Millions face starvation in Eastern Africa:
http://www.irinnews.org/report.asp?ReportID=52047
I don't mean to trivialise this in any way, but aside from the imminent need for aid for these people, does anyone else feel that situations like these point up the failure of western affluent advanced capitalism to allow any organised response other than a vague guilt and maybe a donation of a few quid to an NGO before the next news feature comes along to distract us again? Our social and cultural structures seem to systematically and structurally prevent our societies from doing anything real to eradicate this suffering outside of charitable aid by NGOs (not to diminish their work, which however compromised by politics and/or administrative costs etc. is surely better than nothing?).
Obviously governments in the affected countries can be blamed also, but it seems appalling that our societies have no platforms or structures to debate or decide if and/or how we might want to "feed the world" or provide enough technology and help to prevent these situations. I know this is a hopelessly naive way to look at the issue, but those child-like questions ("why can't we feed the hungry?") can really cut through to the heart of the matter.
And the related political issue: how come capitalism's "least worst" option presents itself as the only one, as a kind of inevitable minimal damage limitation rather than active debate and decision-making about what kind of societies we want to create and live in?
http://www.irinnews.org/report.asp?ReportID=52047
I don't mean to trivialise this in any way, but aside from the imminent need for aid for these people, does anyone else feel that situations like these point up the failure of western affluent advanced capitalism to allow any organised response other than a vague guilt and maybe a donation of a few quid to an NGO before the next news feature comes along to distract us again? Our social and cultural structures seem to systematically and structurally prevent our societies from doing anything real to eradicate this suffering outside of charitable aid by NGOs (not to diminish their work, which however compromised by politics and/or administrative costs etc. is surely better than nothing?).
Obviously governments in the affected countries can be blamed also, but it seems appalling that our societies have no platforms or structures to debate or decide if and/or how we might want to "feed the world" or provide enough technology and help to prevent these situations. I know this is a hopelessly naive way to look at the issue, but those child-like questions ("why can't we feed the hungry?") can really cut through to the heart of the matter.
And the related political issue: how come capitalism's "least worst" option presents itself as the only one, as a kind of inevitable minimal damage limitation rather than active debate and decision-making about what kind of societies we want to create and live in?