I don't' think it's necessarily a bad things at all - just an incomplete solution. I own products from all of the companies I mentioned. I own multiple pairs of TOMS and am working with them this summer to help some folks who really need shoes. My critique is not completely of the companies, they are doing good. I don't look down on folks that buy these things (b/c as I've said - my closet is full of this stuff). It's a great first step - and much better than not doing anything, but it also isn't really enough - and doesn't really affect a lot of change. There is also a unintended consequence that we should guard against. We (and I include myself in this because I care way more than I should what others think about me) as a culture tend to purchase things based on what image we want to project and if we aren't careful, our "activism" is just a fad. What happens when the fad shifts? Hopefully of the masses that are told about these issues through products/media blitzes, etc. 5% will find a passion for a people they didn't know before. While 95% may move on to the next thing, those 5% can do incredible things - like Invisible Children, Blood:Water Mission, Heart for Africa, Change for Change, etc.
You're in Africa so I definitely defer to your opinion on this, I would definitely be interested in hearing more about why it's not working.
It really depends on which situation you're talking about.
Sometimes our perception of the need is not the true need.
Sometimes inserting money into the problem just exacerbates the corruption and problems, sometimes it gets diverted to the wrong thing.
Sometimes all our good intentions creates cycles of dependence and situations that aren't' sustainable.
A lot of it comes down to how we view the problems. in the West, we have a very materialistic outlook on life and especially poverty. We think the problem is simply a lack of resources, so we give (a good thing). But for many places - dignity, sustainability, and the way out of poverty don't come just from mere resources. You have to invest in the culture and let them follow a culturally relevant path out of poverty (rather than imposing western standards/structure as the solution). The good organizations are micro finance lenders, organizations like Light Gives heat, where the products are produced by the people who in turn receive skill training from indigenous leaders - where the goal is sustainability.
It really depends on which situation you're talking about.
Sometimes our perception of the need is not the true need.
Sometimes inserting money into the problem just exacerbates the corruption and problems, sometimes it gets diverted to the wrong thing.
Sometimes all our good intentions creates cycles of dependence and situations that aren't' sustainable.
A lot of it comes down to how we view the problems. in the West, we have a very materialistic outlook on life and especially poverty. We think the problem is simply a lack of resources, so we give (a good thing). But for many places - dignity, sustainability, and the way out of poverty don't come just from mere resources. You have to invest in the culture and let them follow a culturally relevant path out of poverty (rather than imposing western standards/structure as the solution). The good organizations are micro finance lenders, organizations like Light Gives heat, where the products are produced by the people who in turn receive skill training from indigenous leaders - where the goal is sustainability.
I don't' think it's necessarily a bad things at all - just an incomplete solution.
They can be bad things when:
-They provide things that aren't needed and become a burden
-They fail to expose the reality of the problems they claim to help
-They tie economic development to increased consumerism by the world's wealthy
People like you are in the minority with regard to looking to beyond the marketing campaign to understand the root problems. Products like TOMS seem to reinforce bad understanding of the problems and promote the idea that buying more things is how to fix the issue.
i actually worked for a summer with this girl's roommate:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/iyf/truelifestories/ithappenedtome/7.38.html?start=1
the stories she told were just so far outside of my realm of understanding. i just don't understand how somebody can do the kinds of things this man has done.
i understand why people may have a problem with invisible children as an organization. but if you ignore your issues with them, is there a reason why raising awareness about the terrible things happening is wrong?
eta: i just realized that my first line was unclear. this girl was in college around the same time i was (i first met her roommate in the summer of 2006). it was her roommate here in the US.
There's nothing wrong with raising awareness. The problem is when organizations like IC only spend 31 cents of each dollar given on charitable activities. Theres a limited amount of money out there, and it should go to groups that aren't spending millions of dollars on personal travel.
There's nothing wrong with raising awareness. The problem is when organizations like IC only spend 31 cents of each dollar given on charitable activities. Theres a limited amount of money out there, and it should go to groups that aren't spending millions of dollars on personal travel.
i'm not advocating support invisible children (the organization, not the children themselves). i guess my post was mostly in response to TAB whose response seemed to indicate that we just shouldn't care at all what is happening because we have problems here (i'm not diminishing our problems here, but if you can't see why it's advantageous to raise awareness about a guy like Kony, then i don't know what to tell you).
I wonder how much of that $700,000 was spent on that youtube video.