The recent earthquake in Haiti left the small island nation devastated, scrambling for resources to treat survivors, and reliant on other countries as well as international aid organizations for relief. This event shed light on Haiti, the poorest nation in this hemisphere, and its already crumbling infrastructure. Despite the widespread devastation in Haiti some believe that this tragedy may provide opportunity to address the abject poverty already present in Haiti through permanent, positive structural changes to the country; while others like David Brooks, a columnist for the New York Times are not so convinced it is simply a matter of changing structures in Haiti but rather that it is necessary to also address deeply held cultural beliefs.
Read the op-editorial that David Brooks recently wrote for the New York Times discussing his ideas of the challenges facing Haiti in terms of both cultural and structural issues related to poverty. In class we are delving into the cultural and structural explanations for poverty. Discuss the merit of Brook’s argument by answering the following questions: What are cultural explanations and/or structural explanations for the situation in Haiti? Which aspects of Brooks’ argument make the most sense to you and why? What other cultural and/or structural explanations regarding the earthquake tragedy in Haiti would you offer? What do you think is the best way to move forward to impact the poverty rates in Haiti? Why?
37 comments:
Brook’s believes that the structural explanation for the situation in Haiti is the poorly built buildings. He compares the 7.0 magnitude in California to the one in Haiti, and the number of deaths cannot even compare. That tells you that it was not solely the earthquake that was to blame, but the structures that surrounded the people of Haiti. Aside from being structurally oppressed the culture of Haiti is also holding them back. As Brooks stated Haiti is “progress-resistant”. Because Haitians believe that planning would be futile they do not put much effort into building their country. This is where the structural and cultural institutions intertwine.
The structural reasons for what took part in Haiti make the most sense to me. It is very clear that it was not only the earthquake that caused all the death but the lack of proper structures to withstand such a natural disaster. I don’t have many other explanations as to the reasons why the earthquake was so traumatic in Haiti aside from what Brooks stated. I believe the best way to move forward in helping the poverty in Haiti is first giving people places to live. A lot of the residents are out on the streets and don’t have anywhere else to go. If we begin literally from the ground up, I believe that things will take place. I think that experienced counselors need to be there in the beginning of all the rebuilding and help those who still are not able to cope with what happened. I know that will take a lot of volunteers but I believe it is much needed.
Sadly as we know, Haiti is the poorest country in the world. The country was founded and built as a union by slaves. This being said, there aren’t that many specialized builders/constructers/materials to enforce the safety and stability of the country. Brooks stated that 60,000 to 70,000 people died in the rated 7.0 earthquake. Nearly 21 years earlier, the same rated earthquake on the Richter scale in California took the lives of only 63 people. When hearing this, I’d like to say that the main reason for Haiti’s total death count is due to the poor construction of buildings and homes but there is also the thought of numbers. How many people are living in these unstable homes? If a family of 4-6 are sharing a home with two other families of the same size, that’s a total of 12 to 16 people dying per household.
Brooks’ mentions that the Dominican Republic and Haiti share the same island but Haiti is on a completely different financial level possibly due to the appearance of its half of the island. The Dominican Republic is a commonly known vacation destination for Americans due to the beautiful beaches and resorts. On the other side is a deforested and poorly put together area called Haiti. I believe that if Haiti got the same type of tourism that the Dominican Republic gets, the country wouldn’t be as poor as they are and the poverty rates would decline rapidly.
After reading David Brook’s editorial from the New York Times, I disagree with what he had to say about Haiti. His explanation for the tragic situation in Haiti is that the country “suffers from a complex web of progress-resistant cultural influences”. He says that this is a poverty story due to the country’s poor infrastructure because a same magnitude earthquake struck California and killed 63 people whereas in Haiti it killed 45,000 people. I do not buy that the main reason for the on-going poverty and lack of progress in Haiti is largely due to their cultural beliefs. The voodoo religious beliefs, which “spreads the message that life is capricious and planning futile” are believed by the people for a reason. The people of Haiti have gone through much hardship with their country in the past so it is understandable that they do not feel like they can trust society or other nations. Also, I don’t know how reliable Mr. Brook’s view of Haitian culture is because how would he know unless he actually spent time in the country or surrounded by the people. He does not have the authority to say that the culture in Haiti has caused most people to have a lack of personal duty and responsibility; it is a generalization about the population and a pretty ignorant point of view. No matter how different people’s cultures may be, human beings share the basic values of loving and sacrificing for their children.
Not much of his arguments made sense to but I do agree with his first statement that “the first of those truths is that we don’t know how to use aid to reduce poverty”. Whatever developed countries are doing to help the poor nations, it does not seem to be working that well. I’m not sure exactly why that is but there needs to be a change in how we view world poverty and what is the best way to provide aid. More attention should be focused on reducing world poverty because when something as devastating as the earthquake in Haiti happens, it really affects everyone and we all have a responsibility to help in any way we can.
I think that while there are probably many other explanations for the tragedy and on-going poverty in Haiti, there is no use in pointing fingers or saying whose fault it is. Right now it is more important to provide relief. I think the best way to move forward to reduce poverty rates is to learn from the past and also to focus on literacy. When people start the rebuilding process, definitely focus on building schools because education is the key way to get ahead in today’s society. However, I know that it’s not as simple as just having more schools but that is the most helpful thing I can think of.
