“Those children need to be hungry if they’re to toil in my Lambeth boot-blacking factory post-Brexit. And plump ones will simply get stuck in the machinery in cotton mills.
“Aid? To the British Empire? Does Unicef not realise we are the heart of a mighty free-trade Commonwealth stretching from Land’s End to John O’Groats?
The biggest surprise is that Reese-Mogg has at least a conceptual awareness of shame; and one sufficiently well elaborated to encompass the notion that it is connected with the existence of a class of things that one should, and another class of things that one should not, do even in the presence of means, motive, and opportunity.
I assume it’s a fairly abstract and observational one, rather than correlated with personal experience of moral sentiments; but a sense of shame, of a kind, nonetheless.
Jacob Rees Mogg is not the UK government.
His statement is a wonderful example of the way an action can be “Playing political games” if someone else does it, but is “statesmanlike”, or “creative” if we do it.
His statement has to be assessed by considering who Jacob Rees Mogg is.
It is fairly safe to assume that if Jacob Rees-Mogg holds a political opinion on something, I will hold a thought through opinion in opposition to it already. There is probably something that I agree with him on, but the reasons for why I agree with him will almost certainly be in opposition to him.
This isn’t just “Victorian cosplay man bad”, as some unthinking right wingers assume.
If this is surprising to you, you might have missed what the UK tories really are. They were always Malthusianists: they believe charity and aid Make Things Worse. They are also some kind of mirror-stoics and think the suffering of others is to be expected and suffered with dignity. ( Some of You May Die, but that is a Sacrifice I’ m Willing to Make, Lord Farquaad )
I think you can broadly define two groups of poor people:
Foreign poor people living in poor places
Domestic poor people living a mile down the road from the rich person
They get very different treatment. For the former, as a rich person it is important to donate a trivial-to-you but large-sounding-to-the-public amount of money to an organization that purports to do good for them without worrying about what would actually change anything. For the latter, as a rich person it is important to pretend they both morally reprehensible and don’t exist and that anyone trying to help them is doing so only to attack you personally.
When something like UNICEF, who you may have donated a few thousand dollars to and some point, and who you thought was a partner in your reputation laundering, to turn around and help people in the latter group… well, it’s the ultimate betrayal.