I do not know if what I’m about to write makes me a monster. I do know that it makes me a part of a miniscule minority, if Internet trends and news stories of the past weeks are any guide.
“It”, is this:
I haven’t donated a cent to the Haitian relief effort. And I probably will not.
I haven’t donated to the Haitian relief effort for the same reason that I don’t give money to homeless men on the street. Based on past experiences, I don’t think the guy with the sign that reads “Need You’re Help” is going to do anything constructive with the dollar I might give him. If I use history as my guide, I don’t think the people of Haiti will do much with my money either.
In this belief I am, evidently, alone. It seems that everyone has jumped on the “Save Haiti” bandwagon. To question the impulse to donate, then, will probably be viewed as analogous with rooting for Charles Manson, John Wayne Gacy, or the Spice Girls.
My wariness has much to do with the fact that the sympathy deployed to Haiti has been done so unconditionally. Very few have said, written, or even intimated the slightest admonishment of Haiti, the country, for putting itself into a position where so many would be killed by an earthquake.
I can’t help but wonder why questions have not been raised in the face of this outpouring of support. Questions like this one:
Shouldn’t much of the responsibility for the disaster lie with the victims of that disaster?
Before the reader reaches for his or her blood pressure medication, he should allow me to explain. I don’t mean in any way that the Haitians deserved their collective fate. And I understand that it is difficult to plan for the aftermath of an earthquake. However, it is not outside the realm of imagination to think that the citizens of a country might be able to: A) avoid putting themselves into a situation that might result in such catastrophic loss of life. And B) provide for their own aid, in the event of such a catastrophe.
Imagine that I’m a caveman. Imagine that I’ve chosen to build my house out of balsa wood, and that I’m building it next to a roaring river because I’ve decided it will make harvesting fish that much easier. Then, imagine that my hut is destroyed by a flood.
Imagining what would happen next is easier than imagining me carrying a caveman’s club. If I were lucky enough to survive the roaring waters that took my hut, my tribesmen would say, “Building next to the river was pretty dumb, wasn’t it?.” Or, if I weren’t so lucky, they’d say, “At least we don’t have to worry about that moron anymore.”
Sure, you think, but those are cavemen. We’re more civilized now – we help each other, even when we make mistakes.
True enough. But what about when people repeat their mistakes? And what about when they do things that obviously act against their own self-interests?
In the case of mistakes and warnings as applied to Haiti, I don’t mean to indict those who ignored actual warnings against earthquakes, of which there were many before the recent one. Although it would have been prudent to pay heed to those, I suppose.
Instead, I’m referring to the circumstances in which people lived. While the earthquake was, obviously, unavoidable, the way in which many of the people of Haiti lived was not. Regrettably, some Haitians would have died regardless of the conditions in that country. But the fact that so many people lived in such abject poverty exacerbated the extent of the crisis.
How could humans do this to themselves? And what’s being done to stop it from happening again?
After the tsunami of 2004, the citizens of the world wailed and donated and volunteered for cleanup, rarely asking the important – and, I think, obvious – question: What were all those people doing there in the first place? Just as important: If they move back to a place near the ocean that had just been destroyed by a giant wave, shouldn’t our instinct be to say, “Go ahead if you want, but you’re on your own now.”?
We did the same after Hurricane Katrina. We were quick to vilify humans who were too slow to respond to the needs of victims, forgetting that the victims had built and maintained a major city below sea level in a known target zone for hurricanes. Our response: Make the same mistake again. Rebuild a doomed city, putting aside logic as we did.
And now, faced with a similar situation, it seems likely that we will do the same.
Shouldn’t there be some discourse on how the millions of dollars that are being poured into Haiti will be spent? And at least a slight reprimand for the conditions prior to the earthquake? Some kind of inquisition? Something like this?:
Dear Haitians –
First of all, kudos on developing the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere. Your commitment to human rights, infrastructure, and birth control should be applauded.
As we prepare to assist you in this difficult time, a polite request: If it’s possible, could you not re-build your island home in the image of its predecessor? Could you not resort to the creation of flimsy shanty- and shack-towns? And could some of you maybe use a condom once in a while?
Sincerely,
The Rest of the World
It shouldn’t be outlandish to hope that we might stop short of the reactionary word that is so often flung about after natural (and unnatural) disasters. That word: Rebuild. Thus, the tired, knee-jerk cycle of aid/assist/rebuild would be replaced by a new one: Aid/assist/let’s-stop-and-think-before-we-screw-this-up-again.
If forced to do so through logic-colored glasses, no one would look at Haiti and think, “You know what? It was a great idea to put 10 million people on half of an island. The place is routinely battered by hurricanes (in 2008, $900 million was lost/spent on recovery from them), it holds the aforementioned title of poorest nation in the Western hemisphere, and it happens to sit on a tectonic fault line.”
If it were apparent that Haiti would likely rebuild in an earthquake-resistant way, and if a cure could be found for hurricane abuse of island nations, then maybe one could imagine putting a sustained effort into rebuilding the place. But that would only be feasible if the country had shown any ability to manage its affairs in the past, which it has not done.
