Between 1450 and 1700, almost half of Europe was living in poverty. As famine, war, and economic dislocation grew rampant, there were regions where 80 percent of the population faced starvation daily. The massive poor population led to a myriad of attitudes and responses towards the poor, including that the poor were idle, that they needed to be regulated, that helping the poor was the moral thing to do, and that the poor should be helped because it will improve the life of the donor.
Some people thought that the poor were merely idle, and therefore did not deserve help. One such person was Emperor Charles V. In his 1513 imperial decree for the Netherlands, he declared that receiving money from charity leads to idleness, which, according
…show more content…
In a poorhouse in Suffolk County, England, the regulations state that when each poor individual came to the poorhouse for the first time, they should be whipped on their bare skin. They also required more stubborn people to wear heavy shackles, have more difficult work, and be given less food. These regulations were all created for the purpose of controlling the poor. Even worse than the terrible treatment of these people is the fact that they came to the poorhouse seeking refuge and safety. Instead, they were humiliated and abused. This demand of subservience was not, however, out of cruelty, but designed to regulate the poor. Cardinal Richelieu, a royal councilor in France, unofficially gave a statement on poverty in 1625. In this statement he said that the poor should be regulated and that there should be laws passed to regulate the poor because the food they receive from begging could have been otherwise donated to the sick. He felt that the poor should be confined and then given jobs building public works projects. As Cardinal Richelieu was giving an unofficial statement, this is most likely what he actually felt. While expressing this opinion, he would not have been under any pressure from the French government, the aristocracy, his peers, or, as he was a member of the clergy, the church. His idea that the poor needed to be regulated was one that came unaffected, showing that some people …show more content…
Unfortunately, they did this for personal gain. One such person who wanted to get something out of helping the poor was Vincent de Paul. De Paul was a Catholic priest and founder of a religious order that ministered to the poor. In a 1658 speech to the members of his order in France he stated that he heard that one of the most important quality of bishops who became saints was their charity work. He thought that people would want to help the poor not because it was the right thing to do, but because it might have facilitated their personal ambitions of achieving sainthood. Although he might have actually believed this, it is possible that de Paul was simply bolstering the spirits of his order, which was comprised of poor people. By saying that better off people would want to help them because it would help them achieve their somewhat selfish dreams of forever being immortalized as a saint, he encouraged his poor congregation not to give up hope on the dwindling population of people who would readily give charity to the poor. Another French Catholic priest said in a sermon that the only reason worth giving charity was that it would help get people into heaven. He assured his congregation that giving money to the poor would go along way in the eyes of God in terms of the afterlife. Also, in a 1482 town council resolution from Dijon, France it was proposed that the poor of the city should be put in a barn to be cared
Lotzer’s statement could also be viewed a somewhat biased due to the fact that he could be exaggerating on how peasants were actually treated by lords during this time. Another document that shares these sentiments is that of document 3. Document 3 is of the Peasant Parliament to the Memmingen Town Council, and it says that they have been held as their poor serfs which is pitiable. This statement clearly expresses the unapproval in the way that they have been treated by their
According to Eugene, the poor should be helped directly to enable them to meet their daily needs. On the other hand, Andrew believed that helping the poor directly would make them dependent on others hence he insisted that his money should primarily be used to build the libraries to help the community at
Social DBQ Beginning in the 16th century, there was a growing unrest among the serfs primarily in modern day Germany. High taxes, joined with the fact that peasants had no opportunity to increase their social standing, let alone the right to do so, gave an atmosphere of disaccord between the noble, and lower class. Internalizing the egalitarian ideologies of Martin Luther, it was easy for the peasants to feel like they had greater place in among society. However, due to semi-feudalistic attitudes of those days, peasants were the lowest social class and needed to stay that way for such a social structure to function. Martin Luther’s teachings that through faith everyone could be equal in God’s eyes gave peasants a false sense of equality,
One example of this occurred when a ship’s captain ordered the “ship’s surgeons to stop the anus of each of [the slaves infected with flux] with oakum” (Document 10). This treatment was painful and humiliating to the already sick and suffering slaves. This practice highlighted the selfishness of the Europeans, who deceived other and hurt slaves in order to help themselves earn money. These cruel men did not abandon the chain methods on the boats either. The slave traders would chain poor slaves “to the decks by the neck and legs”, the position and feeling of entrapment resulted in so much pain and discomfort that meaning were “driven to a frenzy” (Document 6).
