Last week we put up and took down the following article because USA Today agreed to run it as an editorial. (Newspapers understandably like to have exclusivity until they run something.) They ran it yesterday, so we’ve put it back up.
I’ve also included the way it ran in USA Today to share the frustration writers have with word counts. My blog entry was 1,100 words, and the USA Today version about half that — 580 words. I’m thankful USA Today ran my piece and think they did a fine job of making it fit both physically and stylistically. But you can see the toll cutting the article back takes on its wholeness. Extra words give context, color, transitions, and a smooth flow of ideas. Newspapers have limited space. Plus, of course, my blog entry needed to read a little more mature for a national paper (and without the provocative title). The gist of my entry: aid’s nice…but deal honestly with the First World-imposed structural foundations of Haiti’s misery. In a move in that direction, just this week the US government has proposed forgiving Haiti’s international debt.
(If you click to the actual USA Today article, note how cool the hotlinks are to topics raised. And then read some of the comments. If you’re impressed by the intelligence of some of our legislators, these people are the electoral soil from where they grow.)
No Aid to Haiti (original blog entry) On Conan O’Brien’s final Tonight Show last week, he said, “Don’t be cynical. Cynicism is my least favorite trait.” I don’t want to be cynical. It’s not constructive. But on that spectrum between frustrated and cynical, I’m not in a very good place right now.
Just hours before that show, the four big networks joined together to broadcast a telethon to raise emergency aid for Haiti. America cares. We’re coming to the rescue. When people are in need, it brings out the best in the American people — regardless of our politics, we are united in support. Locally, my church is collecting “health kits for Haiti.” There’s a button on its website to help raise money. I’m inspired by the outpouring of goodwill. It’s good and necessary and motivated by love.
But at the same time, I’m troubled that no one seems to be asking why Haiti is so wretchedly poor to begin with — so poor that even their presidential palace can be toppled by an earthquake. As soon as the passion of this moment fades, the US government will continue contributing to repressive trade policies that keep places like Haiti impoverished. Am I the only one disillusioned…concerned that almost nobody — especially those in our media or government — is talking about this?
Charity is good. It helps people. It feels good. It’s easy to do, and easy to understand. But addressing the roots of structural poverty is the real challenge. A Toys for Tots-type organization collecting toys (“new and in their original packaging please”) brings cheer to poor kids who might not otherwise have a happy Christmas. And while caring people head to the mall with a longer shopping list, our society scuttles an opportunity to help those same families not to be impoverished by health care expenses. Again: simple charity…structural poverty.
During tough economic times or when dealing with the human suffering caused by natural disasters at home or abroad, each of us is confronted with a personal choice. You can: ignore; respond; or ask why, learn, and act to address the root of problem. Most good people take door #2. It’s human nature.
Nobody wants to open door #3. But we must. For example, seismic safety is a luxury only the privileged can afford. While the numbers aren’t in yet on Haiti’s quake, in 2001 a similar quake hit El Salvador and left nearly a quarter of the country (1.5 million people) homeless. (2001 was a momentous year for the USA, but imagine…a quarter of your country homeless.) An earthquake of the same magnitude hit my hometown that same year, and no one died. I was at work in our new-at-the-time building and remember riding it out like a hobby horse (suddenly thankful for the code requirements that made me spend extra for construction that could withstand such a quake). The best those living in a Haitian shantytown can afford for earthquake protection is to live in what’s called “miniskirt housing” — cinderblocks for the lower half of the wall, and light corrugated tin for the upper walls and roof. When a miniskirt house tumbles down, at least it won’t kill you.
We can blame Haiti’s squalor on voodoo, on its heritage of slavery, on corruption, on the fact that its main export is topsoil (in a treeless land, each rainstorm flushes precious soil into the sea), or on many other factors. But we must also look at American and European trade policies that help keep nations like Haiti underdeveloped — tariffs that help keep them “banana republics.”
A banana republic is a poor land whose economy is dominated by the export of its leading natural resource. It’s subjugated by First World trade policies that allow it to export raw materials but not finished products. Higher tariffs for processed goods make it nearly impossible to export anything but cheap raw materials to the already-developed world competitively. Put simply, Haiti can export raw sugar but not candy. Ghana can export cocoa but not chocolate bars. Honduras can export peanuts but not peanut butter. Compounding that are subsidies for American agricultural products. Haiti would love to compete fairly for the American market with its sugar, rice, and textiles, but tariffs and subsidies created by our government (to protect you and me) make it impossible. In Haiti, you’ll see fields that once grew rice now left unplanted. And across the street, a shack sells rice grown in the USA.
