I was watching a TED talk by Barry Schwartz. His talk was called, “The Real Crisis? We Stopped Being Wise” In his talk, Schwartz dissociates “wisdom” from the idea of ‘being smart’ and defines ‘practical wisdom’ as the ability to see the right thing and the will to do it. He argues that this ability to see right and then do it for no other reason than it IS right, will help to re-build our world. We live in a time when views about aid to the developing world raise strong emotions and arguments. It is by no means clear that aid is “the right thing” or that it is always done for “the right reasons” or that its effects are good for the people it is intended to help. The COINS Foundation has some pretty strong reservations about a lot of aid. Just today, the Archbishop of Canterbury called on Anglicans to “pray, fast and give” to highlight Zimbabwe’s slide toward starvation. Dr Williams and the Archbishop of York, John Sentamu said people should give now rather than wait for a political solution. – I was prompted to hope that this, perhaps outmoded response to the troubles of the world, would nonetheless deliver a healthy dose of ‘practical wisdom’.
Tags: Aid
The wisdom of aid
I have been reading with interest the comments regarding financial aid on this blog. What always strikes a very raw nerve with me is that a lot of fundraising has to be “fun” or a “challenge” for the fundraisers – that they have to get sponsorship for their fun and challenging efforts. Giving, for giving sake has been lost. Putting the sponsorship money raised aside, it appears to me that construction companies themselves fund the Coins event such as providing paid time off work, minibuses, fuel, hotel accommodation, equipment, food, clothing etc. etc. for their partaking employees, itself no mean expense. This expense in turn is funded out of the profits of that construction company, which in turn is eventually funded by their customers. More often than not, construction companies look to their customers and subcontractors for sponsorship as well!
Furthermore, the competitive element does not end there. Construction companies are in a league table to see who raises the most!
To me it all seems a very distorted way of raising money. Can people no longer give, for giving sake – just for the cause? Does it so often have to be linked to a “fun” or “challenge”. The money, time and effort spent on the challenge could be better spent by giving it straight to the charity, thus cutting out the middle men – the ones “having fun” or being “challenged”.
The greatest gift of all is time. It is time to rethink.
The Wisdom of Aid
How do we know that aid we are giving is ”the right thing”? Berore we can do the right thing we must recognise what has gone wrong or what is not happening. It is necessary to attemp to fix the root problem otherwise you are just treating the symptoms.
Aid should enhance the postion of those who are receiving it. Aid that relieves in the short term such as famine relief, necessary and a humanitarian response, is but a sticking plaster on a wound. Aid that is given through pity for people less fortunate than ourselves devalues them further because they then become objects of pity in receipt of charity not rights. ( http://www.socialrolevalorisation.com/resorces/osbourne_srv.htm ) A human rights approch to aid gives devalued people back their self respect and sense of community belonging.
The social model of disability is a useful tool to analyse how society devalues people with impairments. (http://www.redcross.org.uk/standard.asp?id=58926). The model views disability as being socially constructed because barriers physical, attitudinal and economic exclude people who have impairments. If these barriers were removed or were not there in the first place disability would not exist. Society should be the target for intervention rather than the individual.
Disabled people in any community are the poorest of the poor and the most marginalise. Therefore the social model of disability would provide a invaluable assessment too to identify the wrong things that are happening so the ‘right thing’ can be done to make a society inclusive for all its citizens..
Whilst I see nothing wrong with fundraising events being fun; I do agree with Linda’s points to some extent. The late, great Douglas Adams (of Hitchhikers’ Guide to the Galaxy” fame) was a great supporter of Save the Rhino and writing about a madcap climb of Kilimanjaro in a rhino suit he reflected that the whole ’sponsored walking/climbing thing’ is a bit odd. It’s always done for good causes but what IS it with the deal which goes, “OK you are trying to raise funds for this very worthwhile cause and I can see that it is crucial matter on which very lives may depend and something clearly needs to be done but . . . well . . . Oh I don’t know . . . Tell you what, if you do something really pointless and stupid and maybe a bit dangerous, THEN I’ll give you some money!”
I love the link that Maggie has made between approaches to finding REAL “Rights-based” solutions to the problems of the developing world vs the traditional “pity-based” approach and recent thinking behind the Social Model of Disability vs the very disabling attitude – which is still very prevalent today – which encourages us to view disabled people as objects of pity. Pity in all its guises is a pretty dreadful thing.
