Martin Luther King and Ivan Illyich give two very strong, yet seemingly opposing views about aiding someone from afar. While King suggests it is our duty to help, Illyich states that it is our duty to stay away before causing any more harm. How can aid be given that truly helps the recipients? Is that even possible?
King’s philosophy on the subject was taken from a letter written when he was placed in Birmingham Jail after participating in a nonviolent protest which he traveled from Atlanta to take part in. His skeletal argument was that one cannot rest if there is injustice anywhere and we have the right and duty to eliminate injustice for the sake of everyone.
Ivan Illyich expressed his view while speaking at the Conference InterAmerican Student Projects in Mexico, boldly telling his entire audience that what they are doing (volunteering abroad) was foolish and not helping anyone.
Although the arguments suggest opposite viewpoints, I don’t think the two authors would entirely disagree with each other.
Ivan Illyich gives very specific reasons for why “Latin American Do-gooders” are harming more than helping. Economically, the money used to operate groups of Americans going abroad could be put directly into the country they would be serving, rather than adding a “feel-good” factor for Americans.
Emotionally, those going abroad to serve are rarely educated about the culture in which they are serving and are diving in headfirst to areas where they are unwanted “there is also a gulf between what you feel and what the Mexican people feel that is incomparably greater.” He recognizes that their intentions are pure, but states that good intentions are not enough, the title of the speech being “To Hell with Good Intentions.”
Illyich would not have “called King out” on his work away from home or even his reasoning behind it. King does make many general statements about how fighting injustice that directly affects you is not good enough, but his efforts, in his situation, would have been justified by Illyich.
King opens up answering the question to why he was in Birmingham Jail, why he bothered visiting Birmingham, and already separates himself from the Illyich “Do-gooder.” King was invited by an organization he was affiliated with. From the start, King had a direct link to his cause and an invitation for entry.
King was not coming into the situation with an absence of true empathy, blinded by his need to help. He was fighting the same injustices he was personally facing at the time. In his letter, he states:
“When you are harried by day and haunted by night by the fact that you are a Negro, living constantly at tiptoe stance, never knowing what to expect next, and plagued with inner fears and outer resentments; when you are forever fighting a degenerating sense of “nobodyness” — then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait.”
Martin Luther King would pass Illyich’s standards for having the right to aid others: he was aiding a cause he was directly affected by. But how can others pass those standards? Or do we even need to have the “approval” of Ivan Illyich, when we could just go by King’s standards of aiding other people?
The root of both arguments come from the standards of solidarity amongst people. King argues that “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” and “whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly”, overall implying that we must stick together as mankind and should not be satisfied when our fellow man is troubled.
Illyich’s argument, while suggesting the opposite action as King’s, uses the lack of solidarity to argue his point: we should stay away from “helping” others, because we don’t truly know what they need, and in the end we cause more harm than good:
“If you have any sense of responsibility at all, stay with your riots here at home. Work for the coming elections: you will know what you are doing, why you are doing it and how to communicate with those to whom you speak.”
What it comes down to is how connected one feels with those they are working with. Do we see them as fellow people trying to make ends meet or do we see them as victims who can only be helped by an outside hand? Are we working with equal partners or charity recipients?
Not only is it important to know what aid recipients are going through, but it is equally important to know the economic and cultural impact being made through the work being done, which is where Illyich’s intended audience usually falls short. It is impossible to truly see through the eyes of others and to know exactly how they feel about the help coming in, but the least that can be done is to do everything in your power to understand the impact being made.
If international aid is done thoughtfully, then the good intentions being done are not backed only by empty deeds.
– Courtney Prentice
Sources: Swaraj, University of Pennsylvania
Photo: Robbbeck
Why You Should Donate Time
There are many ways to give to your charity of choice, but one of the most effective ways to give back is to donate time – that is to say, volunteer. Being generous with your time is beneficial to both you and to your cause of choice.
The effort to eliminate poverty worldwide would not have advanced as far as it has without the hard work of thousands of volunteers – and continued initiatives to reduce poverty will require more volunteers as well. Here are three reasons why you should donate your time.
1. Volunteering Benefits Charities
When volunteers give their time to an organization, it allows that organization to use the money it would have otherwise paid someone to do the same task to make improvements elsewhere. According to the University of California San Diego, an average volunteer hour is worth $15.39. Volunteering permits organizations to make intelligent decisions about where that money is better spent.