I can tell, based on my own reaction to that last sentence, that it might strike a nerve. The reader might be tempted to think, “We can’t blame the people of Haiti for their problems. Surely it’s someone else’s fault.” A similar sentiment can be found in this quote, from an article on the geology behind the quake:
“Unfortunately, [Haiti]’s government was not in a position to really do much to prepare for the inevitable large earthquake, leaving tens of thousands to suffer the consequences.”
The sentiment expressed is one of outrage at the government. But, ultimately, the people in a country have control over their government. One could argue that in totalitarian regimes, they do not have much control, but in the end, it is their government. And therefore, their responsibility. If the government is not doing enough for the people, it is the people’s responsibility to change the government. Not the other way around.
Additionally, some responsibility for the individual lies with that individual.
A Haitian woman, days after the earthquake:
“We need so much. Food, clothes, we need everything. I don’t know whose responsibility it is, but they need to give us something soon,” said Sophia Eltime, a mother of two who has been living under a bed sheet with seven members of her extended family. (From an AP report.)
Obviously, a set of circumstances such as the one in which Ms. Eltime was living is a heart-wrenching one. And for that, anyone would be sympathetic. Until she says, “I don’t know whose responsibility it is.” I don’t know whose responsibility it is, either. What I do know is that it is not the responsibility of the outside world to provide help. It’s nice if we do, but it is not a requirement, especially when people choose to influence their own existences negatively, whether by having too many children when they can’t afford them or by failing to recognize that living in a concrete bunker might not be the best way to protect one’s family, whether an earthquake happens or not.
Ms. Eltime’s reaction helps define what is the crux of my problem with the reaction to this and to other humanitarian crises. I recoil at the notion that I’m SUPPOSED to do something. I would like to help, but only if I feel that my assistance is deserved and justified. If I perceive that I am being told to feel a certain way, and if I can point to a pattern of mistakes made in similar situations, I lose interest.
When I was young, the great humanitarian crisis facing our world – as portrayed by the media, anyway – was the starving masses in Africa. The solution found, of course, was to send bag after bag of food to those people, forgetting the long-understood maxim that giving more food to poor people allows them to create more poor people. (Admittedly, it’s a harsh truth.) At the time, my classmates and I, young and naïve as we were, thought we had come up with a better solution. “They should just go somewhere else,” we said. Our teacher grimaced, saying, “It’s not that simple.”
It still isn’t. And I’m not as naïve as I once was – I don’t think the people of Haiti have the option of moving. But I do think that our assistance should be restricted, like it should be in cases of starvation. It simply does not work to give, unconditionally. What might work is to teach. In the case of famine-stricken segments of Africa, teaching meant making people understand that a population of people needs a certain amount of food, and that the creation of that food has to be self-sustaining for the system to work. In the case of earthquake-stricken Haiti, teaching might mean limited help, but help that is accompanied by criticism of the circumstances that made that help necessary.
In the case of the Haitian earthquake, it’s heartening to see people caring about the fates of their fellow men. What is alarming, I think, is the sometimes illogical frenzy toward casting those affected by the earthquake as helpless, innocent souls who were placed on the island of Hispaniola by an invisible force. In the case of some, this analogy might well be accurate; children cannot very well control their destinies. And as far as sympathy goes, much of it should go to those children.
But children are brought into the world by their parents. Those parents have a responsibility – to themselves and to their kids – to provide. They have a responsibility to look around – before an earthquake happens – and say, “I need to improve this situation, because if a catastrophe were to happen, we’d be in bad shape.”
The people of whom I write are adults. Functional, human adults with functional, human adult brains. It is not too much to ask that they behave as such. That they stand up and say, “Yes, we screwed this up the first time. We are forever indebted to you. Now show us how we can do it right. So that, next time, we won’t need your help.”
For my reaction to the discussion this piece generated: A Reaction, by Paul Shirley.
For more from Paul, click some of the fun buttons below…
Past work on FlipCollective.com.
To follow him on Twitter.
To befriend him on Facebook.
I completely agree with Mr. Shirley’s arguments. I think people are missing the fact that he believes that we need to help Haiti, just in a different way, by reforms. I find it ridiculous that we pump a lot of money into countries and no change happens. I also find it infuriating that doctors in America are so willing to go down to Haiti and help, but refuse to open a free clinic at home. I am a hard core liberal and not Republican at all. I voted for Obama and hated Bush. Wasteful spending on Haiti has gone on for to long. Eventually they need to learn to figure it out themselves.
I agree paul. Finally someone that thinks the same way I do.
BTW: AIDS cures Africa
What you are Mr. Shirley is a Right-wing Anarchist—nothing new to Western culture, but almost certainly destructive to it if gone unchecked.
See… the basic survival of the ‘cave-man’ depended upon the support of everyone in the community. Otherwise the human race would not have been able to fend for themselves against not only the elements, but predators as well.
There was no such thing as ‘every man for himself’ back then because isolation from the protection of the tribe meant certain death.
This is why banishment was considered the harshest penalty before death for millenniums, because it would surely lead to death, only slowly and more miserably.
So…actually Mr.Shirley, I think equating yourself to the early human was actually an insult to humanity as a whole.
