreThomas Pogge claims to close the gap between proponents of large-scale humanitarian aid to the third world, and those opposing such policy. Pogge turns this last group into his target audience by adopting an alleged core-principle of libertarianism, a premise that is often held among those who oppose large governmental programs, roughly the political ‘right’. According to Pogge’s argument, those holding onto the libertarian tenet must completely turn their stance on foreign aid around, as their principle actually prescribes moral duties of first world citizens to aid the third world in order to salvage inflicted damages. In this essay, I examine the actual persuasiveness of Pogge’s argument by assessing the similarity between premises used by Pogge and those held by his target audience. I do so by distinguishing two variants of Pogge’s argument, which both consist of three sub-arguments. Despite the occasional agreement, Pogge’s argument fails to concord with many key-premises generally associated with libertarians, liberals and conservatives. Due to the clash in between the two sides of the debate, Pogge’s tactic to reconcile them into one proposal fails to truly convince. I conclude that Pogge is more likely to sway his target audience by using their similarities to open a dialogue.Show less