To add to my comment, I also want to say that I agree with the post above mine (blogger .349) because a big reason for the high rate of death from the earthquake in Haiti is not just because of the fact that the homes are poorly constructed, but also because of the number of people living in those homes; this definitely exacerbated the problem.
Blogger .303 stated that alot of the Haiti citizens are homeless and that counselors should be brought in to help everybody cope with the tragedy. I completely agree with this for the fact that if the people cannot deal with the catastrophe mentally first then they won't be able to physically build the country back to a stable condition.
Haiti is one of the world's poorest countries. Prior to this natural disaster, it faced soo many social, economical, and political problems. This has no doubt made this already devastating natural disaster worse. Even if we look at the U.S one of the most developed countries, we still have not re-built New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina after 6 years or so. This can be linked with other implications as of why it hasn't been rebuilt. So, before people start essentially blaming Haiti for the devastation, look at ANY natural disaster and you will find that you can point fingers. Remember that natural disasters happen and they are usually beyond our control, or else we generally wouldn't allow them to happen. The U.S. with all its resource maybe able to do some more about natural disasters, but given the resources that developing nations have they probably did all that they can afford to do. Hopefully, other nations will help the Haitians with their infrastructure and then the social, economical, and political stuff will follow. Just think of Maslow's hierarchy of need chart.
Haiti is one of the world's poorest countries. Prior to this natural disaster, it faced soo many social, economical, and political problems. This has no doubt made this already devastating natural disaster worse. Even if we look at the U.S one of the most developed countries, we still have not re-built New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina after 6 years or so. This can be linked with other implications as of why it hasn't been rebuilt. So, before people start essentially blaming Haiti for the devastation, look at ANY natural disaster and you will find that you can point fingers. Remember that natural disasters happen and they are usually beyond our control, or else we generally wouldn't allow them to happen. The U.S. with all its resource maybe able to do some more about natural disasters, but given the resources that developing nations have they probably did all that they can afford to do. Hopefully, other nations will help the Haitians with their infrastructure and then the social, economical, and political stuff will follow. Just think of Maslow's hierarchy of need chart.
I agree with the post above me about Maslow’s Hierarchy. If someone cannot fulfill the needs on the bottom of the pyramid, how is he or she supposed to excel and rise to the top? We discussed in class the vision of the American Dream and that it does happen for a few select people. However, this dream often just stays at what it is; a dream. I love to volunteer and travel on mission trips, but I agree with the author that countries around the world need to be given the right kind of aid. The United States is known to donate money, food, water and other necessities to countries that are impoverished. While this is an immediate cure for hunger and thirst, we are not giving the citizens the tools that will allow them to grow and prosper for themselves and ultimately their country. This causes them to rely more and more on other countries aid. One structural problem with Haiti that was mentioned in the op-ed is that it is the country with the least amount of government institutions. If anyone has seen pictures, the country lacks any type of infrastructure. I believe that government oppression has kept Haiti from growing. On the other hand the fact that they follow a religion that claims life is unpredictable and that one planning for the future is pointless, it is no wonder that these cultural beliefs are affecting Haiti’s ability to surpass poverty. I am not sure that there is a way to impact the poverty rate in Haiti, but if I had to implement a plan of action, it would be to give EACH Haitian the opportunity to gain an education without a monetary burden to themselves.
Poverty was the primary issue in the outcome of the Haitian earthquake. When we compare Haiti to more modernized countries, we see the differences in government structure, education, and technological innovations. Modernized countries usually have strict regulations set by the government in building engineering. We also see more educated engineers who practice the latest innovations in building design. All these factors are personified during an earthquake when a structures integrity is not compromised. Other countries have had earthquakes with comparable magnitudes and have lost fewer lives do to factors which all tie in directly with poverty. Earthquakes are prone to certain geographic regions, an example being California. Therefore, areas which experience earthquakes more frequently can practice preventative planning.
Brook’s argument for poorly constructed building goes hand in hand with the fact that Haiti is a poor country. If they could afford to have better constructed buildings, the mortality rate would be lowered due to safer construction. The best way to move forward is just as any disaster, picking up the pieces and rebuilding. Because of the high poverty rate in Haiti, it is unfortunate that there is not much education offered. I think education is the most important thing to have to make a strong impact and difference. If we can give Haiti an education, they will have educated engineerers , modern technologies, etc to help them be more prepared for any disaster.
Some cultural explanations include corruption, colonialism, dictators, progress resistant influences like voodoo, social mistrust, non internalized responsibility and harsh or neglectful child rearing and structural explanations include poorly constructed buildings, bad infrastructure, terrible public services and poverty in general explain the situation in Haiti according to Brooks.
The aspect of Brooks’ argument on micro-aid being vital but insufficient makes the most sense to me. This is because I have experienced the effects of having multiple groups trying to focus on similar goals but pulling resources from each other and often fighting for the same population. I think that if one or two major aid foundations/groups/organizations were established it would lead to less confusion and more people actually being helped.
I wouldn’t offer any other cultural and/or structural explanations regarding the earthquake tragedy in Haiti but I would like to say that Brook’s statement on a non-internalized responsibility and harsh child rearing is hurtful and I think wrong. I know many Haitians and have seen them caring for their children and giving up many things and making hard decisions just so that their children can survive. The Haitians that I know discredit Brooks’ accusation.