REAL TRUTH: You could learn something from the caveman about what it is to be human.
p.s.Here’s a quick education from someone with actual credentials on the truth about Haiti’s plight.
This answers the questions:
THE UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST INDIES is in the process of
> conceiving how best to deliver a major conference on the theme
> Rethinking And Rebuilding Haiti.
>
> I am very keen to provide an input into this exercise because
> for too long there has been a popular perception that somehow the
> Haitian nation-building project, launched on January 1, 1804, has failed
> on account of mismanagement, ineptitude, corruption.
>
>
> Buried beneath the rubble of imperial propaganda, out of both
> Western Europe and the United States, is the evidence which shows that
> Haiti’s independence was defeated by an aggressive North-Atlantic
> alliance that could not imagine their world inhabited by a free regime
> of Africans as representatives of the newly emerging democracy.
>
> The evidence is striking, especially in the context of France.
>
> The Haitians fought for their freedom and won, as did the
> Americans fifty years earlier. The Americans declared their independence
> and crafted an extraordinary constitution that set out a clear message
> about the value of humanity and the right to freedom, justice, and
> liberty.
>
> In the midst of this brilliant discourse, they chose to retain
> slavery as the basis of the new nation state. The founding fathers
> therefore could not see beyond race, as the free state was built on a
> slavery foundation.
>
> The water was poisoned in the well; the Americans went back to
> the battlefield a century later to resolve the fact that slavery and
> freedom could not comfortably co-exist in the same place.
>
> The French, also, declared freedom, fraternity and equality as
> the new philosophies of their national transformation and gave the
> modern world a tremendous progressive boost by so doing.
>
> They abolished slavery, but Napoleon Bonaparte could not imagine
> the republic without slavery and targeted the Haitians for a new, more
> intense regime of slavery. The British agreed, as did the Dutch, Spanish
> and Portuguese.
>
> All were linked in communion over the 500 000 Blacks in Haiti,
> the most populous and prosperous Caribbean colony.
>
> As the jewel of the Caribbean, they all wanted to get their
> hands on it. With a massive slave base, the English, French and Dutch
> salivated over owning it – and the people.
>
> The people won a ten-year war, the bloodiest in modern history,
> and declared their independence. Every other country in the Americas was
> based on slavery.
>
> Haiti was freedom, and proceeded to place in its 1805
> Independence Constitution that any person of African descent who arrived
> on its shores would be declared free, and a citizen of the republic.
>
> For the first time since slavery had commenced, Blacks were the
> subjects of mass freedom and citizenship in a nation.
>
> The French refused to recognize Haiti’s independence and
> declared it an illegal pariah state.. The Americans, whom the Haitians
> looked to in solidarity as their mentor in independence, refused to
> recognize them, and offered solidarity instead to the French. The
> British, who were negotiating with the French to obtain the ownership
> title to Haiti, also moved in solidarity, as did every other
> nation-state the Western world.
>
> Haiti was isolated at birth – ostracized and denied access to
> world trade, finance, and institutional development. It was the most
> vicious example of national strangulation recorded in modern history.
>
> The Cubans, at least, have had Russia, China, and Vietnam. The
> Haitians were alone from inception. The crumbling began.
>
> Then came 1825; the moment of full truth. The republic is
> celebrating its 21st anniversary. There is national euphoria in the
> streets of Port-au-Prince.
>
> The economy is bankrupt; the political leadership isolated. The
> cabinet took the decision that the state of affairs could not continue.
>
> The country had to find a way to be inserted back into the world
> economy. The French government was invited to a summit.
>
> Officials arrived and told the Haitian government that they were
> willing to recognize the country as a sovereign nation but it would have
> to pay compensation and reparation in exchange. The Haitians, with backs
> to the wall, agreed to pay the French.
>
> The French government sent a team of accountants and actuaries
> into Haiti in order to place a value on all lands, all physical assets,
> the 500 000 citizens were who formerly enslaved, animals, and all other
> commercial properties and services.
>
> The sums amounted to 150 million gold francs. Haiti was told to
> pay this reparation to France in return for national recognition.
>
> The Haitian government agreed; payments began immediately.
> Members of the Cabinet were also valued because they had been enslaved
> people before independence.
>
> Thus began the systematic destruction of the Republic of Haiti.
> The French government bled the nation and rendered it a failed state. It
> was a merciless exploitation that was designed and guaranteed to
> collapse the Haitian economy and society.
>
> Haiti was forced to pay this sum until 1922 when the last
> installment was made. During the long 19th century, the payment to
> France amounted to up to 70 per cent of the country’s foreign exchange
> earnings.
>
> Jamaica today pays up to 70 per cent in order to service its
> international and domestic debt. Haiti was crushed by this debt payment.
> It descended into financial and social chaos.
>
> The republic did not stand a chance. France was enriched and it
> took pleasure from the fact that having been defeated by Haitians on the
> battlefield, it had won on the field of finance. In the years when the
> coffee crops failed, or the sugar yield was down, the Haitian government
> borrowed on the French money market at double the going interest rate in
> order to repay the French government.
>
> When the Americans invaded the country in the early 20th
> century, one of the reasons offered was to assist the French in
> collecting its reparations.
