5 ms·

Last year we had: 1. Biblical scale locust infestation in much of Africa, and Asia 2. Floods in East Asia 3. Early winter in Russia, Ukraine, and North China

Last year we had: 1. Biblical scale locust infestation in much of Africa, and Asia 2. Floods in East Asia 3. Early winter in Russia, Ukraine, and North China 4. Failed, and missed sowing of grains in much of above regions 5. Shipping disruptions, and resulting food spoilage, and waste 6. Granaries busted, and people burning through many months worth of grain, and flour in much of third world due to initial COVID panic 7. Financial speculators having the best field run on agriculture in decades 8. Anxiety about point 6 repeating runs on food wholesalers again https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/12/10/nobel-winner-wfp-warns-of-a-hunger-pandemic-worse-than-virus https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/12/10/nobel-winner-wfp-w...

imtringued 6y ago
That aljazeera link doesn't sit right with me. I mean, just look at that first picture. It's a small child sitting in a sandy place with a stainless steel bowl with porridge like food inside. There is no civilization in sight. Maybe some village houses, which represent the bare minimum shelter needed. So now you get to ask yourself, should I feel pity or should I recognize that this child is not living in an environment that is conductive to escaping poverty? If I do take pity, will people pity me if I do a hike without food and end up starving on some forest path far away from civilization? I somehow doubt they would pity me. My point is, this problem is fundamentally unsolvable without either bringing civilization to these people or bringing the people to civilization. Taking pity on them doesn't do anything except maybe convince yourself that you did your part. Fighting against world hunger feels like a worthy goal that is fulfillable but it isn't. You don't solve world hunger by feeding people, you solve it by restructuring society.
- kingkawn 6y ago
  You gotta feed people to be able to do the restructuring. Your logic is hollow to someone starving. Also impressive you’ve attempted to resurrect the idea of “civilizing” people.
  - brongondwana 6y ago
    What do you mean by 'resurrect the idea of “civilizing” people'? It smells remarkably like you're trying to manufacture a culture war out of whole cloth when the the comment you're replying to was talking about "bringing civilisation" which is quite clearly being used in the with the meaning of "infrastructure", not the meaning of "white western culture".
  - raul-pilla 6y ago
    So you're a proponent of the "give the fish" and not "teach to fish"? If the supplies flowing to them stop they starve again, so I am not sure you're right.
    - dguaraglia 6y ago
      Strange thought for someone writing a reply on a message board using a device there's no way they could build from scratch. We've structured society in a way that not everyone needs to be a farmer (or microchip designer/electronic factory line worker) for people to obtain food/devices that access the internet. Are you a proponent of 'give the fish' because you didn't build the device you are typing in?
    - quintushoratius 6y ago
      You can both give a person a fish, and at the same time teach them to fish as well. It is not, and never should have been presented as, an either/or argument.
      - ceejayoz 6y ago
        (and sometimes, you have to fix the injuries preventing them from being able to even hold the fishing pole)
    - TeMPOraL 6y ago
      I think the biggest risk here - and the reason why talking about "bringing civilization" anywhere attracts strong pushback - is that historically, what happened was people ending up held hostage over supply of fishing equipment. Giving hungry people fish obviously isn't a good solution, because then the fish giver becomes a SPOF. But also because the fish giver now has power over the hungry, and some givers will abuse it. Teaching people to fish doesn't work if they're still hungry. It also doesn't work if you're teaching methods that they can't employ. If your solution to the last problem is giving (especially licensing) them means to do fishing, then we're back to square one, with you being SPOF/risk of becoming exploitative. The solution has to be helping people build self-sufficiency. That may involve giving money, or donating equipment and know-how - but with no strings attached, including non-obvious ones like "you'll have to buy spare parts from us, because your industry can't make them". The goal here is not absolute self-sufficiency (nobody truly has that), but avoiding the situation in which given society's affairs are being managed by outsiders, under threat of starvation or illness.
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  Have you ever left a city? Even in some suburbs it's possible to take a picture of someone with only a few houses behind them. In my smallish town, only tens of thousands of people, I live next to the busiest road and I could find an equally barren background about three blocks away. Not living in an urban environment is not devoid of civilization.
- pjc50 6y ago
  Bizarre line of reasoning. If you want "something to be done", pity is one of the first steps to motivating that. It's not an either/or.
- dagaci 6y ago
  For context the photo is actually from May 1, 2012: "two-year-old Aliou Seyni Diallo eats dry couscous given to him by a neighbor, after he collapsed in tears of hunger in the village of Goudoude Diobe, in the Matam region of northeastern Senegal" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Sahel_drought https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Sahel_drought they are thought to be becoming more frequent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahel_drought https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahel_drought
- meepmorp 6y ago
  No civilization in sight? There are actual houses in the background of that photo.