Giving your time also saves you money, allowing you to invest it in other causes as you see fit – it truly spreads the wealth in more ways than one.
2. You Reap the Rewards
As opposed to donating money, donating your time allows you to see first-hand the difference you’re making. Volunteering also allows you to meet new people, explore new causes and develop skills that may be useful to you later in life. Not only that, volunteers often end up learning lessons that stick with them throughout their entire lives and lead to other opportunities.
3. Your Community is Enhanced
No matter what cause you support, donating your time enhances your community in that it brings people together. Even if your efforts aren’t aimed locally (for instance, in nearby schools, youth programs or elderly facilities), working to better the world makes your community a better place to live. Engaging in service strengthens individuals’ sense of “civic responsibility” and encourages further investment into communities everywhere.
Donating time is one of the best ways to give back to not only your charity of choice but also your community. In 2013, over a quarter of Americans volunteered in some fashion. Increasing the number of volunteers — and the hours they spend volunteering — across the world is sure to make a difference for a number of causes, poverty-elimination included.
– Elise L. Riley
Sources: University of California San Diego, Huffington Post
Photo: Flickr
Top 7 Donors to Gaza and West Bank
U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon has stated that Palestinians in Gaza currently face an “enormous reconstruction task.” While rebuilding will probably be left up to humanitarian aid organizations, these organizations will depend on donations from the international community. International organizations play an important role in the economy of the Palestinian territories.
1. United States ($440 million)
Despite being in a difficult position in the Middle East, the United States is the largest donor to the Palestinian territories. On top of military aid to Israel, the U.S. has contributed humanitarian and economic recovery aid to the Gaza and West Bank in an attempt to alleviate poverty and suffering in those areas.
2. European Union ($370 million)
The European Union provides aid to the Palestinian territories in order to improve areas that are important in forming a thriving and peaceful state and relieving poverty. The European Union’s aid assists the Palestinian Authority in providing social assistance, supporting public service delivery, paying the salaries of public workers and supporting the private sector strengthens the rule of law and improves sanitation and water. Its total humanitarian assistance for Gaza and West Bank this year is at around $42.3 million. Two-thirds of this is allocated for emergency response and food assistance in Gaza.
3. UNRWA ($310 million)
UNRWA is seen mostly as a stabilizing agency in Gaza and West Bank, providing education, health care and food in those areas. Although Israel has accused the organization of being one-sided and members of U.S. Congress are concerned that U.S. aid to UNRWA could be funding Hamas, UNRWA has continued to provide services to Palestinian refugees in the Middle East.
4. United Kingdom ($136 million)
Although the United Kingdom believes that Israel has a right to self-defense, it is currently debating if they should still sell arms to Israel. Support from the United Kingdom for Gaza and West Bank is also large. In 2014, the United Kingdom will give $19 million in aid to the Palestinian Authority, which will be used to provide education needs as well as alleviate hunger and poverty in the Palestinian territories.
5. Japan ($76 million)
Japan is very outspoken in its support for the Palestinian territories. In July, Japan promised $5.5 million in humanitarian aid to Gaza to assist in distributing medicine, food and improving water and sanitation. Some of Japan’s 2014 bilateral aid spending will go to West Bank, improving public services in Jordan Valley and strengthening water infrastructure in Jericho City.
6. Germany ($55 million)
Germany’s aid programs in Gaza and West Bank highlight economic development, security, governance, environment and water infrastructure as important areas to work on. On top of strengthening institutions to provide and regulate water services, Germany works with the Palestinian Ministry of Women’s Affairs to empower women to take on management positions in the water sector. Germany also works with refugee communities in the West Bank and provides psychosocial support in Gaza’s schools.
7. France ($40 million)
Through the French Development Agency’s investments in water and energy, France has been supporting Gaza and West Bank humanitarian rebuilding efforts. Last year, France gave $25.7 million in aid to the Palestinian Authority. In July, President François Hollande stated that France would give almost $15 million to Gaza. Almost $11 million of that will go to the Palestinian Authority, and the rest will go to Gaza-based NGOs.
