school essay on third world countries
The way the world works can be compared with the scheme of a lifeboat. We have limited space inside the boat so most people, say 2/3 lack safety, stability and can barely stay alive. Hardin believes that if we try to sustain underdeveloped countries the issue of poverty will not be solved, he proposes instead the idea of leaving poor countries to build their own lifeboats. Population is exponentially growing and maintaining poor countries would assist them to grow more in citizens, there will be a point in which growth will be too big to handle and the overpopulated poor countries would start occupying rich countries’ lifeboat against the passengers will.
Maintaining poor countries would make earth even worse not only anthropocentrically speaking but also because of the environment, we have limited resources. People in general lack conscience and tend to take everything their hands can grab, if humans don’t have any source of restraint they will have all the right to take the resources and no responsibility to protect it. Because of the egoistic nature of men asking them to build a collective memory fulfilled with consciousness and harmonia natura is impossible.
People can propose to create a World Food Bank but this would make the situation worse in the long run, underdeveloped countries will depend on rich countries and they will never have their own means of survival, they will never learn to build their own lifeboats. It will increase the population of poor countries and they will still lack an economic base, people would survive until the weight is too great and rich countries will not be able to sustain them, it would create a greater lose, because of enormous famine. The over populated countries will consume more commons and the environment will be involved in the losses.
A World Food Bank would also give space to alternative interests, namely privatization of helping poor countries, wealth for the tax extractors, for the farmers that are selling their products in retail prize, for economists and investors that notice that demand on food is increasing gradually and, in this same stance, many other organisms. The response that the humanitarian intention outweighs human greed could be feasible if natural resources were not limited.
Hardin states that immigration is not the solution for poverty because there is space limit in every country on quantity, including rich ones. When people move to rich countries they too are collaborating with the exhaustion of resources, just like in the food bank. The only difference here is that now the people are moving to the food, not the food to the people. This issue can be analysed with the example of Hawaii: the citizens are aware that there is a limit in space and they are conscious of it, there are no racial reasons behind this argument.
Hardin comments that poor countries will be struck in the state of poverty until they learn that they will never reach anywhere with the path they are taking. This idea leaves all the weight of their instability to them; poor countries are the only responsible of their welfare. This can be argued if different means of helping are issued. Helping poor countries doesn’t necessarily mean feeding them, for it can cover a much profound extent. Stable countries can help them internally, not with food, but with giving them means for stability. An example of this could be creating organizations inside the poor country where the members are people from that country; this way the organization for the country is ran by people from the country.
There are many ways of participating with other countries to assist their poverty without maintaining them, all of them being dynamic methods of aid. When aid is practiced in a participative mode it is dynamic, the key for this is not letting the aided country outside the project and making it actively participate. Hardin fails to address this method of helping others. Developed countries can do conveys with the government of poor countries, in order to eliminate some of the causes of poverty. These convey would follow the dynamic method of aid making the government the source of actions and the developed country a simple adviser. For example, poor countries often feel that they are stuck in a pond and lack ideas to empower their economy, they could use some external help in this case.
The issue with poor countries is that the world is – in every possible sense – exponentially growing and they have a hard time keeping up with the pace. If we followed the idea of leaving poor countries to evolve by themselves or perish, it is probable that most of them will perish. The means of growing of developed countries relies in globalization. Underdeveloped countries don’t know how to grow; they feel like they are outsiders of the world economic system. It is important to collaborate with for the development of poor countries as long as the collaboration can really help them get out of the pond.