>
> The collapse of the Haitian nation resides at the feet of France
> and America, especially. These two nations betrayed, failed, and
> destroyed the dream that was Haiti; crushed to dust in an effort to
> destroy the flower of freedom and the seed of justice.
>
> Haiti did not fail. It was destroyed by two of the most powerful
> nations on earth, both of which continue to have a primary interest in
> its current condition.
>
> The sudden quake has come in the aftermath of summers of hate.
> In many ways the quake has been less destructive than the hate.
>
> Human life was snuffed out by the quake, while the hate has been
> a long and inhumane suffocation – a crime against humanity.
>
> During the 2001 UN Conference on Race in Durban, South Africa,
> strong representation was made to the French government to repay the 150
> million francs.
>
> The value of this amount was estimated by financial actuaries as
> US$21 billion. This sum of capital could rebuild Haiti and place it in a
> position to re-engage the modern world. It was illegally extracted from
> the Haitian people and should be repaid.
>
> It is stolen wealth. In so doing, France could discharge its
> moral obligation to the Haitian people.
>
> For a nation that prides itself in the celebration of modern
> diplomacy, France, in order to exist with the moral authority of this
> diplomacy in this post-modern world, should do the just and legal thing..
>
>
> Such an act at the outset of this century would open the door
> for a sophisticated interface of past and present, and set the Haitian
> nation free at last.
>
> Sir Hilary Beckles is pro-vice-chancellor and Principal of the
> Cave Hill Campus, UWI.
@TTWTWSH
You are a moron…and stated facts do not become statistics because you want them to be. I never presented the information as a statistic so I think I get to decide what context I put my own information into…if you want to take facts and turn them into statistic…WRITE YOUR OWN ARTICLE YOU DOUCHE BAG!
The fact is…I really don’t care if you want to send Haiti money…I couldn’t give a shit less to be honest with you. HOWEVER as I have stated until I am blue in the face…IF YOU SEND THEM MONEY YOU ARE DOING IT FOR YOURSELF…NOT THE HAITIANS!!!! Obama sending our money without input from the people…IS NOT HELPING THE HAITIANS…IT’S MAKING HIM LOOK GOOD TO SIMPLE MINDED MORONS LIKE YOU!
You posted the pictures as if I or Paul Shirley or anyone else was saying not to help…you are still convinced that I am saying not to help…you have intentionally MISSED THE POINT AND THEREFORE HAVE GRADUATED TO THE STATISTICAL 100% BRAIN DEAD…. congratulations.
@ kalifani6
You are supposed to study history in order to prevent from repeating it…NOT TO MAKE LAME EXCUSES AS TO WHY HAITI REMAINS SCREWED UP IN SPITE OF BILLIONS IN AID AND CHARITY!
Lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against Aid That Does Harm
Read that landmark article. The author is basically agreeing with it here, and it’s the truth.
It saddens me to see these attitudes by Shirley and some of the respondents. If there is a lack of basic humanity in their hearts for something like this then only personal tragedy will help any of them see how evil they truly sound. I can not know their hearts but I imagine Shirley, Mr. Trail and a few others who’ve responded with seething vitriolic apathy for the death of hundreds of thousands and the subsequent suffering of millions (including many innocent children) may not have one. When I read this sort of thing I wonder if these feelings would be so fierce if Haiti were a country in Europe dealing with a natural disaster. I always see this sort of adverse reaction to aid being given when it’s being given to those living in countries full of yellow or brown skinned residents. And I can’t help but notice there seems to be little understanding of the history of the country by its detractors like Limbaugh and Shirley, maybe because they’re more interested in protesting integrated schools or whatever people like that do now that they are firmly on the wrong side of history.
@TTWTWSH
BTW: The numbers I posted came from a 2008 budget and I am not sure how numbers from a budget somehow magically transform themselves into “Statistics” and then you can say you don’t trust them because statistics can be manipulated. Is your checkbook a statistic that can be manipulated too? If you bounce a check buying your anti-psychotic (Which if you don’t have you clearly need) and then the bank says they are going to charge you a fee…do you say that their calculations are statistics and can be manipulated therefore you refuse to pay the fee?
SO DO ME A FAVOR…SHOVE YOUR “STATISTICS” UP YOUR ASS…THERE IS PLENTY OF ROOM NEXT TO YOUR HEAD! “A budget is actually a statistic”…what kind of brainless moron comes up with something that damn stupid? I EVEN POSTED A LINK TO THE BUDGET I GATHERED THE INFORMATION FROM…GOOD GRIEF!
correction–I just read Mr. Shirley’s blog and see he does not advocate not helping, only cautions when doing so. BIG difference and so I retract my inclusion of Mr. Shirley in my earlier post. I don’t agree with his premise but don’t want to demonize him.
I meant Mr. Trail. Paul Shirley is a jerk and i’m happy he was fired.
So what happens when we have a catastrophic event, and somehow get in the same situation haiti is in now? Will the people of Haiti help us?