That is an example of structural poverty put upon countless millions of people, in part by the trade policies of the wealthy world. Sure, it may be good business for us in the short term. But having squalor south of our border may not be in even the greediest American’s self-interest in the long term.
The most widely used term for poor countries these days is “the Developing World.” But I find that label ironic, since so many First World economic policies systematically and actively keep places like Haiti underdeveloped. (The chapter on El Salvador in my Travel as a Political Act book explains this more thoroughly.)
OK, I guess I am cynical. (I think that feeling’s stoked by the growing power of corporations to shape policies that impact real people — like the Haitians our hearts will go out to for next week or so. Even before everyone was dug out of the rubble that was once Port au Prince, the US Supreme Court gave American corporations the constitutional right to be protected as individuals. That means they have the right to buy our government in the name of “free speech.” I fear our “democracy” is fast becoming one with a government still “by, for, and of the people” — but via the corporations we own. And, as that happens, why would our government ever reconsider these trade policies?)
Give aid or deal with the roots of the problem? That’s the question. Mother Teresa inspired us to feed the poor. Like everyone else, I loved her. El Salvador’s Archbishop Oscar Romero asked what were the roots of his nation’s poverty. He was shot. Today, my pastor worked a slide show on Haiti into his sermon: a series of horrific scenes of squalor. The last frame read: “Haiti before the earthquake.”
On my last trip south of our border, I heard a local troubadour sing: “It’s not easy to see God in the orphan child who cleans the windshields at a traffic light…but we must.” So what do we do? I’m not sure. We can ask ourselves how costly it would be for the US to allow free trade so poor countries can compete with us.
We can learn more about these issues. And we can support Bread for the World — see www.bread.org — which lobbies courageously, effectively, and against great odds for friendlier trade policies for people like the Haitians.
Here’s how the same piece ran in USA Today:
Haiti: Behind Door No. 3, difficult questions await
When people are in need, it brings out the best in Americans. But at the same time, no one seems to be asking why Haiti had become so wretchedly poor to begin with — before the earthquake awakened the world. And as soon as the passion of this moment fades, the U.S. government, and others, will continue pursuing repressive trade policies that help keep places like Haiti poor.
When dealing with human suffering, each of us is confronted with a personal choice. You can (1) ignore; (2) respond; or (3) ask why, learn and act to address the roots of the problem. Most good people take Door No. 2. Charity is easy to do, easy to understand and easy to feel good about. It genuinely helps people in need. Meanwhile, few want to open Door No. 3. But we must. Addressing the roots of structural poverty is more challenging, but ultimately can be more effective.
We can blame Haiti’s chronic poverty on its heritage of slavery, on corruption, or on the fact that its main “export” is topsoil (in a treeless land, each rainstorm flushes precious soil into the sea). But we must also examine global trade policies that help keep nations like Haiti “banana republics,” poor lands whose economies are often dominated by the export of their leading natural resource. These countries are subjugated by First World trade policies that allow them to export raw materials, but not finished products.
Historically, higher tariffs on processed goods make it nearly impossible for less-developed countries to export anything truly profitable. Put simply, Haiti can export raw sugar but not candy. Ghana can export cocoa but not chocolate bars. Countries in Latin America can export peanuts but not peanut butter.
Domestic subsidies for U.S. agricultural products also hamper development in poor nations. Haiti would love to compete fairly for the U.S. market with its sugar, rice and textiles, but tariffs and subsidies (to protect American businesses) make it almost impossible. In Haiti, fields that once grew rice sit unplanted. And across the street, a shack sells rice grown in the USA.
Having desperately needy people south of our border is in no American’s self-interest. For one thing, these policies contribute to a dilapidated status quo that amplifies the impact of natural disasters, which demand a costly international response.
