I'll scratch my back, You scratch Yours
Looking at the CIDA website, the website of an organization devoted to funding international development.
just a quick comment on it, because i have to get back to the struggle between being critical of the organization and its policies and be inundated with its indoctrinary propoghanda.
firstly, there is a link in the header: want to do business. this speaks volumes about a facet of what is happening here. i ask You: is this just some savy sounding quip used as a link, or is it a freudian slip about the true intentions of CIDA?
just now i was in my Development class discussing the altruistic intentions versus obvious/hidden kick-backs of CIDA's development policies. there seems to be a small sentiment that this work is only being done, and only done in a certain way so that some of the benefits flow back into Canada.
how selfish is this? the perspectives brought out in the class discussion were that Canadians as stack-holders in the publicly funded CIDA programmes couldn't be expected to just give away that money.
and my question is how can they set up the programs so as to insure there is a return benefit?
there seems to be a missing element in this rationalization. they are requiring some immediate return on their investment, or by somehow holding back all they have to give they think they will benefit more than if they give their all. when the true law of reciprocity that works in creation, operates to maximum effect only when all is given. the return may not be as immediate, but it will be more beneficial ultimately, because something will give back to You all they have and it may be more than You had.
secondly, under the What We Do section there is a link real progress. here they have listed some of the indicators that "development" is working. i can't help but agree that there is some substantial progress being made. some of these indicatators are very heart-warming. however their is a twinge of irony in how they share these developments. they link developments in literacy, drinkable water and food security to my daily life experience. to me this is not a very good example because (and maybe i'm taking to much for granted) i live in a "developed" country where these haven't been problems long before development became a distinct field of concern to the international community. or, at least, these problems were taken care of for people in my country back while imperialism and colonialism were still wreacking havoc with the world, and actually were then causing the gap between First and Third World countries. so You see, these indicators could also be seen as indicators of benefits, the colonialism rampage exploited out those nations that are now called "under-developed."
maybe You see my sceptisim.
just a quick comment on it, because i have to get back to the struggle between being critical of the organization and its policies and be inundated with its indoctrinary propoghanda.
firstly, there is a link in the header: want to do business. this speaks volumes about a facet of what is happening here. i ask You: is this just some savy sounding quip used as a link, or is it a freudian slip about the true intentions of CIDA?
just now i was in my Development class discussing the altruistic intentions versus obvious/hidden kick-backs of CIDA's development policies. there seems to be a small sentiment that this work is only being done, and only done in a certain way so that some of the benefits flow back into Canada.
how selfish is this? the perspectives brought out in the class discussion were that Canadians as stack-holders in the publicly funded CIDA programmes couldn't be expected to just give away that money.
and my question is how can they set up the programs so as to insure there is a return benefit?
there seems to be a missing element in this rationalization. they are requiring some immediate return on their investment, or by somehow holding back all they have to give they think they will benefit more than if they give their all. when the true law of reciprocity that works in creation, operates to maximum effect only when all is given. the return may not be as immediate, but it will be more beneficial ultimately, because something will give back to You all they have and it may be more than You had.
secondly, under the What We Do section there is a link real progress. here they have listed some of the indicators that "development" is working. i can't help but agree that there is some substantial progress being made. some of these indicatators are very heart-warming. however their is a twinge of irony in how they share these developments. they link developments in literacy, drinkable water and food security to my daily life experience. to me this is not a very good example because (and maybe i'm taking to much for granted) i live in a "developed" country where these haven't been problems long before development became a distinct field of concern to the international community. or, at least, these problems were taken care of for people in my country back while imperialism and colonialism were still wreacking havoc with the world, and actually were then causing the gap between First and Third World countries. so You see, these indicators could also be seen as indicators of benefits, the colonialism rampage exploited out those nations that are now called "under-developed."
maybe You see my sceptisim.
posted by Dana Kittilsen @ 6:06 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home