Christopher Gunness, a spokesman for UNRWA, said that the work ahead of them in reconstruction efforts is enormous. “Some estimates say as many as 10,000 homes have been damaged or destroyed, affecting tens of thousands of people. So the catastrophic human displacement crisis is morphing into a homelessness crisis on a massive scale.”
– Colleen Moore
Sources: Devex, International Business Times
Photo: The Guardian
Spotlight on Heifer International
Dan West was a farmer from America’s heartland when a church mission called him to the front lines of the Spanish Civil War. There he served war-weary refugees. Each were given a cup of milk per day, an amount West considered woefully inadequate. His solution was not more milk. It was more cows. In 1944, he founded Heifers for Relief, which proceeded to later become Heifer International. The organization seeks to end world hunger and poverty, one cow, sheep, goat and duck at a time.
The bulk of Heifer services is manifest through livestock. Donors can access an online catalogue of animals and purchase one for a family in need.
In many parts of the world, cattle provide a steady source of milk as well as a steady source of income through the selling of the excess. Sheep’s wool is spun into wool for clothing; the extra is sold. Water buffalo provide both milk and power by pulling plows to till soil. Yet Heifer International does not deal exclusively with large animals; they also have ducks, rabbits, fish and honeybees for purchase.
All animals come to families on two conditions. The first is that the family “pass on the gift.” The first female offspring of a family’s Heifer International livestock must be given to a neighboring family. Entire communities have been enriched this way. Heifer has touched over 20.7 million families. In fact, some Heifer animals can be traced back 22 generations.
The second condition is that the families receive animal-care training. Not all families aided by Heifer International are farmers, so they are taught to build pens and grow fodder, everything essential for the well-being of their animal.
While the organization is best known for its animal catalogue, it is involved in a wide variety of projects. For example, Heifer teaches communities sustainable farming practices and water conservation. Women are thus empowered to use their skills to become self-sufficient within their own communities.
Heifer International recently marked its 70th anniversary battling poverty and hunger. According to President and CEO Pierre Ferrari, “We know that smallholder farmers are the solution. We are proud of Heifer’s success, but there is still much to do.”
– Olivia Kostreva
Sources: Heifer International 2, Heifer International 3, Charity Navigator
Photo: Heifer International Flickr
Decriminalization of Drug Use and Sex Work
In its continued, seemingly amplified crusade against HIV, the WHO spoke out from convention by advising nations all over the world to reform their laws that inadvertently enable the spread of HIV/AIDS. Most notably, the WHO advised for the decriminalization of drug use, especially intravenous drugs, and protections for sex workers.
The report, titled “Consolidated Guidelines on HIV Prevention, Diagnosis, Treatment and Care for Key Populations,” was released in July 2014 and contained the following declarations:
• “Countries should work toward developing policies and laws that decriminalize injection and other use of drugs and, thereby, reduce incarceration.”
• “Countries should work toward developing policies and laws that decriminalize the use of clean needles and syringes (and that permit needle and syringe programmes) and that legalize opioid substitution therapy for people who are opioid-dependent.”
• “Countries should work toward decriminalization of sex work and elimination of the unjust application of non-criminal laws and regulations against sex workers.”
• “Countries should work towards legal recognition for transgender people.”
• “Countries should work toward developing policies and laws that decriminalize same-sex behaviors.”
Each of the groups addressed in these statements, including sex workers, drug users, homosexuals and transgendered people, falls into the category of “key populations” at risk for HIV/AIDS. These populations also typically face laws and cultures that ostracize their lifestyles, leading to cycles of abuse and incarceration.
These factors create a formula that consistently punishes populations most in need of sound medical counseling, preventative education and medical treatment. As stated in the report, the key populations in question are “disproportionately affected by HIV in all countries and settings.”
Another notable aspect of the WHO’s report lies less in the substance of the text itself, but more so in the fact that it directly opposes the United Nation’s stance on the same issues. According to The Economist, the U.N. still holds to the 1988 position that every nation should dictate the criminalization of intentional possession and use of illegal narcotics under domestic law as it sees fit.
The U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime shares the dissenting attitude toward the WHO’s report, as well, the idea that rehabilitation and societal reintegration tactics should be considered as alternatives to criminal sanctions.
Carefully worded, the report does not call for the legalization of activities such as drug use, but urges legal reform that focuses on rehabilitation versus criminalization.
