Movie review: Hotel Rwanda

Ethical theories, what should be done and why

 Hotel Rwanda movie explored the genocide that happened in Rwanda and the repercussions of the violence. Paul a hotel manager and his family witnessed his neighbor being dragged away by a Hutu force but decided they could do nothing about it (George & Pearson, 2005). According to Barrow (2015) utilitarianism theory, it aims at upholding the best moral action which can maximize utility. Through this theory, Paul and his family did not act accordingly. This shows that Paul was selfish and would have at least done something for their neighbor even if they were risking their lives. This is because it is related with the welfare and upholding the virtue ethics of humankind (Barrow, 2015). Deontology approach suggests that the ethical position is judged on the morality of the action based on its adherence to the rules and its consequences. According to this approach, Paul and his family had the will to help but would have risked their lives in order to save another and it was not guaranteed. This is because according to this theory Paul and his family were actions were justified on the basis of right over good (Corrigan, 2010). Virtue ethics approach emphasizes on the individual characteristics through ethical thinking capacity rather than the act of the rules themselves. This is because according to this approach it is ethical to offer assistance since it is human (Athanassoulis, 2013).

Valid distinction and the meaning of a peacemaker.

At one point Colonel Oliver said they were there as peacekeepers and not peace makers. There is no valid distinction since both deals with conflict. A Peacemaker is committed in telling the truth and reconcile any conflict at the expense of own comfort. They attempt to solve the differences, getting tough and opening up to enable moving on through healthy means for peace to prevail (Bailliet &Larsen, 2015).

The special obligation to the family and the reality of it.

 In the conversation between Paul and Tatiana, it is clear to say that to Paul nothing matters more than family. All his life the work he does is all about family and nothing can come before that. For Tatiana helping a neighbor is a priority since there are circumstances where they may also need help and in this case they were in a position to assist (Corrigan, 2010).. The obligation to the family exist but not to the level of overseeing wrong over right and forgetting the human in us. In an ideal real situation, there should be the willingness to help and assist those in need even though there lies an obligation to the family.

Paul action and the moral difference

            Paul is a Hutus and hosting Tutsis in his hotel shows that his action is permissible. He was unwilling to assist his neighbor though he is responsible for protecting over a thousand Tutsis by sheltering them in his hotel. He took a risk by protecting all these people who were from his wife’s tribe. This shows that he put self-interest aside and he did the best he could at that particular time. Through his action, it may not make a difference morally since the aim is to assist but at least there was a better side of him that can be seen through his action (Corrigan, 2010).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reference

Pearson, K., & George, T. (2005). Hotel Rwanda: Bringing the true story of an African hero to    film. New York: Newmarket Press.

Barrow. R, (2015); Utilitarianism; A Contemporary Statement; Routledge.

Corrigan, R. H. (2010). Ethics: A University guide. Gloucester: Progressive Frontiers Press.

Athanassoulis, N. (2013). Virtue ethics. London: Bloomsbury.

Bailliet, C. M., & Larsen, K. M. (2015). The international law of practice. Corby: Oxford            University Press.