Slashdot Mirror

> It's better to teach a man how to fish than to just give him a fish.

And better yet to let a man fish. Or a woman, as the case may be (kind of insane to not allow the majority of your farm workforce to own property).

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.

That's already being solved - http://www.thp.org/.

And the next one is world peace - and if you want to solve that one, join the Landmark Forum.

Of course, in order to be able to do such a thing, they must enjoy a democratic society (which usually goes hand in hand with freedom of expression).

Although the SMS messages in China forced the government to acknowledge the problem, it is not likely that those in power can be overturned, should they fail to act to stop the epidemic, so their incentive to action is quite limited.

Here's a talk by Amartya Sen, check the paragraph on Political incentives, news media and democracy.

The same can be said of humanity as a whole.

This is somewhat along the lines of The Hunger Project, which is attempting to end hunger by empowering the people in those countries to improve their situation. (btw: when they speak of "investors", they're talking about people investing time and money to create a future of people self-sufficient and empowered -- not investing for a monetary feedback.
`ø,,ø!

For example, not one of the organizations concerned about world hunger ever talks about doing the dirty work of making sure governments don't import the food or resources that undeveloped countries need in order to begin to grow.

• A human issue. Today, ending hunger is not primarily a technical or a production issue, it is a human issue. Hunger persists because we, as human beings, have failed to organize our societies in ways that assure every person the chance to live a healthy and productive life.

Having recognized that distinction, there are a couple of general paths you can take: You can ignore it and pretend that all is OK; you can work to correct things; you can give up and die. Unfortunately, you seem to have taken the pessimistic path.
`ø,,ø`ø,,ø!

For example, not one of the organizations concerned about world hunger ever talks about doing the dirty work of making sure governments don't import the food or resources that undeveloped countries need in order to begin to grow.

• A human issue. Today, ending hunger is not primarily a technical or a production issue, it is a human issue. Hunger persists because we, as human beings, have failed to organize our societies in ways that assure every person the chance to live a healthy and productive life.

Having recognized that distinction, there are a couple of general paths you can take: You can ignore it and pretend that all is OK; you can work to correct things; you can give up and die. Unfortunately, you seem to have taken the pessimistic path.
`ø,,ø`ø,,ø!