I think the best way to move forward to impact the poverty rates in Haiti by eliminating the deficit that they are already in and to listen to Wyclef Jean, and Yele Haiti, about his recommendations on what Haiti and its people need. I think that Haiti needs to establish jobs and start rebuilding its agriculture, reforestation, new roads, buildings and homes. This will create places to live, jobs, and ways to make money so that people start to get the safety and security that they need to begin a new life.
Some of the structural explanations that Brooks lists are “poorly constructed buildings, bad infrastructure and terrible public services” has a history of oppression, foreign invasions, slavery and colonialism, ruthless dictators, and corruption in the government.
On the other hand, some of the cultural explanations he lists are “a complex web of progress-resistant cultural influences” such as the voodoo religion which instills the idea that “life is capricious and planning futile”. In addition, high levels of mistrust, and failure to internalize responsibility are other cultural factors to the situation in Haiti.
I strongly agree with Brooks’ argument that there has to be a more autonomous approach to addressing poverty in Haiti rather than free giving by aid organizations. “Intrusive paternalism” would ultimately enable the Haitian people to making changes to their cultural and structural flaws by educating them “a highly demanding, highly intensive culture of achievement – involving everything from new child-rearing practices to stricter schools to better job performance.” When the Haitians become more adept at dealing with their problems on their own, Haiti may generate economic growth and achieve poverty reductions as did Barbados and Dominican Republic who share similar historical and geographical hindrances
David brooks argument stating that the situation in Haiti was a poverty disaster rather then a natural disaster is correct. When compared to the natural disaster that occurred in CA. Haiti’s effects where much more grand, despite the fact that each country was hit with the same magnitude of earthquake. Brooks reasoning for the devastation in Haiti vs. CA is based on Haiti’s level of poverty. Haiti's culture prevents them from prospering and rising above their poverty. Brooks ideas about intervention and tough love in Haiti seem to make a lot of sense given the past tries to help Haiti with poverty. It is better to teach the country how to help their people on their own rather then just giving them money. The people in Haiti should b taught how to properly farm their own crops, properly raise their own children, and construct safe and sturdier buildings. Learning all of these things will make a huge difference in the Haitian peoples lifestyles. Providing study abroad programs for the teens and young adults in Haiti can provide the younger generation with a wide variety of experiences and knowledge. This will help diversify the Haitian culture and help them to bring back their new ideas and beliefs.
David brooks argument stating that the situation in Haiti was a poverty disaster rather then a natural disaster is correct. When compared to the natural disaster that occurred in CA. Haiti’s effects where much more grand, despite the fact that each country was hit with the same magnitude of earthquake. Brooks reasoning for the devastation in Haiti vs. CA is based on Haiti’s level of poverty. Haiti's culture prevents them from prospering and rising above their poverty. Brooks ideas about intervention and tough love in Haiti seem to make a lot of sense given the past tries to help Haiti with poverty. It is better to teach the country how to help their people on their own rather then just giving them money. The people in Haiti should b taught how to properly farm their own crops, properly raise their own children, and construct safe and sturdier buildings. Learning all of these things will make a huge difference in the Haitian peoples lifestyles. Providing study abroad programs for the teens and young adults in Haiti can provide the younger generation with a wide variety of experiences and knowledge. This will help diversify the Haitian culture and help them to bring back their new ideas and beliefs.
in regards to rachels blog i agreed about helping Haiti to gain the right tools in order to help themselves. i think this is very important because it will set up the country to one day no longer need aid from other countries and be able to take care of themselves. this would also include helping to teach the haitian government to properly care for their citizens and run the country at a modern pace.
I feel that the majority of the reason that the earthquake was so devastating was because of the condition that Haiti was in to begin with. Haiti has a long history of slaver, colonialism and dictatorship. All of these things contributed to the structure and society that Haiti has at the present day. For example the majority of history in Haiti involves some kind of dictatorship where the elite are ruling over the minority groups. Haiti is not used to having a democracy where everyone has a voice and the people have the freedom to speak up about things that they want or issues that they have. The people of Haiti are used to be oppressed and living in poverty. This leads into another reason why I think the earthquake was so devastating was because due to the lack of quality government; the country was essentially left to fall to the ground. Which is exactly what it was doing. The country was really in ruins which made it very easy for the earthquake to just totally destroy everything. If the infrastructure had been better then the effects of the earthquake would not have been as disastrous. The only thing that I agreed with Brook's was his point about how some societies are more prone to poverty and hardship than others. I do believe that there is some merit to his statement. I think that societies that enforce family units and the father remaining with the family are going to be happier and are going to produce children that will also be happier and much more productive citizens; versus a society where the fathers or mothers are absent and the children are left to raise themselves would probably promote more child delinquency and criminal activity. Factors like these are what can make a society either functional or dysfunctional. As far as what to do about the future for Haiti; I think immediately the country does need emergency aid. The last I heard people were still buried underneath ruble; so construction crews, doctors, nurses etc. are al still needed to help the people that are in critical need right now. Once the imminent danger is removed then Haiti can begin to rebuild itself. It is going to have to start with good quality government, that is going to work hard for its people to get the country back on its feet again. New infrastructure, laws, acts and bills will all be needed. Essentially Haiti needs a fresh start, the entire country needs to be built again from the ground up.
I would agree with some of what Mr. Brooks said about Haiti. As someone who has first hand knowledge about Haiti as I was stationed there while in the U.S Army. Haiti is very much an oppressed society. As when I was there our government is trying to help the people of Haiti after this very bad natural disaster but the help that this country and others is used in the wrong ways. When I was there I kind of formed an opinion that the Haitian people did not want our help and we were intruding on their land. I felt as though we were trying to help people that did not want help. This situation is a little different the people of Haiti need help now but when you force feed people assistance overtime they grow immune to it and even despise it.