Hmmm, maybe. To some extend youre right, giving help to all kinds of disasters like in Africa isnt going to work as long as we dont enforce any structural change in a country like that. But at the other hand, that only really counts when the disaster is the fault of humans. Lets suppose that Haiti wasnt the poorest country in the western hemisphere, and that they had a stable, fair democratic government, etc. And then a earthquake comes along and devastates the capital, buildings collapse, and hundreds of thousands people die. Are you saying we shouldnt give them money and food just to relieve them? If a earthquake or any other big enough natural disaster hits you, it can destroy your stable economy, and where else can they find the money to rebuild their country? Yes, you where saying that, under the excuse that they shouldnt have build their city on a geological hotspot. I believe that back when the French founded their colony there, the field of geology wasnt sufficiently advanced to predict that this was one of those hotspots.
In short, to some extend your argument makes sense. I stopped donating money to AIDS funds because I dont think its useful as long as those people continue to sleep with every women that is available. But in case of a natural disaster where its clearly nobodies fault, I do happily give some money for rebuilding purposes. Though, yes, I do demand to know on what my money is spend on exactly.
Carry on Mr. Shirley! You’re not alone!
I think the people of Haiti should postpone the creation of a government and an economy that actually works until after they’ve had enough babies to replace all the people who were killed. And then they should have even more babies and hope that lots of Americans will adopt them.
DUH!!
@ Lexus:
Your logic would work if it were not for the fact that the 7.0 earthquake was the trigger, the real cause of death and devastation in Haiti is their corrupt government. In 1989 San Francisco had a 7.0 earthquake and 68 people died, Haiti has a 7.0 earthquake and 150,000 died. Which is why I say, Haiti’s REAL PROBLEM isn’t an earthquake.
http://conservativehideout.wordpress.com/2010/01/29/paul-shirley-haiti-and-the-difference-between-intent-and-accomplishment/
I like how half of the people complaining say something that is addressed in the article and how so many are so very offended about a logical statement.
Awesome trolling bro.
I do the cha cha like a sissy girl. I “lika, do, da cha cha.”
Paul, I normally chuckle at your columns and enjoy reading them. This time, I couldn’t help but wonder at the ignorance to the “real world” (ie not Western culture) facts about poverty, and hard-heartedness of your writing.
Is there more that Haitians could/should do for themselves? Certainly. Does there appear to be a sense of entitlement among them? Absolutely.
But does that excuse our lack of charity in not giving a small amount out of our GREAT abundance to help in an emergency? Absolutely not.
Although this will sound harsher than I intend, your column smells to me of a Hitler-esque pragmatism which I’m sure makes perfect sense as you type on your laptop, listening to your iPod, sipping on your choice of hot (or cold) beverage in a climate controlled environment, thinking about what sort of snack to grab from your personal stockpile of refrigerated food.
I would suggest, however, that you no more “deserve” your life of luxury than Haitians “deserve” the squalor they live in – even before the earthquake.
And, either way, I suggest that a touch of humanity would go a long way to relieving your own apparent sense of entitlement – which is maybe the most ironic part of your post.
Thank you for being brave enough to voice your concerns that you surely knew were not mainstream. But please – a measure of charity would go a long way!
T-Cress: We have been giving…and giving…and giving…and giving some more! In 2008 alone we gave Haiti $267,200,000.00! Haiti’s primary import is CHARITY DOLLARS and their primary export is ILLEGAL ALIENS! We are talking about the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere and yet they share an island with one of the fastest growing economies.
What Paul said may have needed a bit more tact…but he is essentially correct. Billions over time has been given to the people of Haiti and their poverty remains unchanged because they remain unchanged as a people.
NOBODY says to not help…but what they are saying is the Haitian people are not suffering from a lack of charity, they are suffering from a lack of personal responsibility.
As I pointed out in my article in 2008 the Haitians were eating dirt cookies and in spite of that year alone the United States government giving them $267,200,000.00 of our tax dollars (That doesn’t even include all the millions in charity dollars), in 2010 they are still eating dirt cookies!
Haiti has problems, but the earthquake didn’t cause those problems.
http://conservativehideout.wordpress.com/2010/01/29/paul-shirley-haiti-and-the-difference-between-intent-and-accomplishment/
FUCK YOU ALL YOU GREEDY, MIDDLE CLASS BASTARDS, I HOPE ALL OF YOU WILL LIVE A TERRIBLE LIFE PAUL SHIRLEY
WHY DONT YOU ACTUALLY GET UP OFF YOUR ASS AND TAKE A FUCKING LOOK AROUND YOU
I GOT A GREAT IDEA MUTHAFUCKA, KILL YOURSELF
Chinotws:
You are an idiot…but worse than that…you are a victim and you will always be a victim. You are a product of your own wasted potential…congrats on being a completely useless member of society who believes that class warfare will somehow improve your life.
thank god someone sees this for what it is. fuck the bleeding hearts, fuck wyclef and fuck haiti.
Mark – I started to read through all the comments and your responses (are you Paul’s watch-dog or what?) until I (quickly) saw what sort of posts most of these things were.
So, forgive me if I’m repeating what others have said or if you need to repeat yourself – but I have better things to do than read 2000 snarling, barely sensible posts filled with cuss-words.
I think we can agree that simply tossing money at a problem is not the solution. It seems to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. This is complexities of international issues like this are, I will admit, beyond my pay-grade.
