Saturday, 11 October 2008

Time for some serious thoughts


I’m going to inflict my opinion on you now in an attempt to be polemical, and also to show you why I wouldn’t make a good columnist.

The question that I want to answer is what’s so great about our way of life in developed countries that makes me and countless other misguided do-gooders work so hard to make developing countries the same? Many would say that we’re all fat and unhappy. No-one seems too enamoured with the pressures of modern life and lots even go so far as to plot their ‘escape’, by moving to the countryside, emigrating, retiring somewhere quiet or killing themselves. Contrast this with, for example, rural Africa. It has such alluring innocence and charm. People live off the fat of the land, share with their neighbours, go to bed when it gets dark and let their children play with each other in a playground with no fences: the entire countryside. Doesn’t it seem to address so many of our complaints with the world? So why are we trying to change it?

There are two answers. The first answer is simple: it is going to change whether it we think it should or not. Materialism is infectious and it spreads everywhere. If you have nothing and others have lots then it is natural that you should want to join them. So, since the change is inevitable, let’s try to make it an equitable change.

The second answer is that the change is right and good. People try to escape ‘modern life’ without realising that the imprisonment must be in their mind, because they are politically and economically free. You can exercise your democratic rights through a wide variety of means and although it sometimes might not feel like you have any influence over the government, together with your fellow citizens, you are empowered to end their dominion.

You are also highly likely to be economically empowered. Even at the bottom end of our society, people have enough money to make basic choices in their patterns of consumption and enough for basic luxuries like a really big TV. Higher up, you really do have that option of ‘escape’ if you want it – retire to Spain, buy a Post Office in Scotland, or volunteer for a year in Africa.

Contrast these freedoms with our rural African community described earlier. You are likely to be stuck with a government who it is impossible to shift out of power and who therefore have no incentive to work in your best interests, yet you probably don’t realise you have the right to demand more. Furthermore, you might not even be on the first rung of the economic ladder where people use money for the exchange of goods – the land provides all your basic needs, provided there is no drought, flood or hungry thieves. Your life may have a charm and innocence that people who have more enviously marvel at, but you don’t have the external viewpoint that allows you to appreciate it in that way: you aren’t looking at it out of a car window, you’re living it.

Peasant life ended in Europe about three hundred years ago. It was probably also charming and innocent until you caught disease, got on the wrong side of your grumpy Lord or were inflicted with a thieving neighbour. I don’t think anyone would advocate a return to feudalism.

Working Hours

Long, tiring and brilliant.

Close Encounters of the African Kind

Put a pothole the size of Wales in front of the car, and a drunk driver behind it, and I’m sure you can work out the outcome: car snooker. A light tap from the pursuing cue ball nicely potted our Toyota.

Friendometer

As you can see, I have responded to Ben’s valid complaint of increasingly short actual entries followed by increasingly lengthy regular features. The customer is always right.

Competition time

Well done to Volunteer Jo for pointing out the erroneous information so far missed: the Nile is not the world's longest river. The rest of you should be ashamed of yourselves!


Ben 2

Julia 1

Nigel’s Dad 1

Uncle Simon 1

Nigel’s Gran 1

Brother David 1

Volunteer Jo 1


4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Nigel, this is probably the deepest I've heard you be in the number of years I've known you, and yes, it raises interesting developmental and ethical questions.

Why do "poor" people want to become like us, the "developed"? I certainly don't have the answer. Materialism, I would think, exists in every community for the history of time. People get jealous at other's possesions, or lifestyles. We cannot all have what we want as resources are scarce. Status is important.

Like you say, it is only fair that everyone should have the same equality of opportunity to be in a position that they want to be in. We are, often, where we are due to circumstance and luck - who decided that you would be born in the UK rather than in the Congo? Philosophers might say that 'you' of course wouldn't be the same person were you born at a different time or different place. Those who believe in reincarnation differ. The message from this is that we all have a duty to empower/help/educate/inform people to improve their condition of living such that at least basic rights are met, so life's a little less unfair.

It's a wide old world out there and everyone should have the ability to experience as much of it as they can, or want to. We seem to think that ignorance of other things/peoples is not a good thing, which it isn't.

The thing with modern life is that it is all a game. People love to hate it - if they truly didn't like it, they wouldn't do it if they could. The escape, I suspect, is also meant to be an embodiment of success. I have worked hard all my life - I deserve to take it easy now. This is quite different to being forced to live in this idyllic settings. People think that materialism makes you happy.

The opposite is nearly always the case. You strive to be better than someone else and have more than another person and this makes you anxious of your status and position. I think that as long as basic rights are fulfilled, (i.e. fresh water, food, shelter, education, heathcare) the rest is icing that people compete over.

Yes, it is unfair that the unemployed in one country can buy a big screen TV while the penniless in another country will die of starvation. I guess they would say it's as unfair as someone working but getting a massive house and them with nothing. It was only chance that they were a millionaire.

The point in all this development talk is the mental aspect to it all. Having a lot, or little, of money in any culture does not guarantee happiness. Poverty is a lot about the feeling of helplessness about their situation, and I guess development work should show that people are not helpless. That's the same for those in the UK or abroad.

This is all a bit disjointed, but at the end of the day, having your options and freedoms taken away from you is imprisoning whilst if you never had them, life can be perfectly happy. I think that the whole point of development should be about showing people that things they think are inevitable in life - such as having to walk miles for water or food, or having people die of preventable disease -really are not.

Unknown said...

"If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him? Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth." 1 John 3:17-18

A topical Bible quotation for you my friend. Only just managed to get onto this blog-thingy, and there I was thinking that either my letter had been lost in London-Uganda transit or that you didn't care about my beautiful letter written on paper supplied by the Dorchester!

I'm truly honoured to have been given such a glorious shout out on your blog. I am somewhat disheartened to see that I have been usurped by a little upstart named Belinda and I am herewith commenting on your blog in a flagrant attempt to gain another shout out.

I have actually been meaning to email you for some time, as my area (yes, the aptly named Lordship Park) is highly populated by Jewish families, and ones where the men sometimes wear cossack-style hats and the women shave their heads and wear wigs and I wanted to know why this is. In your absence I thought, "what would Nigel do?" and consulted your trusty friend Wikipedia. And that, my friend, is how I came to know that a lot of Hasidic Jews live in my area. I still don't really understand why the women shave their heads and then take measures to look as though they haven't...can you do better than Wikipedia?

Much love (Christmas cards are being purchased at the end of this week and one will be sent your way!)

Lizzie xxx

ps. I have a job!

Anonymous said...

Hi Nigel,
Got your blog address off Billy, so been having a read today! I will not try to be intelligent enough to comment on your most recent philosophical debate, as you know at this point in the teaching term all braincells are dead! However, I did want to let you know how great it was to read about your adventures & to let you know that the SCA English department still mourns your absence- we miss you!

Take care,
Laura x

Anonymous said...

Hi Nigel. Broke my leg a few weeks ago so have not had the opportunity to vent my pedantry at your blog, but now I'm back on the case!

Thanks for responding to my whinge and providing a substantive entry. You've clearly inspired the polemicist in Rajit as a result!

I think this debate must recognise the difference between people's 'objective' experience of wealth or poverty, and their 'subjective' experience of their situation. If happiness comes from relationships rather that possessions, the irony is that the more stuff we have, the less attention we pay to the people around us. Poor people have less stuff so focus more on other people, and hence may seem happier than the miserable backpacked listening to her ipod.

It’s sad to think that we could have it all but too often romanticise the happiness that seems to only be found in absolute poverty.

Love the concept of car snooker by the way.

Followers