And so, as Americans choose Door No. 2 (respond), let’s also peek behind Door No. 3, which requires long-term thinking. While signing your Haiti charity check, ask how costly it would be for the U.S. to allow free trade so that poor countries could fairly compete with us. Make a point to learn about the economics of structural poverty. And then support organizations that advocate for the nations kept down by First World debt, subsidies and tariffs. For example, Bread for the World lobbies effectively for friendlier global trade policies. On my last trip south of our border, I heard a local troubadour sing: “It’s not easy to see God in the child who cleans the windshields at a traffic light … but we must.” We have all been moved by images of people whose lives have been ripped apart in Haiti. Now let’s try to empathize with how grindingly difficult those lives were in the days, months and years before that disaster.
At my church service last Sunday, my pastor showed us a slide show of horrific scenes of squalor. The last frame read: “Haiti before the earthquake.”
What a hatchet job…does anyone wonder why newspaers are going the way of the dinosaur?
That was newspapers.
Wow! The comments over at USA Today are hair raising! Rick, what’s up with that?
I just read the version of the Haiti blog that ran in USA Today and my reaction was: USA Today – no guts! It must have been frustrating to see some of the most provocative and passionate comments edited out, no matter why they said they were doing it. Having said that, while I expected some negative responses, I was surprised at the number of hostile and sometimes venomous responses the article elicited. If you put the comments that ran in the paper next to the comments the original blog generated on this web site, it is really easy to see why it seems to be almost impossible to get anything meaningful done politically in this country these days. The act of “finding common ground” for problem solving seems to be sadly uncommon today.
In the comments to Rick’s USA Today op-ed, I believe we are reading feedback from readers who feel marginalized. Banks, insurers, car companies, Wall Street, our own very poor and the people of Haiti and Iraq are being helped. But the people who write scathing notes may perceive themselves as among the ignored middle class representing 15.3 million underemployed or unemployed. Some may be in agriculture and fear losses of jobs to third world countries. People are generous and compassionate when they feel they are being treated fairly, less so when they feel the fix is in. Nothing in Rick Steves’ op-ed was unreasonable. He just touched a nerve he may not have realized is so raw. Unfortunately, it’s rare for our bumper-sticker media to present all sides of an issue in any depth. We as a people are also not known for delving patiently and persistently into key issues – witness health care, Islam, regulation of financial institutions, wars. We elect representatives to sort thru that for us and for our efforts we get crony capitalism influenced by lobbyists. Rick writes: “Legislators_ _ _these people are the electoral soil from where they grow” But in fairness, some others might say they are the “grassroots.”
Yes, Haiti before the earthquake was already a disaster. It’s difficult for us in the USA to imagine a country where only 1 or 2% of the population have more than $10/day to live on. Throwaway money for us. And then what little infrastructure they had collapses around them. I thought USA Today was pretty gutsy to run even the edited version of Rick’s post.
At first I thought it was a good editing job – much tighter, and got the main points across. But reading just a few comments it’s crystal clear the point about trade policy did NOT get across. But is that the fault of the article or the fault of the readers? It’s so much easier to blame people for being poor than to understand why – but that’s the problem with Door #3, of course. Kudos for trying!
I think Rick’s points did get across to those who responded to his op ed in the USA Today edition on 4 Feb.- and they didn’t agree with him. Of course, people tend to react more strongly to those they don’t agree with. So while the comments we saw may have surprised us, we will also never know how many more may have agreed and did not feel the need to reply. With great respect to most who write to Rick on his website, they seem to be fans who agree with most of what he says. Those who take strong exception may not know enough or write well enough to respond persuasively, may have pigeon-holed him politically, or feel they will get no sympathy from the majority of his supporters.
I read thru the USA Today comments on Rick’s article and saw some of the usual hostility and anger to any point of view that suggests that US policy causes problems for others. But I also read several supportive replies which had many recommendations that supported Rick’s article. So he did pretty well I would say compared to the vitriol I see regularly in the political blogs.
Once again – Steves focuses on his “hate America first” attitude! What do you want the US to do that you can’t do? Why don’t you take all your money there, spend the rest of your life helping them rise to your level? That is something only a high-minded person could do – someone similar to you such as John Edwards. Go ahead, you CAN make a difference. Do it tomorrow, don’t just tell everyone else what THEY need to do with their money and time and politics!!! You are just another guy that got his and now feels some entitlement to think for everyone else rather than putting yourself in gear to get your policies enacted on your own. Just one more AMAZING, continuing example of gaining the pulpit then bashing the route that got you there. Just go to Haiti, spend a few years and fix it with your money, time and policies.
