Yet another sociology post, this one dealing with world hunger.
Hunger is a pervasive problem in much of the world; even more so than in the United States. There are many approaches to ending world hunger, but so far, none have solved the problem of hunger for the worst off of the world’s citizens.
Using the Modernization theory, one could argue that there are many solutions to the problem of hunger and that the rich countries can play a large part in ending hunger. Using the Modernization theory, requires a lessening of culture and traditions, which can be both beneficial to society and harmful. The reason that hunger has been lessened according to the Modernization theory in the western countries is that they were more amenable to change and accepting of new ways of doing things. By becoming more creative the western world has found solutions to much of its own hunger. This theory holds that all societies were poor societies 400 or so years ago and only by accepting and promoting change have they been somewhat successful in the fight against hunger. By no means have many of the western societies solved their own hunger problems because in our very own country poverty and daily hunger is a way of life for a relatively large number of people and this number will only go higher because of the economic and social policies being enacted presently.
How can we apply the successes of the western world towards making a dent in worldwide hunger? We can increase our aid to these countries, we can export our agriculture advances and we can also export our technology for controlling population. It is a fact that the majority of the world’s destitute people live in societies where very little if any birth control is practiced. I am personally opposed to artificial means of birth control on a moral level, but I understand the necessity of it to control very large families. (who needs artificial birth control when NFP, natural family planning, is as effective, safe, and more healthy for a couple who is properly educated in its practice and the four or so days each month that abstention is necessary) (we are now finding out how damaging artificial hormones are to the overall health of women).
In terms of the dependency theory we can arise at the conclusion that much of world hunger and poverty is directly caused by the rich countries who have systematically raped the poorer countries of their natural resources, both in history and now by the actions of corporations. This theory recognizes that before the industrial revolution, much of the world was poor, essentially equal in terms of economic power. Only by taking advantage of the natural resources and cheap (and slave) labour were the rich countries able to become rich. The poor countries continue to be poor and some even become poorer because they tend to be export driven economies where natural resources are exported only to be reimported as much more expensive finished goods. Many countries even export food all the while they have their own citizens starving. The main reason for this is because of blatant greed, especially in cooperation with large multinational corporations. How can the dependency theory help alleviate poverty? I am not sure if this theory offers much in the way of solutions to the problem, just sources of the problem. Some advocate a complete detachment of poor countries from the rich ones, but that is something that is unlikely as the poor countries could benefit greatly from our advances in health care and agricultural efficiency.
Which theory holds the most promise, and, on the flip side, which theory reveals the true source of global hunger? Of course the Modernization theory can go a long way to helping to alleviate hunger only if it is allowed to act in a socially responsible way. To truly alleviate hunger, we need to remove profit as the goal of food production and replace it with the altruistic goal of benefiting humanity. The Dependency theory can explain how the poor countries became poor and some of how they remain poor, but unless concrete solutions are offered, it is of little value to the 15 million individuals who die every year due to hunger. In no way am I arguing that pure capitalism is the solution to hunger, because we see that most capitalist systems have hunger within their own mists, but what I do argue is for countries, individuals and organizations to reinstitute their conscience and the idea that all life is of value, not just one individual's starvation, but the millions of people who face starvation because of unjust social and economic policies.
Hunger is a pervasive problem in much of the world; even more so than in the United States. There are many approaches to ending world hunger, but so far, none have solved the problem of hunger for the worst off of the world’s citizens.
Using the Modernization theory, one could argue that there are many solutions to the problem of hunger and that the rich countries can play a large part in ending hunger. Using the Modernization theory, requires a lessening of culture and traditions, which can be both beneficial to society and harmful. The reason that hunger has been lessened according to the Modernization theory in the western countries is that they were more amenable to change and accepting of new ways of doing things. By becoming more creative the western world has found solutions to much of its own hunger. This theory holds that all societies were poor societies 400 or so years ago and only by accepting and promoting change have they been somewhat successful in the fight against hunger. By no means have many of the western societies solved their own hunger problems because in our very own country poverty and daily hunger is a way of life for a relatively large number of people and this number will only go higher because of the economic and social policies being enacted presently.
How can we apply the successes of the western world towards making a dent in worldwide hunger? We can increase our aid to these countries, we can export our agriculture advances and we can also export our technology for controlling population. It is a fact that the majority of the world’s destitute people live in societies where very little if any birth control is practiced. I am personally opposed to artificial means of birth control on a moral level, but I understand the necessity of it to control very large families. (who needs artificial birth control when NFP, natural family planning, is as effective, safe, and more healthy for a couple who is properly educated in its practice and the four or so days each month that abstention is necessary) (we are now finding out how damaging artificial hormones are to the overall health of women).
In terms of the dependency theory we can arise at the conclusion that much of world hunger and poverty is directly caused by the rich countries who have systematically raped the poorer countries of their natural resources, both in history and now by the actions of corporations. This theory recognizes that before the industrial revolution, much of the world was poor, essentially equal in terms of economic power. Only by taking advantage of the natural resources and cheap (and slave) labour were the rich countries able to become rich. The poor countries continue to be poor and some even become poorer because they tend to be export driven economies where natural resources are exported only to be reimported as much more expensive finished goods. Many countries even export food all the while they have their own citizens starving. The main reason for this is because of blatant greed, especially in cooperation with large multinational corporations. How can the dependency theory help alleviate poverty? I am not sure if this theory offers much in the way of solutions to the problem, just sources of the problem. Some advocate a complete detachment of poor countries from the rich ones, but that is something that is unlikely as the poor countries could benefit greatly from our advances in health care and agricultural efficiency.
Which theory holds the most promise, and, on the flip side, which theory reveals the true source of global hunger? Of course the Modernization theory can go a long way to helping to alleviate hunger only if it is allowed to act in a socially responsible way. To truly alleviate hunger, we need to remove profit as the goal of food production and replace it with the altruistic goal of benefiting humanity. The Dependency theory can explain how the poor countries became poor and some of how they remain poor, but unless concrete solutions are offered, it is of little value to the 15 million individuals who die every year due to hunger. In no way am I arguing that pure capitalism is the solution to hunger, because we see that most capitalist systems have hunger within their own mists, but what I do argue is for countries, individuals and organizations to reinstitute their conscience and the idea that all life is of value, not just one individual's starvation, but the millions of people who face starvation because of unjust social and economic policies.
posted by Mark at 4:37 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home