imtringued 6y ago

That aljazeera link doesn't sit right with me. I mean, just look at that first picture. It's a small child sitting in a sandy place with a stainless steel bowl with porridge like food inside. There is no civilization in sight. Maybe some village houses, which represent the bare minimum shelter needed. So now you get to ask yourself, should I feel pity or should I recognize that this child is not living in an environment that is conductive to escaping poverty? If I do take pity, will people pity me if I do a hike without food and end up starving on some forest path far away from civilization? I somehow doubt they would pity me. My point is, this problem is fundamentally unsolvable without either bringing civilization to these people or bringing the people to civilization. Taking pity on them doesn't do anything except maybe convince yourself that you did your part. Fighting against world hunger feels like a worthy goal that is fulfillable but it isn't. You don't solve world hunger by feeding people, you solve it by restructuring society.

kingkawn 6y ago
You gotta feed people to be able to do the restructuring. Your logic is hollow to someone starving. Also impressive you’ve attempted to resurrect the idea of “civilizing” people.
- brongondwana 6y ago
  What do you mean by 'resurrect the idea of “civilizing” people'? It smells remarkably like you're trying to manufacture a culture war out of whole cloth when the the comment you're replying to was talking about "bringing civilisation" which is quite clearly being used in the with the meaning of "infrastructure", not the meaning of "white western culture".
- raul-pilla 6y ago
  So you're a proponent of the "give the fish" and not "teach to fish"? If the supplies flowing to them stop they starve again, so I am not sure you're right.
  - dguaraglia 6y ago
    Strange thought for someone writing a reply on a message board using a device there's no way they could build from scratch. We've structured society in a way that not everyone needs to be a farmer (or microchip designer/electronic factory line worker) for people to obtain food/devices that access the internet. Are you a proponent of 'give the fish' because you didn't build the device you are typing in?
  - quintushoratius 6y ago
    You can both give a person a fish, and at the same time teach them to fish as well. It is not, and never should have been presented as, an either/or argument.
    - ceejayoz 6y ago
      (and sometimes, you have to fix the injuries preventing them from being able to even hold the fishing pole)
  - TeMPOraL 6y ago
    I think the biggest risk here - and the reason why talking about "bringing civilization" anywhere attracts strong pushback - is that historically, what happened was people ending up held hostage over supply of fishing equipment. Giving hungry people fish obviously isn't a good solution, because then the fish giver becomes a SPOF. But also because the fish giver now has power over the hungry, and some givers will abuse it. Teaching people to fish doesn't work if they're still hungry. It also doesn't work if you're teaching methods that they can't employ. If your solution to the last problem is giving (especially licensing) them means to do fishing, then we're back to square one, with you being SPOF/risk of becoming exploitative. The solution has to be helping people build self-sufficiency. That may involve giving money, or donating equipment and know-how - but with no strings attached, including non-obvious ones like "you'll have to buy spare parts from us, because your industry can't make them". The goal here is not absolute self-sufficiency (nobody truly has that), but avoiding the situation in which given society's affairs are being managed by outsiders, under threat of starvation or illness.
boomboomsubban 6y ago
Have you ever left a city? Even in some suburbs it's possible to take a picture of someone with only a few houses behind them. In my smallish town, only tens of thousands of people, I live next to the busiest road and I could find an equally barren background about three blocks away. Not living in an urban environment is not devoid of civilization.
pjc50 6y ago
Bizarre line of reasoning. If you want "something to be done", pity is one of the first steps to motivating that. It's not an either/or.
dagaci 6y ago
For context the photo is actually from May 1, 2012: "two-year-old Aliou Seyni Diallo eats dry couscous given to him by a neighbor, after he collapsed in tears of hunger in the village of Goudoude Diobe, in the Matam region of northeastern Senegal" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Sahel_drought https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Sahel_drought they are thought to be becoming more frequent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahel_drought https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahel_drought
meepmorp 6y ago
No civilization in sight? There are actual houses in the background of that photo.