However, I have worked extensively with NGO’s and have been to the Western Hemisphere’s SECOND poorest country – Nicaragua – where my family and I continue to have contact and input. And from that experience I’m confident that help CAN be given. All is not lost. Simply washing our hands of the situation is not the answer.
So – dumping cash into the situation is obviously not teh best way to do things. However, this situation is unlike your “average” poverty issue. I was reluctant to just fire money at the problem until I became aware of the need of many NGOs that was expressly – wait for it – cash! They didn’t need people on the ground or anything else – they need cash. That will chnge over time, but that’s the situation currently.
I’m very disturbed by the sheer pragmatism of Paul’s opinion. I fear this is a slippery slope in the extreme. If we start down the road of absolving ourselves from the need to help the “least of these” then where does it stop? Babies? The elderly? Maybe we should hold handicapped people responsible for their own well-being – after all, they should know better, shouldn’t they? Haven’t we helped them enough? Aren’t they too much of a drain on our economy? Just THINK of all the hard-earned tax dollars that are being absolutely POURED into sustaining the elderly! Wouldn’t it be more pragmatic to simply do away with them? Hitlerite, indeed!
Additionally, I find it ironic and quite sad at how we tend to stand in judgement of these good people in Haiti. They are poor, materially. We are filthy (and I use that word deliberately) wealthy, at least materially. And somehow we think this makes “us” better than “them” – or that we somehow think we KNOW better than them. Could it be that maybe THEY know more about some aspects of joy and life (even in their poverty) than WE do?
I contend that we’re just as screwed up as Haiti is. We just have wealth to band-aid the disease.
Thanks for reading.
@ Paul Shirley: The same hands you used to type this article is the same hands you will use to beg. Mark my word!
http://giveafiverforourwedding.weebly.com/index.html
WoW! This is a hard pill to swallow. I hope you have no regrets!
I read the article and have heard similar reactions from other narrow-minded self-absorbed people that I know. What struck me most was the unrealistic attitude of the writer who makes presumptions that are neither valid nor supported by history. The cultures of nations are evolving entities. The United States and other European countries have reached a level of organizational maturity – we are ‘adult’ nations. Other countries have suffered developmental delays and are still in their ‘infancy’. Haiti is one of these countries, unable to help itself, unable to grow and develop and progress, as a system of government, to a point of independence and self-reliance. To expect Haiti to problem solve in a sophisticated cycle of identifying the issue, exploring solutions, selecting and implementing the best option, and evaluating the result, is like expecting the Downs Syndrome child to properly and appropriately raise himself without parents. How Haiti has reached such a diminished level of existence is an obvious, but moot point. As demonstrated by the author of the article, ignorance begets ignorance, as surely as poverty begets poverty. Haiti has been beat down by nature, disease, and lack of education for so long, that has become its way of life. It exists on the least level of Bloom’s taxonomy where the most basic of human needs are all that are aspired to. We, as a country, have reached a level of self-actualization; we have an identity, we have goals, we have resources and plans for our future. We can imagine a better future and make it happen through our wealth and our education and our drive. We are not limited by the weight of day to day sustenance, we can dream and we can realize those dreams. As Americans, we must parent the challenged “child” and come to grips with the fact that Haiti may never be able to take care of itself. Either give and help with unconditional heartfelt compassion, expecting nothing in return, or don’t give or help and be quiet because just as it is unnecessary for us to justify our selfless actions, it is unnecessary for those who would withhold aid to justify their selfishness.
The First World probably feels some guilt for tossing Haiti into the situation in the first place–once the slave rebellion won, most of Europe refused to recognize it; more recently, natives found it easier–and cheaper–to become part of the sex trade for vacationing foreigners than to go on with subsistence farming, which led to things like the rapid spread of AIDS.
So you’re right, throwing money at the problem isn’t going to prevent this from repeating itself. And Haiti should be taking more of the initiative to improve its infrastructure and government (especially in the face of all those imported volunteers). But did we have something to do with them reaching this point? Yes.
T-Cress:
I agree…Haiti can be re-built and quite frankly nobody has ever said not to help…my point from the beginning and Paul Shirley’s much less tactful point is a lack of charity didn’t create Haiti’s problems, even the earthquake didn’t create Haiti’s problems…in fact…it really doesn’t matter what created Haiti’s problems. People keep talking about 200 years ago….blah…blah…blah…the point is their history is not an excuse for continued failure.
I want the people of Haiti to recover, more than that I want them to prosper. These people have spent years eating dirt cookies…honestly my heart breaks at the very idea that there are parents who have to look at their children and say, “Dirt cookies for dinner…and breakfast…and lunch”.
But in spite of my heart break I also know that we have spent billions on Haiti over the course of decades and they continue to eat dirt cookies! So who do I blame? Is it a lack of charity…no I don’t think that’s it…is it they like eating dirt cookies…I am sure that’s not it! So what is it? The answer to me is the answer to nearly every famine in history…THEIR GOVERNMENT! I say let’s help the people and give the government the ultimatum…change or become irrelevant!
I would rather France and the entire limp wrist Liberal movement accuse the United States of “Imperialism” (Which is all bull crap anyway) than to allow another Haitian to eat another dirt cookie!
