Reading through the launch and query posts I noticed a common word being used to describe Farmer’s article: vague. That he is not clear as to what action should be taken, yet continuously calls those who are prosperous to action. Perhaps this was just how I read into the posts, but people seemed to be a little put-off by Farmer’s apparent lack of a detailed plan to totally eradicate poverty, and in effect, common diseases when he spent most of his article arguing how one should work for that very thing. One query poster, yellow63, gave a reasoning for this: “I attribute this to the nature of the article…. Farmer is writing this to an audience of people in scholarly disciplines.” Which I have to agree with. If Farmer had a clear, detailed plan that would work 100% of the time to wipe out poverty and disease there would be no need for the article. Farmer uses the article in an attempt to shed light on the situation and hopefully inspire more people to attempt to help get rid of poverty. I noticed that for most posts the posters took a fairly clear side to the argument. They were either in agreement with Farmer, in that it is up to the privileged to eradicate poverty and that the poor are in need of the best healthcare or they were opposed to the idea that the poor had little to no hand in their situation and it was the fault of the wealthy for putting the poor into their situation.
toastedravioli on Manifesto Destiny For All… bellajoelleseiz on Taking Control sproles43 on Call to Action: The Food Deser… solebearing on Government + Education daretobepresent on Food Desert