Abstract

This paper explores the current standing of humanitarian ethics from two different, and yet interrelated perspectives. The first argues that shortcomings of humanitarianism are symptoms of deeper social and political problems inextricably linked to the nature of humanitarian practices, while the second takes notion of humanitarian compassion as the primary moral disposition of the 21st century individual under critical scrutiny. By bringing inconsistencies of humanitarianism into the spotlight I show how humanitarianism has become a language that inextricably serves to govern human beings. Hence, by disclosing pathologies internal to the humanitarian system, I hope that I am at the same time pointing at things that a reimagined humanitarianism needs to avoid. Ultimately, I argue that this is only possible if we rethink the objectives and nature of humanitarian assistance today. Instead of falling prey to unhealthy dependencies of crisis relief and pathologies that it engenders, humanitarianism should focus on restoring the autonomy of those affected by humanitarian crises and foster further development of their social environment and individual capabilities. A satisfactory humanitarian regime should enable people to help themselves and their communities, particularly through improving their sustainability and resilience in the face of increasing global challenges and vulnerabilities.