In a statement to the Huffington Post, the senior adviser on strategy, policy and equity in the WHO’s Department of HIV Dr. Andrew Ball stated, “The guidelines recommend decriminalization of a range of behaviors of key populations…on public health grounds, so as to improve access to and utilization of health services, to reduce the likelihood of the adoption of riskier behaviors and to reduce incarceration rates.”
The HIV/AIDS world crisis is one of those issues that transcend border lines and cultures. The WHO has noted an increase in the number of cases in large cities in the United States, Europe, Asia and Africa. However, the poorest countries with the harshest incarceration laws, prominent cultural stigmas or least resources available are positioned to strongly heed the WHO’s reform considerations as they apply to each nation individually.
– Edward Heinrich
Sources: io9, Washington Blade, The Economist, Huffington Post, PRI
Photo: io9
Five Charitable Companies
Corporations and charities aren’t two ideas that necessarily go hand in hand. Corporations generally exist to make money; charities give it away (or use it to give away items or resources to people in need). However, some companies do freely give their profits to charities, showing that even the corporations that make the biggest profits are also invested in people who make the least. Here are the five most charitable companies.
1. Kroger
The biggest grocery store chain in America is also one of its most charitable companies, in terms of percentage of profits. In 2010, Kroger donated more than 10 percent of its overall profits – approximately $64 million – to charities at both local and national levels. Kroger’s charitable endeavors include not only donations, but also employee volunteering efforts programs and participation in programs to feed the hungry. Kroger’s store loyalty card-holders can also choose local charities to which they would like a portion of their bill to be donated, allowing communities to rally around local causes.
2. Macy’s
Charity may not be the first thing that comes to mind when you think of a company that sponsors showy events like the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade, but this department store actually gives a significant amount of its profits to charities around the country. Macy’s consistently gives approximately $40 million annually to charitable organizations, and encourages its customers to give back around the holidays with its “Thanks for Sharing” campaign.
3. Walmart
Walmart giving does not total much of its overall profits (less than 1.5 percent, actually), but because this corporation is such a behemoth, its charitable donations, dollar for dollar, are more than almost any other company in the world – it was knocked down to #2 in 2013 by Wells Fargo. Walmart donates over $300 million per year to charity. The company also donates significant amounts of food to charities and hunger-prevention programs.
4. Goldman Sachs
Another surprising company that ranks high on the corporate giving list is Goldman Sachs. Despite its alleged role in causing the recession of 2008, Goldman actually works in some ways to prevent poverty by donating millions to charity. In fact, during a time period in which its own profits dropped by 35 percent, Goldman increased its charitable giving by a whopping 300 percent, bringing them to $315 million total. Though the company has been accused of using charitable donations to bolster their image after the fiscal crisis, the fact remains that few companies have donated more than Goldman.
5. Target
Target makes the top 10 charitable corporations list, with its donations coming in at five percent of total profits. Target’s employees are some of the most generous with their time as well, as Target runs a substantial employee service program. Target’s goal is to transform for the better every community with a Target store, and by giving to charities that support education, hunger prevention and public safety, they’re doing just that.
– Elise L. Riley
Sources: Forbes, Business Insider
Photo: CrainsNY
A Masters in Public Health
While many young science-minded individuals focus their aspirations on medical school, a Masters in Public Health provides an opportunity for those passionate about healthcare to expand their expertise beyond the walls of a hospital into a variety of institutions and organizations.
The MPH focuses on leadership in public health–allowing graduates the ability to be hired in a number of outlets. From high-level roles in state, federal and international health organizations, to positions in research settings or the private sector, an MPH offers a versatile career path.
Participants acquire skills during the course of an MPH from a number of disciplines. Students become proficient in leadership, business, communication, education and medical subjects.
Typically the MPH degree takes two years to complete.
Any individual with an undergraduate degree may pursue a Masters in Public Health. Although it is not a clinical degree, an MPH is recognized by many states in the U.S. as an ancillary clinical professional degree. This means an individual with an MPH degree can perform certain functions in clinical and hospital environments apart from directly providing care.
Many hospital systems hire MPH staff to study disease trends with the intent of fighting infections, especially those that are hospital-based. Outside of the confines of hospitals, MPH’s are often valued in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology market research space–advising clients on trends and market potential.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention require the expertise of individuals with MPH degrees to manage both local and international disease outbreaks such as the current Ebola crisis in West Africa.