I under stand the nature of this country wanting to assist Haiti in these time of crisis but I also know that this country has people and places that are in need of assistance such as the state of Louisiana and the city of New Orleans are still in shambles after hurricane Katrina. It is like Mr. Brooks says in his article we can't just rebuild Haiti you have to change the culture of Haiti and we as a country can not do that we don't have those type of service men and women on this countries staff. I would have to agree with 308 in saying other nations need to come to the aid of Haiti such as the Dominican Republic they share the same soil they should be the first in line to try and help Haiti rebuild. This country for many years dating back to the world wars has always tried to be the big brother and I think it is time that we try and better our own country and stop trying to help everyone else. Once we end homelessness and hunger and joblessness in this country then maybe we can go out and help the other countries. Just look at the things that have happened in this country and ask yourself who came to our aid after Katrina or after 9/11 no one we did it ourselves. I just think before we try and change the culture in another country we should make sure our country is not 1 natural disaster away from poverty.
I agree with blog .263 in that it is important for us to provide Haiti with gaining the tools they need to revcover from this tragic event, however we need to educate the people about the importance of building codes and building structue so that this won't happen again. I think it is important to inform the people of the country that they're homes, offices, places of business need to be built structually sound and not just leave to it to government to make sure this happens. We need to empower and educate the regular, every day people.
Sadly, Haiti is one of the poorest countries in the world. When we compare Haiti to more modernized countries, we notice that there is a large difference between government structure, education, and communities. Brooks mentions that although Haiti and the Dominican Republic are part of the same island, they are on a quite different financial level. It is obvious that natural disasters are out of human's control, but it is important to notice how well the structures are built throughout communities in Haiti compared to communities in California where earthquakes commonly occur. In Haiti, the buildings are poorly built, and citizens there may not be ready for what may occur. In California, the buildings are built with much greater support, and it is likely California will be more ready for an earthquake if it actually did occur there.
I believe that education is extremely important in a situation like this one. Once the rebuilding stages begin to occur, schools should be a number one priority. If we teach them ways to survive on their own, then maybe they will rely less on aid from elsewhere as much. As earlier students pointed out, Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs is certainly important in this situation. The first stage is the most important, and that is the basic needs for survival.
The Earthquake in Haiti was a devastating time for not only Haiti but for us as well. For me personally seeing the children who could not find their parents, or parents who could not find their children was heart wrenching. In regards to the Haiti culture I believe it is going to take a lot more than this disaster to make these individuals want to change. They have grown up their whole lives, and it has been passed on through generations that are the way of life and there is not anything better to come out of Haiti. They have developed a way of life that will keep them poor. To want better for one self is to know better. For example, on a news program one night I saw a little boy who was playing with a milk carton that had wheels on it like it was a toy car. The child is content with the toy and happy with it because that is what he knows as a toy car. The people in Haiti have to know the difference and want to change before they will truly change. The aspect of Brooks’s argument that made the most sense is “…it has a history of oppression, slavery…”. If the Haiti only knows this way of living like I stated before this where they will remain, slavery is what they know and although they may not be enslaved anymore the salve mentality hasn’t changed. A structural explanation that I would offer is because Haiti doesn’t have the technology other countries have it wasn’t a surprise that the majority of their buildings collapsed. If they don’t have the resources to build stable homes or even skilled workers to do so then it shouldn’t be any surprise that everything crumbled to the ground. Agreeing with blogger 303 I believe the first step in helping the people of Haiti is finding them somewhere to live, the news coverage on Haiti has shown people living in the streets and in tents. Regardless if, it is Haiti or not something needs to be done to get the ball rolling on building homes or shelters.
The cultural explanations for the situation in Haiti are due to the fact that we (the world in general) do not know how to use aid to reduce their poverty. David Brooks noted that “Over the past few decades, the world has spent trillions of dollars to generate growth in the developing world. The countries that have not received much aid, like China, have seen tremendous growth and tremendous poverty reductions. The countries that have received aid, like Haiti, have not.” If we are giving money to poor countries, we want to see positive change, not continuing poverty.
The structural explanation for Haiti is based on “terrible public services” as well as “poorly constructed buildings”. If the Haitian people are living in shacks, of course they are going to lose their home (adding to more stress and more poverty) when there is a natural disaster.
The aspects of Brooks’ argument that made the most sense to me was when he asked why was Haiti so poor to begin with. He then alluded to the slavery and oppression that Haiti had to endure. But then he also mentioned that the Dominican Republic had to endure just as much slavery and dictatorship as Haiti, but they are in better condition. This led me to believe that maybe the issue really is structural.
Some other cultural and/or structural explanations regarding the earthquake and tragedy in Haiti I would offer is that much like Hurricane Katrina. I think a lot of people would have left if they could have, but where were they going to go? The people in Haiti have probably lived there their whole lives, just as the people of New Orleans. Even if they had the means to leave, they would not have anywhere to go because Haiti is the only place they’ve called home. A cultural reason could be that Haitian’s don’t watch the weather channel on TV or have telephones and cell phones to call and tell each other about natural disasters.
