Guest Blog - A Crisis of Conscience | War and Peace

Guest Blog - A Crisis of Conscience

Published October 17, 2008 @ 11:31AM PT

Wanted to follow the recent pieces on world hunger and declining humanitarian funding with a post by Alison Woodhead of Oxfam, about Stand Up and Take Action, which starts today. (To take action through change.org, click here.)

Sometimes, it seems like writing about humanitarian relief is simply describing a parade of horribles - which makes Alison's post, about what we can do to help change the situation, all that much more important.

A Crisis of Conscience

The numbers are mind boggling; the sense of panic is contagious. The global financial crisis has galvanised world leaders into finding unimaginable sums of money almost overnight to prevent banks collapsing, shore up failing systems and reassure nervous punters.

The arguments for urgent action to avoid systemic collapse are of course genuine and persuasive. But they reveal something extremely dark about the world’s priorities: we can find the money to bail out banks, but not to prevent the deaths of 30,000 children a day from poverty.

Mostly these children die quietly, far removed from the scrutiny and conscience of the world. It may be easy for us to ignore, but every day is a Financial Crisis for over half the world's population who struggle for survival on less than $2 a day. The crisis on Wall St. and Main St. is no excuse to ignore the crisis in Kroo Bay - the infamous Sierra Leone slum whose residents face dehumanizing extreme poverty like millions more in the world.

The US bank bail out alone totalled $850bn. That would clear the accumulated debts of the 49 poorest countries in the world twice over. It is about 53 times as much as the annual cost of getting every child into school. And more than it would cost to give basic healthcare to every man, woman and child on the planet for an entire decade

Here is what we urgently need to stop the Poverty Crisis:

$16bn a year to achieve education for all
$50bn a year to achieve health for all
$50bn a year to help developing countries adapt to the impact of climate change
$200bn a year to achieve all the Millennium Development Goals
$30bn a year to end hunger
$50bn to cut in half the number of children dying from poverty

Duncan Green, our Head of Research, offers a further breakdown on his blog. Or, check out the video we made with Will.i.am, Scarlett Johansson, John Legend, and others that helps put these numbers in perspective.

Some argue that these bail-outs are guarantees and loans rather than ‘real money’, and that therefore comparisons with spending on poverty are meaningless. Unfortunately there are plenty of other stark comparisons that do involve actual cash: Global military spending was a little over a trillion dollars in 2007.

The awful fact is, while current comparisons with spending on poverty are shocking, they are only going to get worse. Even in good times, many governments were reneging on aid promises; those now facing recession are more likely to follow suit. And other international processes may also be threatened – governments hunkered down against recession are less likely to have the political imagination and courage to reach the kind of agreements required on climate change - negotiations on a successor to the Kyoto protocol are scheduled to climax in Copenhagen in late 2009. East Africa is already suffering the onset of climate change, in the shape of unpredictable and devastating combinations of floods and drought.

So here’s a more heartening number: last year on world poverty day, over 47 million people took part in a record-breaking mobilisation against poverty. This year, the Global Call to Action Against Poverty are aiming for 1% of the world’s population – 67 million people – to stand up and take action. You can take part on Change.org. Beating a world record is an inspiring experience, but more important than the ‘standing up’ is the ‘taking action’.

Activist and journalist Jenerali Ulimwengu has dedicated his life to fighting for better governance in Tanzania. During Stand Up and Take Action this year, Ulimwengu will spearhead demands for the government to make sure that poor people have access to clean portable water, improve access to healthcare.

In Madhya Pradesh, India, Yogesh Jain last year mobilized more than 200,000 people to protest at the districts’ lack of healthcare, clean drinking water and resources for education. As a result of the massive mobilization, government officials conducted surprise inspections that resulted in the allocation of funding for repairs and the allotment of government land for school construction. Mr Jain will be standing up and taking action again this year.

In the end, people created poverty and people will eradicate it. The movement against poverty is growing – embracing both rich country activists who are ashamed to live in a world where governments consistently break their promises to tackle poverty, and people living in poor countries, who are demanding better governments with the determination to improve the lives of their most disadvantaged citizens. With every government focused obsessively on the financial crisis, there has never been a more urgent time for ordinary people to stand up and demand that poverty stays at the top of the world’s agenda.

