The legitimacy of global governance is driven in large part by its implicit promise to make life better for human beings. Better also implies achieving tangible measures of progress in areas of health, access to food and water, and freedom from political violence. Given the readings, video presentations, and your own research, answer the following prompts in any order or manner you wish, separately or integrated:

In your opinion, are the tangible measures established for global well-being and development legitimate in legal-political as well as medical terms? In other words, if health standards seem legitimate, does this imply any political obligation on part of states to tax their citizens in order to fund such projects? On what practical or moral basis should such obligation be binding, and to what degree? What reasons have critics of development assistance given for limiting the level of state commitment to these global projects? (Easterly-Barder video debate)

Many American Christians are divided on the issue of what the Church (or individual believers) owes to meeting contemporary UN development standards, whether political or health-related. Using biblical and extra-biblical sources to inform your own reasoning, explain where you stand along this spectrum of views and why.

pur-new-sol

Related Questions