The following is an essay I wrote for the 2007-2008 SEVEN Fund Essay Contest for which I was a finalist. The essay was fun to write and helps explain my belief in Tegu as a force of positive change in Honduras. Read on if you dare:

Independent of ideology, I believe that every decent human being in our world today is willing to make some personal sacrifice in order to, as Bono says, “Make poverty history.” Increasingly during the past few decades of global economic expansion, provocative literature has suggested that indeed a small financial contribution by a few million Western households will lead to the abolition of poverty. While useful for sizing certain societal ills: X billion dollars will cure malaria, Y billion dollars will provide clean drinking water for all Africans, and Z billion dollars will give all children basic education, this literature offers little practical use. Why? These books simplify poverty into an issue that can be solved by brute wealth redistribution of an imagined fixed number of economic goods, in spite of the fact that collectivist reform has never worked in world history.

Economic collectivism clearly failed in the Soviet Union and China, and is currently failing in Zimbabwe. Despite this appalling record, people continue to propose similar schemes as the solution to worldwide poverty. Why do we fall into this trap so consistently? The answer lies in our guilt and our desire to assuage it. Wealth, more specifically wealth disparity, gives rise to personal and societal guilt. We feel pity for those who are less fortunate and desire to do something about it. Most often we deal with these feelings by giving away some portion of our wealth directly through personal donations or indirectly through government. This is supposed to make us feel better, but what does it do for the plight of the poor?

In most cases, we fail to take the time to see what happened to our money, and some never know if their dollars made any difference in the world. We avoid following up for many petty reasons. First, we prefer the path of least resistance. Since follow up takes effort, we tend to avoid it. For example, if my wife were hospitalized I would immediately be at her bedside. Contrarily, if my friend’s wife were hospitalized I would feel compelled to visit, but would likely just send flowers. Too often, we opt for sending flowers because it is easy. Second, our charity is often more about our guilt than their plight. Once we give, we feel better about ourselves and wishful thinking helps us believe our money made a difference. Third, we fear learning about how our actions perpetuate a system of handouts and external dependency. Follow up might reveal how our charity has convinced people that Western welfare is more rewarding than working. Without follow up, we cannot hope to make any significant progress.

(more…)