A reminder of the most shocking number of all: 30,000 children die every day from poverty -- a child every 5 seconds. If that isn’t a crisis, it’s hard to imagine what is.

The author, Alison Woodhead, is campaign manager at Oxfam and a board member of the Global Call to Action Against Poverty.

Image: Slum in Sierra Leone - Photo by Save the Children

Share this Post

Comments (11)

Any system that allows for these kind of grievances is a failed system. We can afford 700bil for wallstreet but not for something that truely matters.

Posted by Nathan N on 10/18/2008 @ 04:17PM PT
- Report close
  You must be signed in to report content.
- Reply
- Like
Reply to thread
For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment. In the process we will also create a Change.org account for you so you can track this and future conversations. Don't worry - we won't spam you. We just want to promote constructive dialogue and find that people are more respectful when they are not anonymous.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

reply to thread started by by Nathan
Check Spelling
- Email me when there are new posts to this thread
- Comment Policy
Cancel Reply
It's really sad watching the amount of money being pumped into economies suffering only because of greed when so much less is required to enable millions to have decent lives.

Posted by Justin Davey on 10/18/2008 @ 05:00PM PT
- Report close
  You must be signed in to report content.
- Reply
- Like
For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment. In the process we will also create a Change.org account for you so you can track this and future conversations. Don't worry - we won't spam you. We just want to promote constructive dialogue and find that people are more respectful when they are not anonymous.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

reply to thread started by by Justin
Check Spelling
- Email me when there are new posts to this thread
- Comment Policy
Cancel Reply
I posted my idea for a quick end to world hunger, health and education problems among all other problems at http://youtube.com/watch?v=-QNgkUE7O7s
/>
I think we need a new worldwide currency that would be exclusively digital that should work for receiving payments and paying on cheaply manufacture Internet connected mobile phone type devices. Access to this new worldwide currency should be regulated so that it excludes cheaters, speculaters and polluters.

Human rights should include the right to have food, healthcare and education, for everyone worldwide.

Posted by Nicolas Charbonnier on 10/18/2008 @ 08:18PM PT
- Report close
  You must be signed in to report content.
- Reply
- Like
For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment. In the process we will also create a Change.org account for you so you can track this and future conversations. Don't worry - we won't spam you. We just want to promote constructive dialogue and find that people are more respectful when they are not anonymous.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

reply to thread started by by Nicolas
Check Spelling
- Email me when there are new posts to this thread
- Comment Policy
Cancel Reply
Where did you get those figures...

$30bn a year to end hunger

There are about 1.2 billion living on under $1.25.
If we were to split $30 billion a year between them they would each get $1.31 a day (assuming they all lived on $1.25 at the moment).
I am sorry but a bowl of a even the cheapest food does not cost 6 cent a day.

Even if you feed someone just rice, at wholesale price. They would get about 100gram a day every day for 30bn.
That is not enough to live on.

So while I agree with your ideas, maybe next time either check your figures or atleast provide a source.

Actually it's 1.4bn in 2005 so they'd get less than that. (http://econ.worldbank.org/external/default/main?pagePK=64165259&piPK=64165421&theSitePK=469372&menuPK=64166093&entityID=000158349_20080826113239)
/>Cost of Rice: http://allafrica.com/stories/200808061030.html

Posted by rowan s on 10/18/2008 @ 11:45PM PT
- Report close
  You must be signed in to report content.
- Reply
- Like
For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment. In the process we will also create a Change.org account for you so you can track this and future conversations. Don't worry - we won't spam you. We just want to promote constructive dialogue and find that people are more respectful when they are not anonymous.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

reply to thread started by by rowan
Check Spelling
- Email me when there are new posts to this thread
- Comment Policy
Cancel Reply
So, basically, it would be enough money for 2-3 years. What happens after than? It's just magically all going to work out once these kids have had 2-3 years of education? Not to mention the infrastructure that would need to be built up. Please, don't get me wrong, I completely agree with you that it's insane to give bankers money for paper they printed themselves when there are children dying. It's ridiculuous, and we should do MUCH more. I volunteer in my community because that's where I do the most good.

