|
There is probably no better time than the present to deliberate on the issue of developmental ethics. I hail from an extremely blessed place that is Singapore, a prosperous city-state in South East Asia. I, like many of my disillusioned compatriots (I hope), am fully cognizant of our extremely fortunate repute- not in civil rights- in the world, but also of the unpalatable and starkly inequitable distribution of blessings in the region.
Needless to say, Singapore being the bellwether in this part of the world, many Singaporeans, like me, seek to render help to our neighboring countries in myriad ways (financially, militarily and in terms of knowledge). This phenomenon begs the question: why should the more fortunate- i.e. Singapore and the first world (negative connotation notwithstanding)- help the less fortunate?
Let there be no doubt that it is a moral obligation and duty for the more fortunate to help the less fortunate. Most people would agree with me on this statement. I, for one, fervently and staunchly believe in the moral obligation of the better-off to help the less fortunate. There is no debate here.
To examine the ethics of development would demand an understanding of the intention(s) behind development. The intentions, I believe, if shall illuminate much of the path on which we are about to embark. The snags along the way, e.g. ethical dilemmas, are better understood and ironed out in light of these very intentions.
Development ethics have been deliberated for as long as development has been around. If there is a poem out there which aptly sums up an age-old and yet contemporary conundrum, Rudyard Kipling’s widely acclaimed poem, "The White Man's Burden", is certainly among the frontrunners. "The White Man's Burden" has set the stage for much of my developmental work; hence the need to elucidate its main import.
The race ("White man") in the poem is irrelevant insofar as the history of imperialism goes; what matters here is the White man’s “burden”- the onus which comes ineluctably with colonization. Lest I get misconstrued, I must make it clear that I am neither for colonialism nor neocolonialism; however an obsession with denouncing colonialism has no merit today. (For better or worse, many countries in the world are former colonies, Singapore included.) Instead, we should make sure that we do not commit the same mistakes.
The roles that organizations such as the UN, MSF or the Red Cross assume in the developing world are truly multi-faceted. We must strive to comprehend the exceedingly essential roles they (and individuals such as ourselves) play in these impoverished countries. It is from this understanding that we will avoid making the mistakes the colonialists made. The alternative is to allow the dead hand of the past to come back and haunt us. It is only with understanding can we erase the vestiges of colonization.
Unwittingly, we foist our sets of beliefs onto these communities. That which is 'good' for us may not necessarily be good for a particular community. Working in impoverished and culturally-alien countries such as Cambodia requires a lot of understanding and tact. There are many Singaporeans who have gone to Cambodia to volunteer and many do so through non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Some of these NGOs are religious-based and some secular.
I must make clear that I have never ever doubted the power of faith-based organizations to benefit humankind. These organizations existed at the start of 19th century and, since then, have been doing great deeds for humankind. What I can't help but notice is the religious indoctrination which often comes along as a corollary. Having said that, common good (a reference to things which are intrinsically good such as food, clean water, sanitation and shelter) is obtained, and objectives are met.
This brings us to the second question: must development take place at the cost of local culture/religion? NGOs could choose either to allow the local culture to flourish or snuff it out. This sounds like cultural imperialism to me, albeit a milder form than the one employed in the colonial era. NGOs should promote the understanding of local culture among their own employees and volunteers and among the people they are seeking to help.
Views such as, “We are superior in advancement and hence what we do for you all must be right,” must be put to an end. This is one but many examples of ethical dilemma I have come across and one that I am still trying to get a grip on. This is why I have mentioned above the importance of having a clearly delineated intent for every development endeavor. NGOs should seek to describe and understand rather than prescribe what is right and wrong, good or bad.
Having dialogues with various stakeholders in the community or at large certainly helps to delineate the intent of NGOs. If the NGOs are armed with clear intent, ethical dilemmas will be consigned to the past, not
|
Tags
You must be logged in to add tags.
|
Writer Profile
Ming Kun
This user has not written anything in his panorama profile yet.
|
Comments
You must be a TakingITGlobal member to post a comment. Sign up for free or login.
|
|