If we are giving money and that money is going to sustain their current Government then I say NOT A NICKEL…these people are eating dirt cookies…I can’t imagine it getting much worse! So it’s either a new government…or NO AID!
T-Cress:
Take a look at my article…maybe you will get a better picture than the comments I have made here addressing the truly ignorant.
http://conservativehideout.wordpress.com/2010/01/29/paul-shirley-haiti-and-the-difference-between-intent-and-accomplishment/
Great writing Paul Shirley, it’s about time someone wrote was truly on their mind and heart. And as for the liberal bleeding hearts where logic and honesty goes flying out the window, who cares what they think!
What he wrote is the truth, I’m not giving either, and guilt does not work, for I have nothing to be guilty about, and either does Paul Shirley.
Most of the rude, ignorant, and down right evil comments against Paul Shirley, takes me back to many situations written by Ayn Rand in “Atlas Shrugged”. The evil actions and words of certain people, are so dishonest, they willfully create a double standard, and blatantly wave around their hypocrisy as if it’s an honor to do so. They’re just miserable and nasty people with no rational opinion, these people are the ones filled with malice and hate.
Paul Shirley I admire your courage, look at it this way, ESPN does not deserve people with intelligence and integrity that you possess. Something much better will come along, a place that will allow the true meaning of “Freedom of Speech and Expression”.
@Mark
Okay, so is throwing money at the GOVERNMENT the only problem, in your mind? Why not give to NGOs, churches or other charities that seem to be the only ones (outside of the US Armed Forces) capable of getting anything done in Haiti? Personally, that is where my help is going to! I don’t pretend to understand all the complexities of Haiti, but I believe I know some who do and that’s where my money is going. And I am extremely happy that my little contribution is helping in ways that I could never otherwise!
Is that problematic?
T-Cress:
No, I don’t see that as problematic. But all of the charity dollars are dwarfed by the US tax dollars that are flowing there and the White House’s little donation deal they set up which is a sham. Like I said…I feel for the people of Haiti but the Obama administration is dead set on maintaining the Government of Haiti that is creating the problems.
This article is clearly saturated with ignorance and misguided theories. The idea that those who are benifited should not help others (I’m sure you’re writing this on your $1000+ computer drinking your Starbucks)is truly unfortunate. If you believe so strongly in not providing monitary support, maybe you should donate your time and efforts to helping those on ground… oh, wait you probably cannot… So people donate so that those trained can help. Maybe you should reconsider the opportunities that you had; education, food security, protection against violence, the list is far to long to spell out for you… The developed world may need to rethink appropriate uses of aid.. But your generalization of food bag drop offs and uninvolvement attitude is without reason an perception. Walk a mile in another’s shoes.. or so the saying goes.
Wow Calteich… Standing up for something noble — I am 100% in belief of freedom of speech but this author is no victim. I wonder if anyone here would ask for help if everything they had was taken away by a disaster? Not to mention a complete life without formal opportunity due to a multitude of factors, almost all of which are not in control of by the typical Haitian citizen. This is not a “liberal” argument so just leave the he said, she said, stuff at home. Try to think what you would do without so much opportunity, including the most basic essentials.
@ mark trail
for the record, grow a brain, if you do have one, then use it.
and YES i am a victim having being born to protect my parents from your countries policies , if you think you’ve seen it all , guess again you heartless muthafucka
im not a PRODUCT , i am a human being, and so are the thousands of lives gone from the quakes.
to say Fuck haiti, to ignore helping the loved and the lost. to refuse to give something, SOMETHING, to these people who since their indepence from france from slaves to a people.
You…… are the idiot. a true PRODUCT of Wasted potential because you believe in government, them who constantly pocket the relief money , rather than actually helping the PEOPLE out. cuz you believe that their mistakes are being repeated…
these people are the meaning of poverty, because they dont have the money to fix their houses, to put food for the children, to end the violence that roams faster than the fucking swine flu.
congrats on being a worthless cucaracha, congratulations on being a fucking disgrace to humanity
oh and one more thing, i am 17 yrs old, and somehow i understand more about these things even more than you. and yeah, i think destroying the middle class will most certainly help me and my peoples out.
The fact that you harbor these opinions makes you an uneducated fool. The fact that you give voice to these opinions in a way that might influence others makes you a vile human being. Or, monster, if you prefer. Now, please never, ever write anything again, under any circumstances. Go practice free throws for the rest of your life. Just do it quietly.
Paul Shirley, you seem to be intelligent. Yet, that ‘article’ is a dribble of benightedness.
.. Read about the history of Haiti, yeh?
Some Corporations have their merchandise made in Sweatshops in Haiti and do you really think that if people had the choice, to, or not to work in sweatshops, do you really think they still would?
The only reason they allow themselves to get exploited is because the price of Survival in Haiti is very high, most Haitians live in Poverty, they need water and food to live, just as we do.
And you also seem to think that people can just pack up their bags and leave, like a holiday. And you seem to think that people can choose where they were born or where they live. The world’s not a perfect place.
Donate some money to Haiti, try to make it so.
God helps those who help themselves. Unfortunately people think the inverse; what’s worse is that people think America and all the other first world nations are God.