However, I have a burning question: what would happen if poverty went away? Are there enough jobs to sustain the entire planet, or is poverty at some level (deemed acceptable or not by our humanistic point of view) necessary? I would love to live in a utopian world where everyone has food on the table and a chance to realise their dreams, but even $850 billion isn't going to make that happen in 100 years. We, as a global people, have to change our values first. It is human nature to serve one's self and family first - we are basically selfish animals first; humanitarians second. Find a way to answer the question, "what's in it for me" for consumers around the world, and you will have made progress toward real change.

Posted by james webb on 10/18/2008 @ 11:56PM PT
- Report close
  You must be signed in to report content.
- Reply
- Like
For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment. In the process we will also create a Change.org account for you so you can track this and future conversations. Don't worry - we won't spam you. We just want to promote constructive dialogue and find that people are more respectful when they are not anonymous.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

reply to thread started by by james
Check Spelling
- Email me when there are new posts to this thread
- Comment Policy
Cancel Reply
Let me begin by saying that i don't actually support this bailout...

but the difference here is in the wording. $50bn a YEAR. $200bn a YEAR, that is what the cost of these services to help the under privileged will be for a single year. if we do indeed spend the $850bn on them, everything will be fine and dandy for a year or two, but after that the entire system will fail because of lack of capital and we'll be back to where we started.

the idea of the bailout is to support financial markets that already "work". a one time "investment" is intended to continuously reap profit and stability, instead of a yearly re-investment with limited results.

a better example would be: after the tsunami in the Philippines, many of the countries in the world donated millions of dollars worth of supplies/money, i believe the overall total came to something like $360million. If this same amount of money were to be donated to a struggling African country, a significant amount of work could be done. but the idea is the Filipinos had their quality of life taken away, and that by providing this money they would be able to get it back and sustain it, they "know" how to "live" and "grow" and "survive". while investing that same money into those african countries may help in the short term, the basic problems are still fundamentally there (mainly lack of education and infrastructure), and thus that money will not actually change anything the 2nd year, or 3rd year, and by time the 5th year returns, because the lack of understanding/experience in the management of those resources the original situation will have returned. A quick burst of money will never solve the problems in those places, a long term approach must be taken, at least two generations of their people must be educated in the ideas of conservation, health, social development, before any realistic long term can be expected.

Just something to think about. on the Other hand, who needs $1 trillion for defense? i mean, seriously?

Posted by Andrew BLANK on 10/19/2008 @ 01:27AM PT
- Report close
  You must be signed in to report content.
- Reply
- Like
For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment. In the process we will also create a Change.org account for you so you can track this and future conversations. Don't worry - we won't spam you. We just want to promote constructive dialogue and find that people are more respectful when they are not anonymous.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

reply to thread started by by Andrew
Check Spelling
- Email me when there are new posts to this thread
- Comment Policy
Cancel Reply
@james webb

for all of the capitalists in the world, with a bit of "risk" you can make 3% on some of your money while "helping" out local business, the concept of the micro-loan has been expanded to encorporate the mindset of the "but its my money", people:

https://www.microplace.com/

Posted by Andrew BLANK on 10/19/2008 @ 01:31AM PT
- Report close
  You must be signed in to report content.
- Reply
- Like
For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment. In the process we will also create a Change.org account for you so you can track this and future conversations. Don't worry - we won't spam you. We just want to promote constructive dialogue and find that people are more respectful when they are not anonymous.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

reply to thread started by by Andrew
Check Spelling
- Email me when there are new posts to this thread
- Comment Policy
Cancel Reply
It is interesting how the 700 billion used to buy distressed assets or bank preferential shares are being compared to expenses required for fighting poverty. Consider the following points.

1. Banks have real estate mortgages that are in foreclosure. This brings a lot of property into the market reducing prices. Government has decided to buy these assets and release them into the market profitably many years later.
2. Government invests in banks by acquiring preference shares, requiring the banks to pay the government a share of their profits every year until the preference shares are not bought back.

Both these actions are revenue generating for governments.

Spending money on providing food, health, and education in Africa does not have a revenue model. They are just expenses. Most of Africa keeps fighting among themselves based on tribal, religious, ideological differences, or purely for power.

It is abundantly clear that no one will help those who are unwilling to help themselves. African countries have to figure out how they are going to get out of the mess that they are in.