To Joe C… Grow up and get over yourself. The USA (and other well developed countries) do make policies that keep countries such as Haiti in an economic quagmire. This is a fact and there are advantages and disadvantages to these policies. Rick was just pointing out some of the disadvantages and providing another means of looking at the issues. Constructive criticism of any political system is a must to maintain a healthy balance. Remember, Hitler was not some autocratic nut job, but someone who was voted in by the people in a democratic system. These very same people were very quick to put down any constructive criticism that would upset the current policies of his administration. In fact, years of propaganda encouraged neighbour to turn in neighbour if they even hinted at constructive criticisms. Constructive criticism was seen as being anti-German. Just Google the words propaganda and Hitler and you can view the very posters and radio clips encouraging such behaviour. If you feel any pressure to empty your pockets and that makes you angry, that’s your issue, not Ricks. If you were truly interested in thinking of the possibilities as suggested in his article, you may already be emptying out your pockets but a much different way.
How can people read my article and think I want to give Haiti more of our money and how can people think it’s America bashing? Good people who haven’t sought out an understanding of the fundamentals of Developing World poverty as it relates to trade policy simply won’t be exposed to these ideas by our media. Being wealthy citizens of a wealthy country is a fine thing to be or stive to be. Adding to our wealth with repressive trade policies enforced on desperately poor people in places like Haiti is not necessary. I think most Americans are good and caring people who have yet to learn how our policies impact places south of our border. Talking about that is not America bashing.
Hi Rick, Good article, the original version, and your point is well taken. I remember also your chapter on this in “Travel as a Political Act.” I am all for giving aid to help those in need, but I am also a firm believer that we must stop having such negative policies that enrich us at the expense of others. It is shameful behavior and one that continues to happen, yet did not Jefferson and the Founding Fathers argue about the unfair trading practices and laws of Great Britain that were impounded on the 13 colonies? And, did we not go to war over this? Yes, and then once that war was over we began to implement America favored policies over the rest of the continent, policies that continued to enslave African Americans and push out the Native Americans and marginalize the Hispanics living in what would become, eventually border states. We Americans have a hard time seeing our faults, and I could go on with the history of American policy at home and abroad that has done more harm than good. Just the other day I was teaching students in a university level class about the Japanese American internment period, and all of the students had NEVER had never read or learned about that unfair moment in American history until now. Oh, and by the way, for those who want to attack my comments, please realize that I am proud to be an American, but I also don’t look at America with “rose colored glasses.” Lack of education and a fundamental belief that we should rule the world through policy whether others like it or not has become the more dominant way of thinking in America.
I know people who have served our government with distinction. They are charitable. They believe in the golden rule. Yet they unwaveringly believe in U.S. policy (as long as it is highly conservative policy) right or wrong. It is hard for me to conceive that highly educated, highly productive, seemingly caring citizens can be so rigid. But maybe that’s exactly the point we are missing. Maybe people who perceive themselves as patriots see the world only thru the prism of their own beliefs and will never yield to another idea? Incidentally, these people have traveled and lived all over the world in all kinds of conditions. So when Rick writes that he can’t see how some can read his articles and come up with the mis-perceptions they do, maybe he has been sheltered from part of Americana? Maybe not the best parts, but insulated nevertheless.
Rick It’s time you ran for politics.You could start local then state then national. Your articles are great but you can do more in political office. Train someone else to run the day to day business at ETBD. You could sit on the board. You would then be able to work as a politician to implement your many ideas. You have my vote.
Whether people end up agreeing with Rick’s points or not, these points have to be raised so that people are at least aware. I love America, but it drives me crazy how insular we have let ourselves become, how little we know of what goes on in other countries, and how ignorant we often remain of our own history. And I don’t understand why pointing out the ill effects of our extremely pro-corporate agendas is somehow seen as being irrelevant at best, or un-American at worst. Thank you, Rick, for helping bring awareness to this issue, and for being willing to be criticized simply for doing so! Too bad about the hatchet job.