This has become a cycle of fools who think this kind of support to poor nations helps in the long term; disaster happens, throw money, disaster happens, throw money, disaster happens, throw money. It may help in the short term, but do you think it will promote evolution within the nation?
I am amazed by the ignorance of this article – For those who are defending his freedom of speech.. that’s not the issue… The unfortunate message is that those who are so “benefited” should not help others based purely on their self-created knowledge on the issue and “all the work they have done to earn their money” — What about the thousands of people who lost their family members or who are suffering from hunger. Does this guy work for the UN?… Does this guy have a PhD in political science or Sociology? — Has this guy contributed to society beyond dribbling some basketballs..? I sure if anyone here lost everything they would expect society to lend them a hand. Give me a break. This is just uneducated hate speech with the knowledge level of “shooting the you know what” with your buddies. Think about your daily concerns and then try to “relate” to someone without food, security, vaccinations, protection against violence/rape, shelter, clean water, an opportunity for education, ………. because there are millions of people in the world (beyond Haiti) who do not have the luxury of these things. Have fun “shooting hoops” later. I bet you will really have to think hard about your life if you “miss your free throws” Must be rough.
I thought the article was well written and I agree totally with the contents.
Why help those who won’t even help themselves?
http://giveafiverforourwedding.weebly.com/index.html
Sure hope he’s prepared for all the flack he’ll forever receive because of foolish decision to share his “personal” opinion in such a public domain.
Aaron,
Are you serious? – The reason developing countries require assistance is not as one billionth as simple as your black and white quoted response. There are certainly more appropriate/educated readings regarding aid and global development than this guy, and there are certainly better articulations of the complexity. The answers to humanities “problems” are surely not going to develop from this hateful article. He should be ashamed.
@Mark (and by extension, I guess, Paul),
But if WE are going to give money to Haiti (which is where this all started with Paul’s article, correct?) wouldn’t we more or less HAVE to do it through an NGO or church or something (ie World Vision)? We aren’t going to give cash directly to the government, are we? I’m not even sure how one would go about doing that even if one wanted to!
So your point about just tossing money at their government is well taken (although, as far as our governments go, I’m not sure where else a government would give money to…chalk that question up to ignorance on my part).
But as individuals we CAN help – and, I’d argue strongly, we SHOULD! I’d argue that it would be wrong NOT to help!
So, find an NGO or church or something who is helping in Haiti and give some money/time/resource that will SAVE LIVES in the short and long term!
Are we on the same page?
@Mark – dude, you’ve got more patience than I have in dealing w/ all these comments! Wow!
You make some very legitimate points in this article. Whilst it is unfortunate that so many people are suffering, hungry, and injured, it is important to look at the underlying problems with Haiti before this earthquake. How many of the people you see on the TV commercials crying and starving were just as hungry and impoverished before the earthquake? Did Americans take interest in feeding these people just months ago? They were living in shacks before with no food for their children. Now they are living in a park with no food for their children. A substantial difference? I think not. Perhaps rainfall will serve as some sort of a group bath. You mentioned that millions was spent on correcting damage from a hurricane just years ago. Common sense would say if you step on a nail coming through the carpet, don’t walk in that same spot again. Unless Haiti is suddenly and miraculously able to relocate itself away from detrimental fault lines, it will experience more damage from earthquakes in the future and the money and efforts wasted in rebuilding will be just that; wasted. Many people, especially the infamous Americans, are so quick to jump on bandwagons. As soon as the hype dies down, a few million people get some rice, and some make shift shacks are reconstructed, most Americans are going to return to their everyday lives, satisfied that they did their part. And then what? Haiti is back into their political turmoil and mammoth crime rates. Did no one realize that the US government itself considers Haiti “dangerous and all visitors are urged to exercise vigilance and caution” (http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1134.html). Take a look at the US Department of State’s website to see just how unsafe, dangerous, and impoverished Haiti was before this “disaster”. Even while people from around the globe are creating rescue efforts, people continue to rape, fight, and loot. Sure, Haiti needs help. But no one is willing to help them in ways that will actually create a change in the society. Feeding people so they can turn around and starve and kill each other in six months isn’t exactly the best game plan.
Hope you enjoy flipping burgers, IF someone will still hire you after this.
Why even take time to read all this bullshit..mind as well just watch the tyra show if i wanted to listen or hear ignorance in the makin..
Chinowtws:
You are a moron and obviously cannot read…I have NEVER said “Fuck Haiti”…in fact you illiterate moron…quite the opposite. I also NEVER professed a faith in Government…theirs or ours…again…you must be illiterate. The fact that you are 17 doesn’t surprise me you foul mouthed little cuss. I have a daughter 4 years older than you…and I will tell you what I tell my own children…if you think you know it all do you think that all the adults forgot it?
Hopefully you will grow up someday and encounter someone as eternally stupid as yourself, then you will understand why every adult laughed out loud at your ignorant comments.
T-Cress:
My church sent people and a team of doctors…I donated to that cause….so I guess we are on the same page there. But I think the point is not the emergency help, but the rebuilding which will primarily be handled by the inept Government and our inept Government and the even more inept UN.