Charity Sucks

(i'm sorry for offending anyone with this)

Okay, charity as a concept doesn't suck - there's absolutely nothing wrong with helping others wherever and whenever you can. But there is a problem with attitudes, in New Zealand, and in other MDC's, towards charity and how to best deal with the multitude of problems faced by the people and governments struggling in LDC's.

Charity organisations run advertising in New Zealand. Advertising, for the most part, is good - it helps make people aware that there are issues affecting people around the world, something that the AC tries hard to do. What's not so good is the way they try to solicit donations, by broadcasting images of starving children, guilting you into donating money. While donating money (as opposed to not donating money), is a good thng, it over-simplifies poverty. It creates the impression that by thowing money at these charities, the children won't be starving, and you can resume your life, guilt-free. The problems are much more complicted than that, and run a lot deeper. Throwing money at it, just as throwing a key at a door without bothering to find the lock, isn't helpful. By sponsoring a starving child, you help that child, yes, but behind that child are millions more, starving and sick, and you just can't sponsor them all.

Not only are traditional forms of charity ineffective, but many are counter-poductive, and harmful. Many western aid agencies promote traditional forms of farming, as attitudes in our society become more environmentally conscious, and supportive of 'organic food'. They tend to be anti-technology, instead promoting the same methods of farming present in the region hundreds of years ago. We can afford to support organic food choices in MDC's - we have an abundance of food and money. But when aid agencies, and green activists (who often support organic farming as a way to reduce carbon emissions, and sell the carbon credits to people in the west) push these ideals (which are just that -ideals) on the peope they're trying to help, they hinder the progress of that society. Without the latest technology - plants that are resistant to disease, salt and flooding- the impoverished farming communities of the world, in plces like the Democratic Republic of Congo, will be left further behind. Their farms will barely, if even at all, keep them above the povery line, creating problems that didn't even need to be there in the first place. Furthermore, this holding back of technology by aid groups mens crops fail, and land is used inefficiently. we're in the middle of a food shortage - using the latst food technology in these areas would certainly help alleviate the strain and the cost caused by food. These 'aid' agencies supporting traditional farming are holding impoverished nations back, contributing to the problems they, and the rest of the world face.

There are many ways peope in MDC's can help alleviate the strain felt by those elsewhere. pressuring governments to set up trade policies that are non-exploitative, and thoughtful, instead of capitalist, would be a nice step. Other legislative measures, such as regional pressure (such as the African Union on Zimbabwe, or if the EU encouraged prospective member states t solve issues, rather than hide them) on horrible governments would also be beneficial to the welfare of the world's poor. 'Most of the poverty and misery in the world is due to bad government...' (George Soros). By encouraging governments to make policies that help rather than hinder, much poverty could be solved, and much pain on both sides) alleviated. The problems created by bad policies cnnot be solved through charities, and just throwing money at people through them. An actual change needs to be made globally to the way we view poverty, and choose to combat it, or the people unlucky enough to be born in an impoverished nation will be left behind the rest of us, with no hope of escape or improvement.

-Romana