The poorhouse regulations say “Every strong rogue, at his or her first entrance into the house, shall have 12 stripes with the whip on the bare skin and every young rogue or idle loiterer shall have 6 stripes in the same manner. All unruly and stubborn persons shall be corrected oftener and given heavier shackles, a thinner diet, and harder labor until they are brought to reasonable obedience and submission to the master of the poorhouse” (doc. 7). The poorhouse had these certain rules and regulations to keep the poor in check and to keep them from acting up. They would beat them and starve them until they stopped acting up. This shows how the people would control the poor at this time.
My natural elasticity was crushed, my intellect languished, the disposition to read departed, the cheerful spark that lingered about my eye died; the dark night of slavery closed in upon me; and behold a man transformed into a brute” (55)! On the contrary, there were masters who treated their slaves fairly. For example, John Pinney was a
Slave owners felt that it was their responsibility and duty to dominate the “less fortunate and the less
However, Argument I of Singer’s essay is quite obviously correct and to argue otherwise would be foolhardy and morally cruel. Similarly, Argument III of Singer’s essay, that people in developed societies possess the resources and abilities to alleviate famine and suffering is equally hard to refute. Therefore, it is Argument II of Singer’s essay that I will examine in detail and then offer several objections that will repudiate the hypothesis of Singer’s essay, ‘Famine, Affluence, and
Social Gospel, on the other hand, could be considered more of a social movement than a theory. Social Gospel is defined as "Christian faith practiced as a call not just to personal conversion but to social reform. " This attitude is nearly the opposite of Social Darwinism when it comes to how Americans viewed themselves in relation to others of lower social status around them. Most prevalent during the late 1800s to early 1900s, Social Gospel was characterized by strong feelings of social responsibility and the idea that salvation could be achieved through service to the poor. During the late 1800s, many reformers were inspired to help the urban poor, and settlement houses began to spring up in slum neighborhoods.
In one circumstance, we may feel the need to give to those who are poor to keep them from getting in our personal space; and in other circumstances we feel that we give to others out of the kindness of our heart. I completely agree with Ascher and her views on compassion, because I have been in similar situation where I have questioned why people give money, and whether they give with a whole heart or out of necessity. Furthermore, this essay can teach us plenty of lessons that can be utilized throughout our lives so we can teach others and make them aware of the need to be more
Prior to the Protestant Reformation, Catholic doctrine was to help the poor through gifts of alms and charity. Around the time of the Protestant Reformation, this idea of alms and charity was lost. The Catholic Church was becoming corrupt, instituting indulgences, which took the very little money poor citizens had, promising them a one-way ticket to Heaven, and focusing their money on ornate cathedrals. In search of its original values regarding the poor, Catholics were finding their own way to treat the impoverished, often times distinguishing the “deserving poor” from the “undeserving poor” based on how hard they worked, hoping to save money. The Catholic Reformation helped Catholics rediscover the idea that alms and charity to all poor were
Evaluating Cruelty: Sharecropping and Slavery “After the Civil War, former slaves sought jobs, and planters sought laborers. The absence of cash or an independent credit system led to the creation of sharecropping” (Pollard para. 1). Sharecropping is the action of allowing workers, called sharecroppers, to work on someone else’s farm. This let former slaves find jobs; however, farmers found loopholes to exploit the former slaves. Because of this, the workers were rarely paid the amount they needed for their needs.
In this paper I will be arguing against Peter Singer’s views on poverty, which he expresses in his paper “The Singer Solution to World Poverty”. Singer argues that all people with wealth surplus to their essential needs are morally obligated to prevent the suffering of those in dire situations. I will argue that you can not hold people morally obligated to prevent the suffering of others, and that people can only be held morally obligated to prevent suffering that they themselves caused. To begin, we will look at Singers beliefs and arguments regarding poverty and the responsibility of people to help those in need. Singer’s first arguments revolves around a girl named Dora, who is a retired schoolteacher, who is barely making a living writing
Social Darwinism and the Social Gospel Movement are contrasting systems of belief. Social Darwinism suggests that people are in the social or financial state that they deserve. This appealed to the work ethic that anyone could do well if they worked hard enough. For some, this was a source of inspiration to work hard to excel.
I remember being a little kid and whenever my family and I would see a homeless person with a sign my parents would say, “Don’t make eye contact,” or “They probably don’t even have a problem, they’re just begging.” I remember when I made my dad buy a woman and her children McDonalds because she had a sign about having no money for food and she had no home and I felt bad for her kids. I remember my dad giving her the McDonalds and her saying to my dad, “I’d rather just have the money.” That’s when I stopped feeling sympathetic towards the poor and homeless. That’s when I decided if they wanted to be out of poverty then they could work for it