The demand for various types of public health professionals increases every year. With increased levels of research centered around sanitation and nutrition, governments are recognizing the need to understand the most efficient and cost-effective methods to improve the health of their population.
One of the most significant movements in the public health realm is an emphasis on education and preventative measures for countries struggling with public health issues.
For example in Cuba, the government has implemented an extremely effective public health system that pushes for education and prevention. Even without sophisticated technology, Cuba has been able to increase control of infectious diseases, reduce infant mortality, and make progress in the way of managing chronic disease.
In fact, Cuba’s life expectancy is the same as that of the United States–an impressive feat when comparing the infrastructure of the two countries.
An MPH offers a number of career paths in many industries. The need for the comprehensive degree is only expected to increase, especially as the international community continues to work together to fight infectious disease in developing countries.
– Caroline Logan
Sources: Online MPH Degree.net, Harvard School of Public Health: MPH Program, Oxford Journals, Upstate.edu
Photo: MPHDegrees
HIAS: Helping Jewish People Globally
HIAS, the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, was founded in 1881, and its initial goal was to help Jews in Russia and Eastern Europe escape from the pogroms. As an organization, HIAS has maintained its original goal of helping Jews around the world flee undesirable, threatening situations, as well as managed resettlement programs for the individuals who must leave their homes.
Operating through the values of dignity and respect, empowerment, welcoming, collaboration and teamwork, excellence and innovation, and accountability, HIAS partners with other local refugee assistance organizations in order to maximize the amount and quality of care that goes towards helping refugees settle into new environments.
HIAS partnerships span all across the United States in order to help those seeking better homes both locally and abroad. Partners include the Jewish Family and Children’s Services of the East Bay, the Jewish Family Service of Western Massachusetts, the Jewish Family and Vocational Service of Middlesex County, the Carolina Refugee Resettlement Agency and many more.
HIAS endeavors to not only provide refugees with physical freedom and aid, but also with emotional and psychological support. HIAS gives legal protection to those separated from their children, those seeking asylum, those who need medical attention and those who need protection from danger.
HIAS offers psychological counseling to refugees in order to help them deal with both the trauma they experienced in their old homes and with the shock that comes with moving to a radically different place. HIAS’ goal is to provide refugees with the chance to create a sustainable new life for themselves.
An example of HIAS’ success includes the securing of an asylum in New Jersey for a Syrian refugee who was being targeted by the Assad regime. Additionally, HIAS is managing to sustain a growing community of individuals coming from Iraq to Toledo, Ohio.
— Jordyn Horowitz
Sources: HIAS 1, Charity Navigator, HIAS 2, HIAS 3
Photo: JSpace
Seven Hip Nonprofits that Work to Alleviate Poverty
With all the nonprofit organizations out there that work to alleviate poverty and combat climate change, it can be hard to choose which one to donate your time or money to. Here are seven hip nonprofits that you can consider donating to:
1. Earthjustice
Founded in 1971 as the Sierra Club Legal Fund, Earthjustice is a nonprofit law firm that works to protect our global earth. It has provided legal representation to more than 1,000 clients and all of its services are provided at no charge. Its three main priorities are promoting clean energy to combat global warming, protecting the health of communities and preserving wildlife and special areas.
2. Girl Effect
The Girl Effect was created by the Nike Foundation in partnership with the NoVo Foundation, the United Nations Foundation and Coalition for Adolescent Girls. Girls play a crucial role in global development. When girls are included in economic development, health and education, there is a better chance to alleviate poverty and prevent HIV/AIDS, teen pregnancy and child marriage. This campaign is about empowering girls and providing them with resources. Its website is pretty cool, too: Girl Effect’s home page uses a video to state their message, mission statement and what the viewers can do to support it.
3. Sesame Workshop
Sesame Workshop is the nonprofit organization responsible for Sesame Street and so many more education television shows. Its projects provide valuable lessons in respect, understanding, health and literacy to children in more than 150 countries. Sesame Workshop’s mission is to use the educational power of media to help children everywhere reach their highest potential. Its recipe for success is combining a curriculum that addresses children’s critical developmental needs with the sophisticated use of media and a large dose of fun.
