Thursday, August 16, 2007

When Is Charity Not Really?

Found this snip on they NYTimes and thought it could be more broadly applicable to such situations as Iraq and the like:
"If someone wants to help you, they shouldn’t do it by destroying the very thing that they’re trying to promote."
GEORGE ODO, a CARE official, on U.S. food aid to Africa, which his organization says can undermine struggling local farmers
Could it be that the general practice administered by the US of A and executed by the good people of America for a great long while has led people in other countries to a co-dependency upon our aid thus never reducing their dependency nor the problem and feeding our addiction feeling charitable rather than actually being such?

My theory is that the W, Rove and Co's preoccupation with "faith-based" "do-good" agencies may asphyxiate any chance to ameliorate some of the most dire situations in some of the most desolate places on the globe. What's that biblical slogan: Better to teach a person to fish than to feed her a fish?

Likewise, perhaps it's not good policy to destroy a country in the name of improving it.


Larry said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Larry said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mary Ellen said...

Hi Windspike

I don't think George has figured out that lesson yet. If I hear one more time how the world is a better place without Sadaam Hussein, I'll scream. I think the world would be a lot better place without George Bush and Dick Cheney. In fact, I would venture to say, the rest of the world feels that way, too.

Anonymous said...

On the other hand ...

NYTimes: This week, the United States Department of Transportation announced $848 million in grants to help cities discourage people from driving, in many cases by imposing new tolls or fees. But at the same time, another arm of the federal government seems to be sending a very different message. Congress provides a tax break to many of those same drivers to help them shoulder the costs of taking their cars to work.

... the government is consistently inconsistent.