I think the best way to move forward to impact the poverty rates in Haiti would be to put people in charge of programs that know what they are doing and are extremely passionate about reducing poverty in other countries. These people should also be specifically trained for multiculturalism. I also believe that we should not just being throwing money into thousands of programs all going to the same country. Instead, there should be order and efforts concentrated on fewer programs that actually get things done.
Structural explanations are poorly built infrastructures. The people in charge of building and growing the economy are non-governmental organizations. They focus on micro projects. Macro projects and developments are insufficient and ineffective. They don't help everyone they need to. Micro projects may be more money efficient but they do not the benefit the community as a whole. There is no cohesion or even a sense of community! This is where it leads to cultural explanation. Culturally, the people of Haiti do not trust each other. They neglect their families and don't have morally good family practices. There is no social influence on responsibility. People of Haiti are not only growing up in poverty, but also without any social sense of reform. They don't know how to reform unless they are corrupt leaders.
Brooks' argument does make a lot of sense to me because the way their building structures are made reflects how their government is made. Their government doesn't have all the resources to build stable programs, thus unstable buildings and progress-resistant cultural values and practices. Secondly, although we've tried micro-community efforts and funding them with money, we need to increase intrusive paternalism. We need to start at their cultural rooted values. These will carry over into how they practice work ethics, social ethics, etc.
Other cultural/structural explanations regarding the earthquake tragedy in Haiti I would offer is not enough government programs, domestic and global. Haitians need domestic and global help. As a global aid, we need to help them build solid foundations--starting with social and cultural values and working up to building stronger buildings and help regulating government officials are ethical and non-corrupt. As domestic aid, the government needs to help create more programs and jobs that will help the people of Haiti to come out of poverty. They need to provide jobs with safe conditions. They need to provide cut backs on child care and to educate people on how to properly PROVIDE child care. Most importantly, there needs to be an increase in education--spending and supporting. Provide qualified teachers, updated books, etc.
The best way to move forward to impact the poverty rates in Haiti is to involve both global and domestic help. They need to start with polishing the cultural values and social responsibilities. There needs to be a sense of trust among other people, there needs to be more help on building stronger foundations--literally and metaphorically.
After reading Brook’s argument about Haiti’s poverty issue, I agree somewhat with what he had to say. It is absolutely devastating what recently happened in Haiti. But I agree with Blogger .308 that the fact that Haiti has been in extreme poverty and experiencing other problems in the country, that it made this tragedy even worse. I think that the poor construction of Haiti’s buildings made the earthquake have a stronger destruction on the country but at the same time, everyone needs to understand that this was the working of Mother Nature. Regardless of how poorly the buildings were built or the religious beliefs of the Haitians, Mother Nature is the one to blame for this destruction.
However, I feel that if Haiti truly wants to rebuild they are going to have to be willing to along with the help from the US and even other countries. Haiti’s culture could explain why they are so poor but we have to remember it is not the ONLY thing that has made the country so poor. But I feel that if Haitians cooperate and agree to make progress and not be resistant about it, they can rebuild their island to something much better then it ever was. I think that this would be the best way for Haiti to move forward. If they want to get out of living a poverty-ridden life then they need to be open-minded to the ideas and help of other countries. I think that if we help get Haiti even a little bit out of poverty, it would be a great place for vacation, which people would want to visit. If tourist began coming to Haiti they will create more jobs for Haitians and more money will come into the country.
While I agree with 259 in that in order to rebuild Haiti a large cultural change will have to take place. I am not sure that Haiti is necessarily a closed minded country, I think they just have lacked exposure and education to other aspects. Brooks mentioned introducing programs similar to Harlem’s Children’s Zone and No Excuses schools into the Haitian society, which I agree is a key way to help rebuild Haiti. Instead of focusing on the past and aging population, the US and other countries need to target the education of the younger population as they will ultimately make or break any progress made in rebuilding Haiti. Also while attracting tourists to help the Haitian economy is a great idea, I think that it may be problematic since they are so close to the Dominican Republic and cannot at this point compare to the attractions of the DR. In the future however, I think that could potentially help stabilize the economy but not necessarily rebuild it.
I agree with Brooks in that Haiti’s current devastation is not due to the history of oppression, slavery and corrupt dictatorships alone but that a progress resistant culture with “voodoo” religion, may be to blame. If people do not value planning, the future seems unimportant as well as today’s decisions. Child-rearing builds the future of a country. If values and tradition in Haiti do not foster a progressive environment, it’s people are perfectly okay with the conditions they are currently in. They would see no room for improvement perhaps because they know nothing else. In America we were driven from our hardships to success by the theory of an American Dream. The drive for something better is what made generations of people work so hard to build the privileges we have today. If you were never told you had an opportunity to be what you could be, would you even try? Brook’s argument about culture makes perfect sense to me. I am not arguing the “westernization” of every poor country. I believe however that there is something to be learned from every successful country or nation and that until you educate people progress doesn’t stand a chance. You don’t have to rid someone of their culture to foster change. You can stay true to your values and build on them in order to grow personally and nationally. I think the main reason for this is the idea that the people of Haiti have a strong feeling of social mistrust. There has never been a light at the end of the tunnel, a promising upward climb or even a dream. Years of conflict and corrupt government has made them all too comfortable in poverty. I think Haiti needs a confident leader to motivate the people to remain true to the culture but build their nation up to something positive. Haiti needs someone to light the fire in them and create a drive for a Haitian Dream.