Hi – Maggie just recently introduced me to the COINS Foundation and I am so impressed, excited and inspired by the work that has already been undertaken plus the future project plans. I want to help. I want to be involved NOW! I am particularly encouraged by the emphasis that is being placed on the social model of disability. It could potentially be very easy to overlook fundamental human rights in relation to disabled individuals, particularly in third world countries. In my view the heart of the social model is the person centred approach to treating disabled people with dignity and respect and ensuring their views are heard, taken into account and acted upon. Obviously, the cultural context has a huge impact… thats another discussion!
Looking forward to future exchanges.
100 % agree, in fact, we think that the social model of disability has lots to teach us about the inclusion and establishment of human rights for many marginalised groups in the developing world; the very poor, women, abandoned children, and of course the disabled to name but a few
Reading the above posts is all of interest and relevance to everyone in the fundraising sphere of life – whether as givers or receivers, or indeed fundraisers!! There are so many questions now around the once-easy option of giving for givings sake. People above have highlighted this already and whilst I empthise with linda’s plea to ‘give for givings sake’ it so often is not clear-cut. And there is HUGE competition for our giving – so many natural disasters, man-made disasters, problems of health, history and politics. Corruption – how do we know that the money we give is going to get to the people who need it? Then there’s the right or wrongness of ‘aid’ in itself – stick on the sticky plaster or go to thr root causes – if we do the latter can the people who are desperately in need actually survive while they wait for the wrongs to be righted? Quite possibly not.
I think thay many people with genuine good intent just get so entwined in all or some of these type of issues that too often they give up and do nothing. It falls to the fundraiser – and the charity they are working for – to spell out clearly and compellingly their need for funds and their ways of using our gifts, their stance on human rights (if relevant) must also be clear and evident to the intelligent donors out there. No easy task as those in these realms of work know too well!
But I do think that if donors want to do something that’s fun in the spirit of raising money then that’s to everyones advantage – after all, giving is meant to be an enjoyable experience so if doing something challenging is what rocks your boat then go for it – just keep it all in the right context.
HI – Diane was talking to me yesterday about Coins Foundation so I had to check out the website and blog. This is fantastic work and totally inspiring! Diane’s point about the cultural context being a whole other discussion is spot on … there will be some great challenges there, particulalry around the varying perceptions and understanding.
Its great that the construction and insurance industry are really thinking about the social model of disability, the concept of a 360 Inclusive Community Development is truly in the spirit of the social model. It could be said by applying it in Africa the social model of disability has also gone 360 degrees. The inspiration for the social model was from experience of oppression under apartheid in South Africa and Nelson Mandela Riviona Trial Speech being compared with segregated special provison for disabled people in the UK. http://www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies/archiveuk/finkelstein/Reflections%20on%20the%20Social%20Model%20of%20Disability.pdf
This link from Maggie is really fascinating. To put it in a framework for those not familiar with the Social Model of Disability – the Social Model essentially argues that there is an important distinction between ‘impairment’ and ‘disability’. The model argues that while people may have impairments – the inability to get from A to B by walking for example, they are not DISABLED until they come to set of steps without an alternative ramp or lift. People do not HAVE disabilities; they are disabled by a society which discriminates unthinkingly against those with impairments.
From Maggie’s link above, it would seem that Mandela was ahead of us all in recognising that same discrimination and disabling influence was manifest in Apartheid.
I increasingly wonder if there isn’t a “Social Model of Poverty” – discrimination coupled with a lack of clear thought about ‘aid’ in the developing world which is the key factor in keeping communities disabled rather than the outwardly manifest impairments of drought & disease etc.
I totally agree with the pertinent comments of Maggie, Diane and Rik. Although, academically speaking, the Social Model of Disability has its critics (Tom Shakespeare in particular), I believe the principles underlying the model to be self-evident in securing equality for many marginilised groups. Proof of my theory, albeit it small, is the fact that access for wheelchair users and people with baby buggies is now freely available on about 99% of all buses in Greater Manchester – pavements at bus stops have been heightened and buses have the technology to ‘lower’ and meet the pavement, thus accommodating ease of access for people using ‘wheels’. Not that many years ago, people would have really struggled up unweildy stpes to get on a bus or, more likely not have bothered getting a bus at all!
As Rik states on 27 June, people are not disabled by their perceived impairments, but rather by a society which cannot adapt itself accordingly. This must be all the more dificult to achieve in the Third World.
Maggie has informed me of your sterling good work, Rik, with the Coins Foundation – I am really sooooo impressed with it all! Keep it all up! With people such as yourself and your organisation, we are well on the way to promoting the Social Model of Disbaility as being a prime influence in erradicating inequalities which still exist for all sorts of people who are disadvantaged by society’s incapabilities.