I am not well versed in the blood diamond situation. What would happen to the miners if the blood diamond trade evaporatec tomorrow?Scott wrote: ↑April 16th, 2021, 1:07 pmThat's a good point, and I don't necessarily disagree. Though, the finger snapping is not simple in practice, in that for instance a weak mob boss might be killed and replaced by an even blood-thirsty 2nd in command. The mob boss might considers himself a benevolent dictator of sorts. If you have ever seen the movie 300, there are some scenes I really love where the invading emperor Xerxes keeps calling himself a "kind god". In one scene Xerxes says to a spartan traitor, "You will find I am kind. Unlike the cruel Leonidas, who demanded that you stand, I require only that you kneel."LuckyR wrote: ↑April 16th, 2021, 1:57 amI think you are forgetting the responsibility of those you are trying to decide are responsible. In the mob boss case, the boss snaps his fingers and orders the enforcers to stop, and the problem evaporates.Scott wrote: ↑April 15th, 2021, 7:02 pmScott wrote: LuckyR, I would love to know your answers to those questions.I agree.LuckyR wrote: ↑April 15th, 2021, 6:25 pm I, as most, would hold the mob boss primarily responsible. This would include the third case where the business owner died against his orders since the mob boss created the environment where the enforcer put the business owner at risk of harm. The fact that the harm was of an unintended variety, the prudent mob boss should anticipate that such an outcome was possible.
While the paid enforcers might have the literal blood on their hands, the mob boss is primarily responsible for the violence and killings, and in that way the mob boss is the one who has the real (albeit figurative) blood on his hands.
For the same reason, I think the primary responsibility for the slavery she funds voluntarily with her money arguably goes to the hypothetical soccer mom with the shiny glistening blood diamond ring on her hand for using that hand to voluntary paying for soccer shoes she knows were made by child slaves. Certainly, the mob boss as entitle to a nice fancy but expensive suit as anyone is to soccer shoes and a diamond ring.
You are wise to bring up the role of prudence, and thus by extension due diligence. I think we can agree that willful ignorance is no excuse for the wanton disregard of the effects of one's actions including those done vicariously by others for money.
In the soccer mom example, the subcontractor snaps his fingers and the slave labor is freed. The soccer mom does not have that power. Her response power is incredibly limited, thus so is her responsibility.
To your wise point, LuckyR, we might consider a $10,000 blood diamond made by slaves is a thousand times more blood-ridden than a $10 pair of shoes made by child slaves, namely in terms of the amount of the market that would be removed if one chose not to participate. Thus, the one buying the $10k blood diamond is in a sense 1,000 times more responsible for that blood than the one buying the $10 shoes. The mob boss may be the primarily purchasers of hits in the hit-selling market, thereby single-handedly generated that market, or not.
A more specific and thus realistic example is the anonymous online viewers who literally paid Stas Reeflay to lock his pregnant wife outside in the cold. She died.
A cliché example would be a single guard working a Nazi concentration camp, just doing his job. If he chose to quit, or chose to never sign up for the SS in the first place, it's not like that would stop the holocaust.
Are we responsible for what we intentionally do or what we happen to allegedly cause? For those who answer in the latter, I'd point to my topic, The only true cause of death is birth, as a potential reductio ad absurdum.
Perhaps it doesn't matter that much if the person would die anyway, if the holocaust would happen anyway, if Stas Reeflay would eventually kill his wife anyway. Perhaps what matters much more is if one intentionally knowningly chooses to help make it happen when they easily could snap their fingers and withdraw their active financial support. What do you think?
The single Nazi guard situation is a bit easier. The guard is not responsible for the Holocaust, merely his small part in it.
As to the Russian you tuber, I have had some trouble finding a reliable mainstream source of information on his case.