Congo: "The Malnutrition That Shouldn't Be"

[SealLion]

[slikrapid]

i don't see these doctors solving the malnutrition problem in their own (developed) countries, what makes anyone think they might do so in some developing countries

whats even worse, the food industry controlled by large corporations has no intention to provide quality food on a wide/massive scale, ie. the masses are doomed to junk food (less nutritional value, larger consumed amount) - the only way out of that for the ordinary citizen is to earn more (buy hopefully better) or grow your own food (where you know what you get)

as for the africans in general, their exploited status remains active, whether being directly under colonial governance (as in the past) or via local gangs/warlords/generals that still bow-down & bend-over to western demands - there is no intention on improving their status, they are supposed to remain ever-underdeveloped, ever-in-need-of-assistance, etc. - meaning: the africans themselves should solve the situation in their own countries, no one else will solve it for them

btw. whats with the facial close-ups? cheap hammer-it-home techniques, when telling a story is not enough

[SealLion]

i don't see these doctors solving the malnutrition problem in their own (developed) countries, what makes anyone think they might do so in some developing countries

...

The spreading of people resources is what takes care of that. You can't have 100% of philanthropic oriented and dedicated persons looking after their own problems in their developed countries. It is important to be able to spread out those people resources around to other locations when you know that your own technology and development can afford it. It is the nature of humankind to be able to help another human when needed. When you know that there are other agencies and people resources available, you let them do their job looking after those who need help in their own or another developed country while the another set of available people resources does theirs in an undeveloped nation. In effect you fulfill humankind's naturally benevolent manifestation. Contributing to philanthropy in both developed and undeveloped countries.


Another video.

After surviving more than a decade of conflict, rape, hunger and homelessness, the people of the Democratic Republic of Congo are urgently praying for peace and stability. Joining them in their effort, World Relief is working in rural Eastern Congo to unite communities and reverse the deadly trends of violence and insecurity.

[slikrapid]

You can't have 100% of philanthropic oriented and dedicated persons looking after their own problems in their developed countries. It is important to be able to spread out those people resources around to other locations when you know that your own technology and development can afford it.

their primary objective ought to be dealing with own-country problems, anything else comes secondary (exceptions would be disaster-aid scenarios) - this way they can at least attempt to substantially address relevant issues, otherwise neither get done properly (the latter is currently in effect, aka establishing/maintaining ever-lasting or perpetuating problems which are intentionally treated with inadequate solutions)

in other words, ' clean your own doorstep before you start imagining you could clean someone else's '

It is the nature of humankind to be able to help another human when needed...In effect you fulfill humankind's naturally benevolent manifestation.

sounds comforting/pleasing, but its essentially incorrect or incomplete without including the other side of the medal, namely the likewise natural manifestation of 'malevolence' & 'to hinder', if one insists on using this kind of terminology - which of these will be prevailing at any given moment depends on the circumstances & the acteurs involved, not because there might be some fundamental predetermination that defines a prevailing inclination to either side, meaning in general: if you help someone, at the same time you're, among others, hindering someone else and vice versa (which ofc doesn't necessarily have to be immediately apparent or have an effective 1:1 proportion)

as for the so-called philanthropy ie. 'loving people', its as deceptive as they come, fi.: many of those able to act as philanthropists have made their fortune through direct & indirect exploitation of some people and now they act as benefactors to other people - strange love, that one - add to this things like tax evasion, money laundering, PR image inflation & showing-off, non-transparent charities, sidekick programs accompanying these projects (fi. vaccination), power/influence games exercised over/on those in need, over their governments/economies/politics, guilt inflation tactics regarding people in developed countries, inadequate solutions/measures as mentioned above, hypocrisy involved, etc. - seems many of them have indeed a different definition of 'loving people', which as usual boils down to: because of what they can get from it (conditional love)

how about another related example: the colonialist countries along with christian missionaries who went throughout the world spreading their civilization & religion (via the carrot & stick combination), using the same reasoning: them savages & pagans are in need of material & spiritual guidance, we'll help them get it, for we know whats best for them as we live in developed countries and can afford it, not to mention its philanthropic value and whatnot - so what happened? blood, death, invasion, colonialism & indoctrination (honorary exceptions excluded) even from the 'universally' accepted do-gooders, wanting to 'save them', ending up 'enslaving them'

back on topic: granted, some africans do need food asap, but what they ought to be interested in is finding ways of producing that food by themselves and/or as a group/society/nation, instead of continuously being dependent on foreign crumbs & similar baggage-ladden interventions - until they start acting in this direction, one cannot expect substantial improvement, regardless of the amount of foreign aid coming in

or to conclude with another relevant proverb: 'give a man a fish and you feed him for a day, teach him how to fish and you feed him for a lifetime' - guess which approach is preferable to the majority of current philanthropists

[SealLion]

..in other words, ' clean your own doorstep before you start imagining you could clean someone else's '

Sure.
Why not.