4. Charity: Water
Founded in 2006, Charity: Water is a nonprofit organization that brings safe and clean drinking water to developing countries. Charity: Water’s goal is to eliminate diseases from unclean drinking water, and it has helped fund almost 7,000 projects in more than 20 countries. The organization has partnered with ONA products to produce a camera strap in which a percentage of the profit goes to Charity: Water.
5. Greenpeace
Greenpeace is the largest direct-action environmental organization in the world. Its goals are to promote peace and defend our earth by protecting our oceans and ancient forests and working to stop global warming. Climate change causes natural disasters that negatively affect food production, hindering efforts to reduce poverty and advance economic development. Greenpeace believes that alleviating poverty can be done without hurting the Earth. The environmental organization is determined that providing clean energy is essential in the fight to improve health and education and to reduce poverty. Greenpeace exposes and confronts the environmental abuse that is detrimental to lives around the world, while supporting environmentally-friendly solutions.
6. ONE
ONE is an international advocacy organization that works to alleviate poverty and preventable disease. ONE raises awareness and works with political leaders to demand greater transparency, increase investments in nutrition and agriculture and fight AIDS and other preventable diseases. ONE works with activists and policymakers to oversee the use of foreign aid, combat corruption, improve economic development and encourage poverty-reducing efforts. Their teams in Johannesburg, Paris, Berlin, Brussels, London, New York and Washington, D.C. lobby and educate governments to help shape policy decisions that will improve and save millions of lives.
7. Shining Hope for Communities
Shining Hope for Communities is a nonprofit organization that works to promote gender equality and alleviate poverty in the Kibera Slum, one of Africa’s largest slums in Nairobi, Kenya. SHOFCO provides free education for girls as well as poverty alleviation and empowerment programs. The organization provides health care, meals, access to clean water and toilets, school supplies, uniform and counseling to girls that attend The Kibera School for Girls. SHOFCO also provides services to the Kibera community through their community center in order to provide healthier lives for girls and their families and to inspire the community to commit to change.
– Colleen Moore
Sources: Alternative Press, Girl Effect, Sesame Workshop, Peta Pixel, CBC News, ONE.org, Global Giving
Photo: Animation Magazine
What is AmeriCares?
A good way to learn about an aid organization is to see it at work on a current issue. AmeriCares is one of the organizations currently sending aid to countries affected by the recent West African Ebola outbreak.
Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone are directly involved in what is being called the largest recorded Ebola outbreak in history. At least 700 people have already died, with 1,300 more infected. What’s worse, there is no vaccine for Ebola and the fatality rate is almost 60 percent.
AmeriCares has sent three shipments of emergency medical equipment to the affected countries. The delivery weighed 2,700 pounds and included tens of thousands of surgical masks and caps, gloves and various medical supplies.
Support like this is desperately needed in the affected countries, as they are lacking in medical equipment and supplies. Liberia and Sierra Leone have stated that the demand for intravenous fluids is rapidly outnumbering the supply.
Luckily, in conjunction with Baxter International Inc., AmeriCares is sending enough intravenous fluid for 3,000 patients. This should cover everyone affected in both countries for the near future.
AmeriCares is a U.S. based non-profit founded in 1982. Its main goal is to provide direct aid assistance during times of crisis. According to their website, they “deliver medicines, medical supplies and humanitarian aid to a trusted network of clinics, hospitals and health care providers around the world.”
Even though direct aid during times of crisis is its main form of support, it still tries to foster sustainable healthcare practices and to “increase capacity, improve quality and provide more access to health care in the world’s poorest countries.”
This means giving medicine and medical attention to people that would otherwise not be able to afford it. For example, in Romania a boy with hemophilia was given the treatment of Factor VIII so that he could live a normal life. Or in Cambodia, where a woman with breast cancer now has access to the medicine and equipment necessary for her treatment.
AmeriCares’ website has dozens of examples of the everyday lives it changes by simply allowing for access to medical facilities and supplies.
Besides the recent Ebola outbreak, AmeriCares is working on other current crises: it has delivered $19.7 million in relief aid to the Philippines in response to the destruction caused by Typhoon Haiyan. It states that its money is used for, “medicines and medical supplies, antibiotics, chronic care meds, bandages, nutritional supplements, blankets and other relief supplies for hospitals and health centers.” AmeriCares sends volunteers to help in the relief effort, as well.
