How charity backfires

[Basman]

Betterment is a good short-term solution to a crisis, but long-term generosity creates dependency and undermines the local economy. It's hard to compete with free so poor countries are rendered indeficient at developing their own businesses and systems for handling survival. And the free stuff is often mediocre and eats away at peoples dignity, like used clothes. Africans wearing a tired old oversized Spiderman shirt instead of something locally produced. The "gifts" poor parents give their children during Christmas are all donated. It sends a message to one's self-esteem when it's chronic.

It's a good example of how good intentions tend to backfire if you don't appreciate how systems work. It's an example of why stage green is insufficient at solving the problems it cares about, and often actually makes things worse. Sometimes its more evil to rob people of the opportunity for self-improvement and dignity with your compassion than to just let them suffer and struggle.

 

[Human Mint]

What you speak of is not charity per se the problem. The thing that is backfiring is ideology. The ideology behind charity is toxic and selfish.

Needs to be discussed thoroughly.

But think about this: donating a school can be a really good thing. But people think this is a given. It is not.

[Basman]

13 minutes ago, Human Mint said:

What you speak of is not charity per se the problem. The thing that is backfiring is ideology. The ideology behind charity is toxic and selfish.

Needs to be discussed thoroughly.

But think about this: donating a school can be a really good thing. But people think this is a given. It is not.

You probably didn't watch the video. It's much more structural than just ideology. Your undermining people's survival if they become too dependent on your donations. And they can't develop businesses because poor people can't compete with free stuff. At the same time the stuff you donate is going to be mediocre garbage compared to what they could produce themselves if they had the opportunity.

If a school was dependent on donations in order to function on a basic level then that would be problematic in of itself.

[Jirh]

This only proves that there is no such thing as an absolute good.

Anything we do, no matter how good it may seem, will always be limited, have blind-spots, cast shadows, create complex feedback loops, etc...

It speaks to the unpredictability of life, and of the nature of good and evil being relative.

The question is always the same: Are we trying to preserve a system or a life? And the answer is often not easy.

[Human Mint]

5 hours ago, Basman said:

You probably didn't watch the video. It's much more structural than just ideology. Your undermining people's survival if they become too dependent on your donations. And they can't develop businesses because poor people can't compete with free stuff. At the same time the stuff you donate is going to be mediocre garbage compared to what they could produce themselves if they had the opportunity.

If a school was dependent on donations in order to function on a basic level then that would be problematic in of itself.

Yes, that can happen. Is so hard to balance an entire society into self-sufficiency. But also developed countries donate to their citizens a lot. They do it in an intelligent way.

The question is rather what to do about corruption. Governments that have an identity of charity are often full of corruption.

Edited 5 hours ago by Human Mint

[Ulax]

Agreed. Great post

[Basman]

2 hours ago, Human Mint said:

Yes, that can happen. Is so hard to balance an entire society into self-sufficiency. But also developed countries donate to their citizens a lot. They do it in an intelligent way.

The question is rather what to do about corruption. Governments that have an identity of charity are often full of corruption.

Short-term relief 👍

Long-term, let them deal with their own issues and corruption. Don't retard their growth.

Obviously, you would never do charity if you didn't get at least equal benefit in some way. People get to feel good about themselves, feel a sense of purpose and companies can do tax write-offs. Often only a fraction of donated funds actually go to the cause. There's a lot of bureaucratic overhead. Donating as a complex is a survival strategy. No such thing as a free lunch. The money itself isn't worth as much to those who donate as to those who receive it. Otherwise you couldn't afford to donate. So they must be getting something else out of it.

Edited 2 hours ago by Basman