Slashdot Mirror

Dvorak is shortsighted, thinking that if we can pay for meals for starving kids, that we will stop hunger. That is simply not a sustainable way of thinking about the problem. Take a look at any of the big organizations working on the issue: for example The Hunger Project, or CARE. While it's convenient marketing to associate X dollars with providing Y meals (and they sometimes do this to encourage people to donate), these organizations readily admit that the real path to successfully beating the chronic problem of hunger is to empower locals to be self-sufficient.

There are concrete actions that we can take as members of the "developed" nations, and these include: subsidizing agricultural infrastructure, providing education about health and nutrition, education in general, helping to challenge laws / societal norms that restrict productivity, reducing sexism and racism, etc. But these hunger programs are specifically *not* about providing meals directly.

Chronic world hunger is a real issue (and is different from short-term famine relief, which our military and private organizations do a whole lot of), and there are things we can do to lead to a sustainable solution. Dvorak incorrectly assumes that because we can buy Y meals, we should do that instead of educating the next generation. In fact, the big organizations already tackling hunger know that empowering the locals is the key, and this is entirely consistent with OLPC's goals.

--
Educational microcontroller kits for the digital generation.

16,000 children under the age of 5 died yesterday because they didn't have enough to eat. This church, along with the rest of us, will have to answer some pointed questions in the afterlife about priorities.

[Salvation Army members] work endless hours, seemingly tirelessly, and never lose their smiles.

If you are worried that your donations won't reach the right people then consider donating to CARE. They seem to have some of the lowest administration costs among relief agencies. Over 90% goes to affected victims.

Not that this isn't an extremely impressive move, but seriously - they're going to spend all this money trying to compete with NASA to get to Mars? Yes, the fulfilment of human greatness, scientific forethought and everything, but c'mon - I could think of a thousand better ways of spending that money. This is sad.

According to some Unicef data (no URL) I read, during the horrible Ethiopian famine (remember "We are the world"?), Ethiopia actually exported grain to pay for their foreign debt.
I don't know about the current one (you know there are people dying from hunger in Ethiopia now, don't you?), but I heard a CARE man on CNN that the country managed to increase food production and depend less on imports. Thus they stood longer, but not enough.

Food donation and these patches can help in emergencies (Mozambique), but they will not solve the world food problem.
Food produced in the 1st world (powder milk!) makes third world dependent of big companies.
As the worthy anonymous I am answering to says, the Earth produces more than enough to feed mankind. It's the current economical and political organization that makes the distribution so unfair.
__