Ok so Haiti receives about 490 million dollars in revenue from exports 68% of that is from the US bought. Looking at the top 5 GDP per capita Qatar, Luxembourg, Norway, Brunei and Singapore, US is number 6. I don’t see how the fault rests soley with the US and European countries. If Dubai was so intent on building man-made islands in the shape of the world in palm trees, they could of avoided dredging the bottom of local sea floor, causing who knows what kind of ecological damage and purchased tons of top soil from Haiti. Also why aren’t the environmentalists screaming about that. Look pointing the finger at two countries and saying its “All” their fault while ignoring all the others who haven’t contributed one cent to Haiti’s economy is ridiculous. Hopefully we can work together to solve these problems. How long would you let your two kids argue with each other before you stepped in. Who will step up and settle the bickering between Dems and Reps and will we have torn each other to pieces by then. Best Wishes.
Interesting that no one has brought up the fact that many 3rd world countries are governed by repressive dictatorships, as Haiti has been in the past. Common sense tells me that that is likely a strong contributing factor as well, not just the policies of rich countries.
An excellent New York Times article on the history of Haiti: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/opinion/22danner.html?pagewanted=1&sq=Haiti history&st=cse&scp=1
Nice article. But, it still glosses over the responsibility of other nations. I believe it was Spain and France who colonized Haiti and played a part in some of the largest atrocities. Yet at the end of the article we are expected to expand the trade bill established in 2008 by Bush. France and Spain could very easily step up and return some of the reparation money that Haiti was forced to pay over the years or in lieu of payment create a substantial trade bill with Haiti. Right now unemployment is through the roof and people are losing their homes. If we can’t take care of our own citizens how can we be expected to fix another country.
And now the trans-racial adoption issue has reared up. Many Haitians and Americans are upset by the fact 10 white Americans attempted to adopt 33 Haitian children to save them from the chaos. Yet Haiti reportedly has a history of selling its own children. How much will we do as a nation to help this badly broken country?
Well-written, Rick. Your article brings to surfact another angle of the situation in Haiti and other countries. It gets people thinking which is good. Take care.
Oops, a spelling boo-boo…surfact should be surface. :)
Firstly, this is the first comment I leave on your blog so I have to tell you that I am a huge fan of your work. I catch your shows on public television as often as I can and I am right now planning a trip to croatia with your guide book. The planning is nearly as much fun as the traveling will be. Thank you! As an experienced traveller with knowledge of the world, surely you must have noticed something general about the human existence: for the vast majority of people, through most of time life has been rough. It has consisted of hard work, unfair treatment, high risk of death from simple infectious diseases or childbirth, starvations for long periods of time, cruelty, rape, and exploitation just to name a few. Good times have been few and far between. The logical question is: how do we change conditions? You seem to suggest that action from the USA, Europe and other parts of the developed world is needed, in form of different ways of trading, etc. In my opinion there is no evidence to suggest that anything outside a country or a people itself will change conditions in a lasting way. It simply has to come from within, as it did in the Western Civilization some 200 years ago. Any attempt at being the great benefactor in 3rd world countries smacks of condescending missionary work. We’re not satisfied with better living conditions, the poor must embrase our new uniting ideology: democracy. This was an attempt at shining light on the issue from a different angle. Thank you again for the excellent work you do in your travel books and TV programs! Ida
Rick, the news media does not want to bring up the fact that the majority of Haitians (and Jamaicans and others in the Carribean) are descended from slaves who were brought over from Africa to raise sugar cane in Haiti for the rum trade. It simply isn’t politically correct to discuss it. I think it’s time there was a dialogue in America about slavery and the fact that it was the slave trade of the 17th and 18th centuries that brought black people to the New World to begin with. While some of their descendants in the 21st Century have the same freedoms and equality as white people like me, so many others live in the same conditions experienced by their ancestors. Free? Only in the sense that slavery is outlawed today. My ancestor was a wealthy plantation owner in Virginia named Rober Carter. A genteel, educated, church-going man, but he owned slaves. I’ve seen the documents. Am I to blame? Of course not, but at the same time I believe I have a responsibility as an American to consider the plight of Haitians and others whose ancestors experienced the horrible condition of slavery. I often wonder what it would be like to grow up a black child — to be told at some point in your life that your ancestors came to the New World unwillingly, chained to a boat with a future that most likely would never include the potential for entrepreneurship, home ownership, personal freedom and other things that most people consider synonomous with being American. Thanks for your article, Rick — there’s much truth in it that needed to be said.