The Reality Behind Poverty
It’s hard to say “no” to free! As the picture above suggests, a leading cause for the hunger, homelessness, and overall destitution of many people around the globe is because of an inability for people to provide for themselves through work. Foreign aid, philanthropy, or non-governmental organizations will provide efforts to help feed or shelter or clothe these people. Are they going to turn down food if they are hungry? Of course not! But is anything being down to fix the root of the issue?
Currently, not as much work is being done to help provide jobs for these people and actually help get them out of poverty. They are providing remedies to the byproduct of the issue, but not the issue itself. The best intentions can unfortunately keep the poorer people in a perpetual state of poverty.
Poverty Inc.
A documentary titled “Poverty Inc.” was made to bring to light some of the current issues in regard to global poverty. The name suggest that this is poverty is systemic in nature by using the word “Incorporated” in the name. Poverty is not existing because of unknown and non-combatable reasons. It exists because those more affluent and powerful say and do things that propagate the poverty to continue. This documentary begins with a thoughtful quote describing the poverty we see today. It is by one of the most well known and controversial French philosophers.
"The reason there will be no change is because the people who stand to lose from change have all the power, and the people who stand to gain from change have none of the power.” -Machiavelli
Global Age System
In order to discuss development we need to discuss who has the power and who should have the power because change is easiest with the help of some force or power.
If so many efforts have been done to help the poor, but poverty is still rampant, what does that mean? It means we need to change the way we help. The food, digging wells, clothes- these are all good things but the change isn’t long lasting. It makes me think of this proverb: “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you will feed him for a lifetime.”
Paternalism
The definition of paternalism is the policy or practice on the part of people in positions of authority of restricting the freedom and responsibilities of those subordinate to them in the subordinates' supposed best interest. Subordinate may not be accurate in the political sense, but when a country or nation is economically indebted to another country, that practically makes them subjected to the will of who is giving the funds.
This style of altruism is preventing impoverished people from getting out of their impoverished state. In some instances, efforts done help those in need only paint the people in a state of desperation and helplessness. Other countries will begin to look at them like as inferior and the people themselves are prone to develop a dependence mentality. Giving away free or discounted goods at times other than nation emergencies counteract local business and internal efforts to support oneself.
From the perspective of some African natives in the documentary, the western world, along with other nations, depict Africa as a barren wasteland even though it is a resource of natural minerals, oil, timber, land, and even has beautiful landscapes for tourism. “The people are just disconnected from global trade.” The man who said this in the documentary is correct, but I feel as if he underestimates the impact trade has in the development of African nations.
Poverty Seen in Haiti
Agriculture is a prime example of how “aid” has distorted the economic ability of an industry within another country. The United States was producing rice and selling it to Haiti at a discounted rate and essentially undercutting the domestic growers. Originally, the US put tariffs on other countries agricultural products to prevent them from competing against local farmers within the United States. Once this happened, the US farmers produced a surplus of rice and wanted to sell the excess to the poorer countries they had just put a tariff against. This prevents the poorer countries from making a profit with their own goods. Instead they have to compete against a stronger nation who claims to be want to “help.”
When a devastating Earthquake hit Haiti, many nations and NGO's rallied together to help rebuild and bring provisions for the Haitian people. Even now, long after the Earthquake is gone, the aid is still funneling in. The documentary claimed that there were 10,000 NGOs in Haiti when the filming was being done. One reason that they need this aid is because they are being given this aid. Let that sink in. Because various groups are giving them aid, Haiti is becoming dependent on the aid and unable to produce a competitive market that could sustain themselves.
A Potential Solution
If Haiti was given the chance to operate independent, they might be able to have business people rise up and produce the goods that their country needs. After these business-people establish a start-up business, they can recruit others to work. This would create jobs and, theoretically, a growing economy.
A company called Enersa did what the paragraph above proposed and it has been great for them. Enersa manufactures solar powered lamps and streetlights. They were doing great work and spreading at a reasonable rate, but when NGO's attempt to do the work for free, it is nearly impossible to compete. As one of the workers for Enersa said in the documentary- “it’s hard to compete with free.”
The solution is this - create jobs, allow trade to happen, and ween off of aid. Not only for Haiti, but for all of the third world nations.
The New Colonialists
In regard to foreign aid, I want to clarify how these funds may be making poorer nations act as subordinates, so to speak. The funds might be given with contingencies that the donor nations prescribes based on implementation of actions that the donor nation thinks will help the nation that is receiving the funds. For example, the money might have to be used in building new schools or infrastructure or agriculture or a multitude of other things.
The donor countries may not have the intent to actually see these poorer countries grow independent. If the donors did things to establish the small businesses in these 3rd world countries, then they would be putting the donor’s business out of business.
By giving loans, the people are becoming economic slaves to these donor countries. Instead of the physical sense of colonizing people, this “new age colonization” is colonizing the economies of the poor countries.
Aid leads to more aid and more aid and less independence. This also perpetuates what I will call the “Superman syndrome.” By that, I simply mean that people with power feel good about themselves when they help other people.
Importing clothes caused the cotton factories to shut down in Kenya. Churches in Atlanta collected eggs to give to people in Rwanda and caused a local egg producer to go out of business. When the shoe company Tom's gave away free shoes, they took away most of the business from local shoemakers and cobblers. Were any of these social entrepreneurs or charities acting with bad intentions? Probably not, but the these were side-effects nonetheless.
Final Thoughts
The people in these 3rd world countries are not inferior or incapable of rising above poverty. They are being held there by the oppressive, charitable hand giving them aid.
Having a mind for the poor may be more important than just having a heart for the poor. People need to understand the factors that lead to poverty and not just the living conditions that seem so unbearable. They don’t need aid, they need a door in to capitalism and trade!