[Buddha-l] Re: "So much for tsunami dana"

[jkirk]

> On 11/10/05 JKirk rewrote:
>
> : The more local the organizing, the better chance they might have to 
> escape
> : corruption because the more local, the more visible.
> : In the case of Sri Lanka and other Asian areas, I doubt if such 
> organization
> : will happen or that any of it will be corruption-free. Civil society in
> : these countries is weak.
>
> I recall a recent UN report that estimated that, of the 10 billion dollars 
> sunk
> into Cambodia by international agencies over the last decade, only 1 
> billion had
> reached the target - i.e. desperately poor Cambodian people. Spectacular!
>
> Is not what we call corruption pretty much the norm in traditional 
> societies?
> (The use of status/power to generate revenue.)
---------
I agree with this analysis--we can see it also at work right here in the US, 
where crony
business companies of the Bush administration got contracts for rebuilding 
New Orleans, and special exemptions from paying regular wages--lower wages 
became OK. This has now attracted hordes of workers from Mexico who are 
willing to work for much less, thus denying not only local businesses, but 
local workers, from rebuilding jobs. Local New Orleans businessmen are now 
raising hell about it, but i doubt if they will be heard by the status/power 
factions. JK
-------------
My interest in this question is
> really how best I might offer aid. Via a local agency of some kind is all 
> very
> well while that agency survives the disaster event. The vihara I mentioned 
> was
> only partially demolished by the tsunami and therefore half survived and 
> could
> still function, but events in Kashmir surely have eliminated some of the 
> very
> agencies that we might have supported?
>
> In broader terms, I feel driven to the conclusion that the best recourse 
> for me
> is to engage in direct personal dana - which curiously, I feel embarrassed 
> by -
> doubtless my cultural conditioning operating here. When I resort to 
> impersonal
> giving, via a charity or regular bank debits, I tend to feel that I am
> contracting out my generosity.  Like I am trying to shut it away in a 
> cupboard
> to allow my conscience to feel at ease.  But maybe giving has an 
> uncomfortable
> edge for the donor?
>
> Andrew
==============
Can ways of offering dana really be regularized into one particular MO? I 
doubt it. We give as we can and as we see is fitting. I personally am not 
giving to any international agencies any more, except Medecins sans 
Frontieres, because the rest have such poor track records, or their help 
inevitably ends up in corrupt hands as unsupervised giving. IMO let the 
multi-millionaire Saudis help out Pakistan, where they've spent millions 
already on building madressahs on every block, and the multimillionaire 
Indians (like the Tatas and other wealthy families) help the Kashmiris. 
Local is better, more responsible, perhaps. I'm off to donate to my local 
Red Cross, which is suffering because most of the mil. they raised around 
here went to hurricane aid, and their ability to help locals here has been 
significantly reduced.
Joanna