SOAPBOX TIME
I hate how many times I read things like "nobody cares about the world" and "humanity is the virus" and "our species is too inept/evil/selfish to survive" online. I almost never see anyone talking about the many, many people who are doing incredibly hard, complex, good work
Then I log off, and run into, say, someone who provides occupational therapy for disadvantaged factory workers. Or someone whose job is to produce citywide heat maps that lead to regulations that cool specific areas. Or someone who scrutinizes health care in mental health settings. Or or or
There's a world of people who aren't debating the basics (pollution bad, climate change real) but are taking action at incredibly complex levels. And I mean there's a WORLD - there both US- and non-US-based solutions. There are massive victories. Heroes. And I don't see this work reflected online
Or WORSE I see people being like "oh yeah they're doing this thing and here's WHY IT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH AND HERE'S WHY IT'S ACTUALLY BAD BECAUSE A LITTLE ACTION IS WORSE THAN THE NO ACTION I DO"
No. Tiny actions >>>> your Discourse.
Ex. Act. Ly.
If the only thing they are doing is posting in despair I do not want to hear it.
Also like, yes if you want to tell me X is bad actually...and NOT TELL ME HOW TO DO IT BETTER...
If these people have any actual citation for an instance in which doing something small was measurably worse than doing nothing, I will listen (and probably go check it out).
If they are making this claim off of vibes alone, I kind of want to hurl them into the icy grip of deep space.
(Remember: yeeting someone into the icy depths of interstellar space takes less delta v than hurling them into the Sun, so you can be energy-conscious with your removal fantasies)
you gotta be setting up processes that are self sustaining and can be implemented BY the affected population if you want it to really help, imo
lotta leftists, especially the ones from privileged backgrounds, end up replicating this sorta thing at a smaller scale for lack of community outreach
OK, so:
Is giving wheat actually worse than giving nothing at all?
If so, how?
That is the basis of what I'm saying. Not that there isn't nearly always something *better* one could do, but that doing something small is better than doing *nothing*.
yes, keeps the populations part of a subservient colonial workforce (or a marginalized underclass in the US)
have a hard time saying it's WORSE exactly, and this kind of aid can be appropriate in crisis
but it's like life support, patient withers as soon as it's rescinded
recommend How Europe Underdeveloped Africa by Walter Rodney if you haven't read it
it's one of those formative texts whose points are just in the dialogue now, and a little dated because his study ended right before the USSR started going really sideways; but it's dense as hell and a very succint
if you're keeping people perpetually in crisis so you can profit off them i think it's more harmful in the long run than just letting a population figure things out on their own
i think the history and population stats in that book lend truth to that argument (europe stalled africa for centuries)
i know, i'm saying i have seen similar things happen with (especially with) white evangelicals parachuting in with stuff they think will help before ASKING what will help
This is a good example of yes but instead of yes and. People can't use any of those supplies of they dont have a good meal and clean water, to be healthy and strong enough. People need long term but also need short term so they can get to the long term.
I had some half-formed thoughts a while ago about the difference between "yes but" and "yes and" when talking about progress towards a goal. The former diminishes and degrades the hard work done, the latter acknowledges and encourages (and invites more people to join).
