Friends —
We think of charity as doing good, and most of us assume that giving helps people out of a bad situation. But what if our good intentions are actually hurting the people we’re trying to help?
I started thinking about this after reading a book called “Toxic Charity,” which changed how I think about giving entirely. In today’s video, I dig into what happens when donated clothes flood Africa (spoiler: it gutted their textile industries, which was very bad). And I looked at Haiti, which has over 10,000 charitable organizations and is somehow still a failed state.
There’s also a psychology to dependency that nobody wants to talk about. And there’s a difference between “betterment” — doing things FOR people — and “development” — doing things WITH people. One feels good in the moment, but the other actually works in the long term.
I’m not saying to stop giving. But maybe we should all take a closer look at how we give. It’s not about whether we feel good afterward; it’s about whether the people who received help eventually need it less.
And another one!
On Friday, we published, “Why is Latin America so poor?”
You can drive from San Diego into Mexico and, within minutes, pass through neighborhoods with dirt roads and open sewers. Household income drops by 80%. How is that even possible when they’re right next to each other?
While we’re at it, how did Venezuela go broke when it’s sitting on the largest oil reserves in the world??
You can check it out here if you’d like to learn more.
– Ken
I agree. 100%. Where I live a hundred years of white people "helping" First Nations has left them worse off than ever. The despair up here is overwhelming.
I believe we need to literally stop helping. I'd like to believe people need to face their own problems in order to solve them.
However, I'd like to hear even one example where deliberate non-intervention has seen a poor situation improve.
The road to worse is paved with the following:
1) when initial help creates the expectation that more will follow
2) more help, especially without conditions, leads first to dependency
3) and then to entitlement, as we saw with the EBT people who were furious at no longer being to spend others’ money on junk food and as we’re seeing with NATO’s tantrum
4) the final step is resentment on the part of the recipient who realizes, consciously or not, that he is now a ward of the benefactor