I believe with the above blogger that the blame falls on a lack of education and exposure to other cultures. The people of Haiti are most likely more motivated then we think but do not have the education or tools at their disposal to make changes. I think the best way to move forward and combat poverty in Haiti is to focus the country on a dream, a vision of how they want their lives to be. I think a charismatic leader is needed to focus Haitians on the values of responsibility, personal achievement and accountability. The people of Haiti are not mongrels who raise children with no values, they are country that has only seen devastation. In order to rise out of the rubble Haitians need a reason to be inspired.
On top of the recent natural disaster in Haiti the people have experienced unfortunate conditions. Haiti is a nation that has suffered from cruel slavery and oppression. Haitians have a strong belief in voodoo practices that send negative messages such as life being futile. Haitian parents lack in good parenting traits resulting in a vast number of children being neglected. All these negative attributes add on to the poverty conditions in Haiti. Brooks’ argument makes a good point that simply sending money to solve poverty in Haiti hardly brings good results. The people need an intrusive paternalism that has proven to be the only affective method towards improving conditions in Haiti. Through training parents with good parenting skills will help the upcoming generation to make wiser decisions for the future.
After reading David Brooks’ article, I definitely think the horrors hit by Haiti is a structural issue. Brooks points out that the Dominican Republic and Haiti share the same border and have been through rough times, but for some reason the Dominican Republic is rising and growing. Obviously, no one is taking this country and leading them to a better future; I would venture to guess the main reason is that they do not have the resources there to do so, which is prohibiting them from rising above poverty. It is not the character of the people of Haiti, but rather the terrible situation the country is in that is keeping them in poverty. I agree with .313, Brooks does mention the views of the Haitians and accounts some of their poverty to be based on their beliefs, but like .313 says, these Haitians have been through so many tribulations that I believe they are some of the strongest people here today. Brooks states that the same magnitude earthquake hit in 1989 in Northern California, and a totally of 63 people died; when the Haiti earthquake shook, nearly 50,000 innocent people died. This is astonishing to think how we can’t take care of our fellow countries by helping them build better infrastructure buildings and providing these Haitians with opportunity. I think the only way to pull this country out of poverty is by uniting nations and donating money and people to build new schools, hospitals and other important buildings. This country needs a determined, ruthless and passionate leader to take these people and give them hope by building them up. These Haitians need job opportunities and structure in order to rise.
In reading the Brook's article, the part that stood out to me was the portion on cultural influences affecting the poverty there. I strongly agree that more institutions that are more progressive should be started there to give way to the "highly intensive culture of achievement." Many people when they donate money to organizations don't see where it is going or if it actually goes to the cause they're donating to. These programs are more proactive and less on passive in my opinion because I think we will be able to see a change. Personally in High school I traveled to Nicaragua to a very impoverished town where we brought supplies, clothes, and money to them. The most important thing about this program is that we started a program where the kids in schools get a hot meal for lunch that they usually wouldn't get at home. This lets them be more attentive and active so that when they do get an education, they have more of a chance of making something for themselves. These are the types of programs that make more of a tangible difference than texting money to the Red Cross. It will also be interesting to see how our nation deals with the earthquake that happened in Chili and if one crisis will overshadow the other because obviously the work in Haiti is not done. Will they hold a telethon for Chili? Will you be able to donate money by texting 'Chili'? Only time will tell what will happen there.
After reading Brooks’ article, the argument that Haiti’s structure is at fault became more clear. Haiti has experienced several structural problems that probably hindered its recovery. There is a large history of poverty and slavery in Haiti along with low funds for proper educations, parenting resources, and hospitals. The argument Brooks made that made the most sense was how some countries are just more progress resistant than others. I believe that is true, but if we can offer resources to help them become more progressive, it should be done. I understand Brooks’ other argument that countries should be left alone which will force them to rebuild themselves and recover; however, I don’t think it is that simple. Haiti’s structure is pretty far gone, further than China, Barbados, and the Dominican Republic which Brooks compared Haiti to. I think it is in the United States’ best interest to offer support to Haiti to give them a push in the right direction. We don’t have to just send money, but instead send actual resources they can use along with manpower to help them build better structures. Hopefully with useful resources like clothes, food, and textbooks, generations to come will learn to change the way the failed structures have run in Haiti because they will receive resources they may not have been able to use before.
The recent earthquake in Haiti left the small island nation devastated, scrambling for resources to treat survivors, and reliant on other countries as well as international aid organizations for relief. This event shed light on Haiti, the poorest nation in this hemisphere, and its already crumbling infrastructure. Despite the widespread devastation in Haiti some believe that this tragedy may provide opportunity to address the abject poverty already present in Haiti through permanent, positive structural changes to the country; while others like David Brooks, a columnist for the New York Times are not so convinced it is simply a matter of changing structures in Haiti but rather that it is necessary to also address deeply held cultural beliefs.
Read the op-editorial that David Brooks recently wrote for the New York Times discussing his ideas of the challenges facing Haiti in terms of both cultural and structural issues related to poverty. In class we are delving into the cultural and structural explanations for poverty. Discuss the merit of Brook’s argument by answering the following questions:
What are cultural explanations and/or structural explanations for the situation in Haiti? Which aspects of Brooks’ argument make the most sense to you and why? What other cultural and/or structural explanations regarding the earthquake tragedy in Haiti would you offer? What do you think is the best way to move forward to impact the poverty rates in Haiti? Why?