AmeriCares is also active in the Syrian Conflict. In June 2013, it sent a response team to Jordan and Turkey to assess the situation of Syrian refugees. So far, $2 million have been sent in medical aid for the refugee camps.
The amount of medical aid sent will help around 67,000 people affected by this crisis.
– Eleni Marino
Sources: The Guardian, It’s Relevant, AmeriCares, Charity Navigator
Photo: New York CBS
Martin Luther King and Ivan Illyich on Aid
Martin Luther King and Ivan Illyich give two very strong, yet seemingly opposing views about aiding someone from afar. While King suggests it is our duty to help, Illyich states that it is our duty to stay away before causing any more harm. How can aid be given that truly helps the recipients? Is that even possible?
King’s philosophy on the subject was taken from a letter written when he was placed in Birmingham Jail after participating in a nonviolent protest which he traveled from Atlanta to take part in. His skeletal argument was that one cannot rest if there is injustice anywhere and we have the right and duty to eliminate injustice for the sake of everyone.
Ivan Illyich expressed his view while speaking at the Conference InterAmerican Student Projects in Mexico, boldly telling his entire audience that what they are doing (volunteering abroad) was foolish and not helping anyone.
Although the arguments suggest opposite viewpoints, I don’t think the two authors would entirely disagree with each other.
Ivan Illyich gives very specific reasons for why “Latin American Do-gooders” are harming more than helping. Economically, the money used to operate groups of Americans going abroad could be put directly into the country they would be serving, rather than adding a “feel-good” factor for Americans.
Emotionally, those going abroad to serve are rarely educated about the culture in which they are serving and are diving in headfirst to areas where they are unwanted “there is also a gulf between what you feel and what the Mexican people feel that is incomparably greater.” He recognizes that their intentions are pure, but states that good intentions are not enough, the title of the speech being “To Hell with Good Intentions.”
Illyich would not have “called King out” on his work away from home or even his reasoning behind it. King does make many general statements about how fighting injustice that directly affects you is not good enough, but his efforts, in his situation, would have been justified by Illyich.
King opens up answering the question to why he was in Birmingham Jail, why he bothered visiting Birmingham, and already separates himself from the Illyich “Do-gooder.” King was invited by an organization he was affiliated with. From the start, King had a direct link to his cause and an invitation for entry.
King was not coming into the situation with an absence of true empathy, blinded by his need to help. He was fighting the same injustices he was personally facing at the time. In his letter, he states:
“When you are harried by day and haunted by night by the fact that you are a Negro, living constantly at tiptoe stance, never knowing what to expect next, and plagued with inner fears and outer resentments; when you are forever fighting a degenerating sense of “nobodyness” — then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait.”
Martin Luther King would pass Illyich’s standards for having the right to aid others: he was aiding a cause he was directly affected by. But how can others pass those standards? Or do we even need to have the “approval” of Ivan Illyich, when we could just go by King’s standards of aiding other people?
The root of both arguments come from the standards of solidarity amongst people. King argues that “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” and “whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly”, overall implying that we must stick together as mankind and should not be satisfied when our fellow man is troubled.
Illyich’s argument, while suggesting the opposite action as King’s, uses the lack of solidarity to argue his point: we should stay away from “helping” others, because we don’t truly know what they need, and in the end we cause more harm than good:
“If you have any sense of responsibility at all, stay with your riots here at home. Work for the coming elections: you will know what you are doing, why you are doing it and how to communicate with those to whom you speak.”
What it comes down to is how connected one feels with those they are working with. Do we see them as fellow people trying to make ends meet or do we see them as victims who can only be helped by an outside hand? Are we working with equal partners or charity recipients?
Not only is it important to know what aid recipients are going through, but it is equally important to know the economic and cultural impact being made through the work being done, which is where Illyich’s intended audience usually falls short. It is impossible to truly see through the eyes of others and to know exactly how they feel about the help coming in, but the least that can be done is to do everything in your power to understand the impact being made.
If international aid is done thoughtfully, then the good intentions being done are not backed only by empty deeds.
– Courtney Prentice
Sources: Swaraj, University of Pennsylvania
Photo: Robbbeck