The Catastrophe of Compassionate Charities

George Rebane

A dear friend in the LA area is building a new orphanage in Haiti.  He has always had a weak spot for children in general, and when exposed to the plight of some of Haiti’s little AIDS orphans he responded.  He joined with another friend and partner to found www.wecanbuildanorphanage.com.  Being a sucker for such pursuits, Jo Ann and I have become supporters of this ongoing act of compassion.

I am not trumpeting yet another charity that we support, but offering a candid and, perhaps, coarse examination of what could be argued as irresponsible behavior.  How so?  Well, that orphanage has been built in the middle of a dysfunctional culture and it will be totally dependent on the outside support that my friend is able to muster for it.  If ever he lets go, like so many similar efforts around the world, it will collapse.  The Haitian community cannot support it economically nor does it even see any necessity to keep it going.  The community’s job, it seems, is to continue supplying an endless stream of desperate toddlers for such an orphanage.

Haiti’s government is even a worse partner for sustaining any such enterprise, it being yet another strong-arm parasite whose only function is to suck lifeblood from its people without actually killing all of them.  Like most third world governments, they look at their people in the same way a cattle herder looks at his steers – they are an asset to be exploited.  With well-publicized pitiable populations, such governments exist only to act as gatekeepers for the inflow of compassionate money from the outside.  This money is skimmed to a trickle by the nation’s leaders and their bureaucratic minions.  They let enough reach the people so that the death rate is kept from becoming an obvious genocide.  Most such indigenous cultures are totally at peace with their leadership and have neither the will nor means to organize themselves to overthrow the leeches.

Major world organizations and NGOs – funded by rich country governments and private charities – often led by the UN, continue the charade of keeping such governments in place.  No one can answer the question, ‘And what sustainable alternatives do these people have that encourage them to undertake a sustainable path out of their misery?’  No one knows, so we continue to funnel funds through corrupt governments while assuring all through a thin veil of statesmanship that we’re doing all we can do.  This allows us to continue our charitable charades and get on with what is really important in our lives.  It’s a cheap and conscionable solution. With this ruse in place, we can forget about them. 

And into such black holes of hope private individuals and service organizations willingly leap with their own funds and energy.  A moment’s reason reveals that by almost any measure, such efforts will expand future suffering and death beyond what it would be if the current generation of sufferers are not succored to sexual maturity and adulthood.  Nevertheless, this is the road we will continue on unless the rich accept the dissemination of an ever growing fraction of their wealth to maintain today’s corrupt conduits through which to funnel marginal support for third world countries. 

Sooner or later it will all have to come to an end.  The only question is how many person-years of suffering must we fund before it all ends in wholesale death.  And, of course, in the interval these people don’t just sit and quietly suffer.  As would we, they resent their situation, and as part and parcel of their misery, they provide an ongoing supply of ignorant, malleable, vengeful, and willing youth to do the bidding of organizations dedicated to the destruction of the west.  In bygone days, distance and poor communications insulated us from such threats.  But today our deeply embedded and ever pervasive technology makes us vulnerable to their very existence.

So why does my friend put yet another orphanage into a hopeless morass, and why do people like me, capable of writing these words, go on supporting the growing tragedy.  Systems science terms such behavior as ‘greedy’ in that it provides immediate gratification without consideration of the larger and longer term consequences.  And greedy behavior by machine or man is an insane policy when it ultimately leads to self destruction.  Unless we also believe in a timely salvation from some higher plane, then with tears of compassion in our eyes, we who persevere in such charities are the truly insane.

Comments

[George Rebane]

I received a very nice email from a friend re this piece which in part reads

"... (the article) was, however, missing a paragraph, which would have clarified your participation in the support of the named venture. I know that you are not "insane" and the article clearly reflects your understanding of the issues. And why is it that you then contribute to the enterprise? That is the missing paragraph."

[gjr] I guess to support the compassionate insanity of my friend, which does not necessarily speak well for my own sanity – in all of us reason has its bounds.

[Martin Schmitt]

Being George's insane friend, I can offer a few versions of "the missing paragraph":

1. In 2007, I held neglected, starving and sick children in my arms in Haiti's hospitals and orphanages. Yes, these children, if allowed to grow up, may become tomorrow's perpetrators, but all I saw was today's victims. I couldn't tell those little souls that I won't help them because they are neither wanted nor needed in this world. Who am I to make that judgment?

2. I believe in non-linearity. Maison Rose, our current little orphanage, provides a home for eleven children. In two years, Version 2.0 -- as we affectionately call our next project -- will house, feed and educate 100 Haitian children. Thanks to the education they will be receiving, these children's future awareness and problem-solving skills will transcend not only those of their Haitian peers, but those of any Westerner working to solve Haiti's problems. As adults, they may well become agents of radical change.

3. You've got to start somewhere. I hope to have 25 or so more years of philanthropic work in me. If last year's learning curve continues, I'll be teaching classes in How-not-to-do-it at a community college near you soon...

4. I still like George's explanation the best, though: reason has its bounds. Emotional attachments get in the way of efficiency. On one hand, I desire maximum utility from my philanthropy dollars. I cringe when I think how much money and effort it has taken to support eleven orphans, four of whom would be dead now without our intervention. On the other hand, how much would I spend to save my own children?

There are many other angles to this discussion. Thank you, George, for shining your analytical light on them!

[Chris Holland]

George - your comments inspired me to reason why so many of us are "insane": because we try to rise above an animal survival model. We believe this is the image of God imparted to homo sapiens. Jesus didn't argue about the sustainability of a widow's mite, or of being a good Samaritan in a dangerous neighborhood.
Unfortunately for you, your insight now lays an extra burden on you (maybe on those of us who read your blog too). What steps do you recommend to create a sustainable solution in the face of a tyranical regime? The right to criticize often carries a responsibility to take steps toward a solution. Thanks for the thought-provoking entry.