According to Brooks, the structural and cultural explanations for the devastating and unfortunate situation that occurred in Haiti are simply due to the fact that the country is poor. The lack of structurally sound buildings, transportation and communication, and public services, accounts for the structural explanation for the effect of the earthquake. The cultural explanation goes back to the history of repression, slavery, and colonialism that Haiti has experienced and continues to experience for a very long time. It is also a country that has the problem of progressing in many ways, such as practicing the voodoo religion and not acquiring certain values. The aspect of Brooks’ argument that makes the most sense to me is the structural explanation because it is what is most visible and rational to me. Obviously, if Haiti had the resources to have well-built structures, then the earthquake wouldn’t have had as much damage as it did; however, because Haiti doesn’t have those resources and the people in poverty, everything was much more likely to collapse and get damaged. Also, if Haiti had good infrastructure, then there would have been better ways to get the people out of harms way and into safety after the earthquake occurred. Another explanation that I believed accounted for the earthquake tragedy is the lack of hope that the Haitians have. Being the poorest country in the world, I feel as if, not necessarily that the people aren’t doing enough to get out of poverty all on their own, but that because they are so used to living in poor conditions, they won’t be willing enough to do anything about it. I think the best way to move forward to impact the poverty rates in Haiti is to continue to do what is currently happening right now: countries helping other countries in times of need. I think all there is to do is continue to raise awareness and money to help out the most that we can, and go out to Haiti and make changes directly.
David Brooks makes the interesting and relevant point that Haiti has “the most nongovernmental organizations per capita than any other place in the world.” Since there is no good governmental infrastructure organizing things, just giving the country money is not going to solve their problems. There is no one to organize the money and delegate where it will go. This is the aspect of Brooks argument that makes the most sense to me. I feel this way because it does not matter how much money a country might have, if they do not have anyone organizing it and putting it to good use, they might as well not have it. Many other students have commented in their blogs that clearly the poverty and poor construction of the buildings in the country are part of the reason there was so much devastation there. This goes back to Brooks point. If someone was there organizing and delegating money, maybe the results of this natural disaster would have been less tremendous. I feel the only way to move forward and impact the poverty rates there would be to send people, be it volunteers or Red Cross or some other organization to physically help out there. Bringing money and supplies is only have the battle, they need educated, hard working people to help them out in this time of great need.
I agree with what .313 wrote that the cultural explanation for the poverty really do not make sense. Also, it is true that there is no way Mr. Brook would know what their culture is like unless he actually goes there to experience their culture. So Mr. Brook cannot say that it is their culture that led them to poverty. Though their cultural belief might have had some impact on poverty, I don’t think he can be sure and say that it is their cultural belief that caused poverty.
In the beginning of the article, the comparison between the number of people who died from the earthquake in California and Hittites is made. Even with the same magnitude of the earthquake, the number of death is strikingly different. While there were only 63 people who died from the earthquake that occurred in California 20 years ago, there were estimate of 45,000 to 50,000 people who died from the earthquake in Hittites that occurred recently. Brook mentions that this tragedy is not merely a natural disaster, but a poverty disaster. Brook claims that countries suffering from poverty often lack resources and that the poorly constructed building, infrastructure, and public services are the elements that exacerbated the disaster and led to such a large number of deaths.
Besides, Brook also claims the traumatic disaster that resulted in large number of death and the ongoing poverty in Haiti that does not seem to get any better. Brook believes that the factors that contributed to poverty is the voodoo religion, which spreads the message that life is capricious and planning futile, and a complex web of progress-resistant cultural influences. Though the cultural belief might have had some partial impact on the poverty, but I think the structural reasons make more sense in explaining a traumatic disaster and the poverty. Poorly constructed buildings, lack of infrastructure, and public services seem more reasonable to explain the large number of death from the earthquake took place in Haiti. I think Brook is just trying to generalize that people in Haiti are “progressive resistant” and they respond to the traumatic disaster in indifferently way and they are contributing factors of poverty. But we don’t know for sure whether everyone there would respond in such way and even if most of people would respond in such way, there may be reasons behind why people would respond in such way. Maybe people might feel helpless realizing that they cannot do anything to help themselves. I think it is hard to come up with just one simple cause of the poverty. There may be a lot more complex reasons that cause poverty. We never know whether the corrupted government is preventing the aid and the money received from the other countries to be distributed to the people who are really in need, or the there may be bad job markets that prevent people from working and make money to buy food, or the land in that country maybe not arable and cannot cultivate crops.
I believe one way to help eradicate poverty is to find an effective way to really help people there. Instead of providing money directly, building a solid infrastructure could be one way to bring relief .By Building dependable roads, hospitals, aqueducts, electric grids, clean water and other essential services, not only people there would have access to them, but they will have opportunity to get a job. It is people over there who will most likely to maintain the infrastructure. I believe education could be another way to help them. By establishing an education system, more people there can become technician, doctors, engineers, and teachers instead of having people of such professions to come over from the developed countries to help them.
Brook's makes the argument that its a country's culture not political history that defines the depth of poverty within its borders. Other countries share similar political histories and hardships, however, their cultures define how they handle the situation and recover from the devastation.
Personally, I liked how Brook's compared and contrasted other countries who experienced similar devastations. He made an excellent point of showing that its not really based on political leadership but rather the values the country's culture has. This demonstrates a better understanding as to why some countries are better off than others.