Posted by Thomas George on 10/19/2008 @ 05:36AM PT
- Report close
  You must be signed in to report content.
- Reply
- Like
For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment. In the process we will also create a Change.org account for you so you can track this and future conversations. Don't worry - we won't spam you. We just want to promote constructive dialogue and find that people are more respectful when they are not anonymous.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

reply to thread started by by Thomas
Check Spelling
- Email me when there are new posts to this thread
- Comment Policy
Cancel Reply
Thomas George has a typical neo-conservative spin on things. Firstly, the US congress and government signed off over 700 billion dollars to be spent on bailing out banks. Sure now Gordon Brown managed to convince the trasury secretary to buy equity in the banks instead of wasting all of the money on buying overpriced junk loans. Though, last I checked, only 200 billion is so far planned to be used to buy equity in the banks, that still leaves over 500 billion dollars that basically are wasted on worthless bailing out of banks. I'm all for nationalizing all the major banks, and running banks for managing money for the people and not for speculating with people's money, but I'm not for giving money to Wall Street billionnaires. Investing in Afrians education, healthcare and food does bring back huge revenues back to the whole world. Just maybe not short term profits which Wall Street corporations usually are interested in, not short term to satisfy elected officials which are only elected 4 years at the time. Making sure everyone has food, education and healthcare is also the cheapest way to have peace in the world, avoid wasting a trillion dollars on a fake war in Iraq and Afghanistan on a hopeless fight against terrorists. As long as some people still are starving, sick and uneducated, there will always be terrorists.

Posted by Nicolas Charbonnier on 10/19/2008 @ 05:53AM PT
- Report close
  You must be signed in to report content.
- Reply
- Like
For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment. In the process we will also create a Change.org account for you so you can track this and future conversations. Don't worry - we won't spam you. We just want to promote constructive dialogue and find that people are more respectful when they are not anonymous.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

reply to thread started by by Nicolas
Check Spelling
- Email me when there are new posts to this thread
- Comment Policy
Cancel Reply
@Nicholas: Suggesting that money spent on banks has a measurable return on investment does not mean that I support the war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Buying junk loans bring the collateral property along with it. it is fair to assume that the property price will appreciate in the future, and be profitable. Banking needs to be regulated better to prevent such large scale leverage.

My point: Money availability is not the problem. It is just not a political priority. It will become one, if there is popular support for it.

Posted by Thomas George on 10/19/2008 @ 06:19AM PT
- Report close
  You must be signed in to report content.
- Reply
- Like
For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment. In the process we will also create a Change.org account for you so you can track this and future conversations. Don't worry - we won't spam you. We just want to promote constructive dialogue and find that people are more respectful when they are not anonymous.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

reply to thread started by by Thomas
Check Spelling
- Email me when there are new posts to this thread
- Comment Policy
Cancel Reply
I must say I feel a little patronised everytime I hear some appeal for the poor starving children, as if children were the only human beings with value. As an African who has lived and travelled widely in Sub-Saharan Africa I am very skeptical about many planned interventions on behalf of the starving children. What the developing world really needs are cheap anti-retrovirals, development of TB and malaria vaccines, seed, agricultural and infrastructure assistance, and to stop being screwed over by the world bank and WTO.

'Feed the children' type appeals are a nail-scratcing appeal to emotion which provide no long term solutions. Helping adults feed their own children is a much more workable premise.

Posted by Richard Strickland on 10/19/2008 @ 04:13PM PT
- Report close
  You must be signed in to report content.
- Reply
- Like
Reply to thread
For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment. In the process we will also create a Change.org account for you so you can track this and future conversations. Don't worry - we won't spam you. We just want to promote constructive dialogue and find that people are more respectful when they are not anonymous.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

reply to thread started by by Richard
Check Spelling
- Email me when there are new posts to this thread
- Comment Policy
Cancel Reply

Add a Comment

For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

Comment

Check Spelling

Email me when there are new posts to this thread
Comment Policy

Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.

Author

Michael has worked for NGOs in Afghanistan, across east and central Africa, and Iraq. Prior to going overseas, he worked on a project providing assistance to the United Nations on the application of International Humanitarian Law to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.