Let's all hold hands together, jeer, smirk, and have a jovial time pointing our fat-lichious fingers at the poverty stricken Aboriginals and non-Aboriginals that are virtually everywhere throughout the African continent, parts of Asia, the Indian sub-continent, other places in Latin America like Nicaragua and Guatemala, and anywhere else they just happen to pop up when the big pharma, oil companies, governments with a pretend-altruistic intention like the Chinese government in Africa, and many others who wreak havoc on Aboriginals and locals.

And while we hold hands together not caring in the least (b/c we are incorrectly overly concerned about our 'own back-yard')about any of the innumerable malnourished-related disease like Beriberi which is seen a lot in; for example, African populations.

Or how about Marasmus or even Kwashiorkor. Will we ever see any of these malnourished related diseases in 'our back yard"??
Nope.
Not us.
That's b/c we're too damn selfish. We're incorrectly overly concerned about our own back yard despite the fact we have the tech and people resources to spread out those resources to our own back yard and someone else's backyard too.
Should we give a damn about the fact that people living in shanties in under-developed countries drink contaminated water. Contaminated by their own feces and bodily fluids??

Nope.
We shouldn't.
We don't have to.

That's b/c we have the tech and solutions to deal with most problems in our own back yard. Not like others, right?? We don't need to share any of that. Not just yet. So ya. Let's all exonerate ourselves from helping other people.


Thankfully. There are people and organizations that have sufficient wisdom to see through the smoke and clouds produced by chauvinist ideas. And the organizations that do exist which actually do have a real and legit motivation to help others actually do. And do make some progress in having those communities where-ever they may be atm to become self-serving and self-sufficient over the course of time. Albeit how challenging it may be. Even with chauvinist actions and ideas spread about.

Thinking that to make a community to be self sufficient and self serving is a worthy cause to undertake. It also takes time. It does not take overnight. It takes training, procuring equipment, people and materials, dedication, and so forth. There may be bureaucratic and political obstacles in the way. But working towards eliminating those obstacles is just one part of the work that is necessary. Most agencies, organizations, and even private individuals with some clout perhaps work towards elimination of some of the obstacles. At least they work than bitch and complain that this 'n that is in the way and throw their hands and arms in the air and give up.

Finally, larger centers ( in developed countries) have spaces for homeless people to adopt overnight. Most larger cities ( in developed countries) have agencies to serve food to those who don't have enough for themselves. Most larger centers ( in developed countries) have the resources to fulfill most of the needs of counselling and so forth and so forth ......to help many of those in need. I say larger centers b/c that is where most of the lesser fortunate go in developed countries. In saying that, it suggests that the needs of our backyard are being looked after. Now how about someone elses back yard?? Should we neglect others and express selfishness?? It's important to be able to recognize that selfishness doesn't help a lot. Most especially to those who need less selfishness and more selflessness from others. It's important to recognize that the spreading of resources is fairly important. Regardless of what bureaucratic, political, corporate, or other obstacles exist.

To be honest, I'd rather try and say I did than say I didn't do a damn thing.

[slikrapid]

@SealLion:

Let's all hold hands together, jeer, smirk, and have a jovial time

well, we could do lots of things, though it doesn't change the fact that the situation in developing countries is a combination of what 'others' tried enforcing upon them & what they themselves allowed to happen, for whatever reason(s) or motive(s) involved

Will we ever see any of these malnourished related diseases in 'our back yard"??
Nope.
Not us.

maybe not those exact ones (specific to the climate/region), but if the current junk-food & co. trend continues, aided with new financial crises, it won't be too long until local/global diseases become increasingly punishing regarding those that are unable to keep their immune system sufficiently functional during difficult times

That's b/c we're too damn selfish. We're overly concerned about our own back yard despite the fact we have the tech and people resources to spread out those resources to our own back yard and someone else's backyard too.

tell that to the governments of the leading countries (colonialist & co.) & local african authorities, their selfishness & exploitative practices are ensuring that this situation remains in effect - if the local population won't organize & prevent them, ie. keeps playing the role of passive aid-receivers, then thats exactly what they'll get

Should we give a damn about the fact that people living in shanties in under-developed countries drink contaminated water.

using the 'fishing' analogy: 'give the man some water and you'll quench his thirst for a day, teach him how to dig a well and he'll never be thirsty again'

And the organizations that do exist which actually do have a real and legit motivation to help others actually do. And do make some progress.

fine, aid is being distributed on a regular basis...now, how about some proactive action from africans for a change