I would have to agree with Brook's argument that throwing money at a situation does not really help as much as we wish it could. It only temporarily solves a problem that really needs to have a permanent long term solution. I think however, that not only should culture values be shifted in order to better handle a national crisis, but a group of experts should go in and set up long term goals incorporating longterm programs that incorporate both new cultural values to better assist while still maintaining their original ones.
I think there needs to be a group that goes into Haiti and educates them on how to deal with emergency crisis sitautions. Perhaps this organization could offer them jobs within this field while still educating them as well. This might then change the future dynamics for the country of Haiti because not only would they have more opportunities for employment but they will also have an education behind them.
I would then have to agree with another blogger that education and literacy is one of the best ways to combat poverty. Educating people can pave a way for a positive change in the future.
When talking about the structural explanation for the situation in Haiti, I can mostly agree with Brooks. As he stated, and many know, Haiti is a country that has been plagued by hardships, both political and economic. With a country that has experienced more than it's equal share of dictatorships, corruption, and political violence, there should be no wonder as to why the people of Haiti do not believe in their government. The government that Haiti has now is supposed to be a kind of democracy, a statement that cant be further from the truth when you look at Haiti's corruption levels. So as far as Haiti's structural issues go, I would have to agree with Brooks and say that there needs to be a major change within Haiti's government. It is not a government that works for it's people, but a government that works for the people who hold their places in office. This sight becomes all the more clearer when you look at Haiti's destroyed infrastructure. How is it possible for people living in that kind of system to believe in their government? I don't know. When it comes to Brooks' cultural explanation for the situation in Haiti, I would have to blatantly disagree. Brooks was speaking from a perspective of pure ethnocentrism. At this point I am not as much arguing that Haiti doesn't have " a complex web of progress resistant cultural influences", but more for their right to have just that. There are many cultures in this world that America and other more developed countries look at as progress resistant. For example, China's brilliant reasoning for taking over Tibet had to do with their "want" to bring economic development, legal advancement, and political progress. While this reasoning is obviously debatable for numerous reasons, they did in fact bring just that to Tibet. Tibet's life expectancy was raised by over 30 years as well as the general quality of life. But is it right to do that? To just rape a culture of it's values and instate your own, because you believe that this culture should be progressing and moving a long with the rest of the world. I don't believe so. Haiti's people have brought positive changed through revolution before and they can do it again, but on their own terms.In the greater scheme of things I would have to say that Haiti's poverty and the immense damaged that occurred is mostly if the fault of their government.
The explanations that Brooks’ gave for the situation in Haiti were poorly build buildings, bad infrastructure, and terrible public services. In my opinion all of Brooks’ claims were valid because they all can be related to the overall death count in one way or the other. In my experience with the Caribbean, houses are made with cinder blocks instead of bricks, which make them more susceptible to crumbling, and bringing down buildings, with an earthquake of that magnitude. With that being said, I would somewhat agree with .349 statement about the death count being affected by the poorly constructed homes. I would disagree with the statement because you can’t assume that the living situation of one family is the trend of living across the island. I would say that the overall death count was so massive because the earthquake brought down homes, schools, hospitals, and other various buildings filled with people.
I think that lack tourism and financial resources helped add to the devastation that the island faced. If the island had more tourism, as the Dominican Republic does, the death count might not have been as high. The tourism would give Haiti the opportunity to have more financial resources; these resources would be used to upkeep and renovate the buildings in order to keep the tourism coming back to the island. The best way for Haiti to move forward is to rebuild the island. This would help the island move forward because it would provide more work for the islanders that didn’t have any work before, and lower the poverty rates that they are presently facing because it is pushing more finances into the island.
The cultural explanations for the situation in Haiti are that the citizens of Haiti have fallen victim to oppression and exploitation from other countries. They were already a poverty stricken country. The structural explanation is that the government isn’t as established as other nations. Brooks points this out a compelling argument that the earthquake only called attention to an already existing poverty problem, by primarily comparing Haiti to California. Sixty-three people died in California, compared to nearly 50,000 in Haiti. This was a result of flawed buildings and structures, and an unprepared/underdeveloped medical response system. I agree with Brooks in saying that, if Haiti were a more developed country, then the earthquake would not have been so fatal. I believe that countries like Haiti are exploited by bigger nations for their resources and cheap labor. Brooks points out that no matter how much money we put into a poor country like Haiti, its economy is not striving from this money, other big nations are prospering from this aid. I believe that we need to train Haitian citizens to rebuild and provide for themselves, which will help the country not only get through this, but become a prosperous nation.
I think that Brook's pointed out an important factor that the culture and mentality of the people of Haiti needs to be modified. If they were receiving aid before the earthquake and were not making progress, there is only so much a government can do, which becomes a structural debate. Helping anyone in need can be compared to an addict. If an addict does not seek help for his/herself, the structural aid can not be forced up them even though the programs were made to help them. Before reading Brook's article, I solely believed that the previous and current conditions of Haiti were because of structural issues with the government not putting forth enough effort and Haiti being ignored by developed countries. Like many situations, the answer is not solely a structural or cultural issue. A problem such as poverty consist of both cultural and structural. The millions of dollars raised will hopefully go toward building Haiti safer buildings and homes. I do not think that is an issue with the culture of the Haitians. The money is definitely a factor when rebuilding an entire country. The Haitians are resilient and have overcome many hardships. This aspect of culture, along with the continuous aid from the world would hopefully advance Haiti out of poverty.
Post a Comment