Some people believe that charity organizations should give aid to those in greatest need, wherever they live. Some people believe that the charity organizations would better concentrate on helping people who live in own country instead. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
It is highly disputable whether the objects of the remedy measures of philanthropic groups should be the destitute at home or the refugees abroad. As far as I am concerned, the answer relies on where the charities are.
Philanthropic organizations of developed countries should reach out to the foreign penurious. To assist those in need is to help the almsgivers themselves, since globalization makes nations closely bonded and much more interactive than ever before. Blue tongue, for example, initially found in South Africa, later attacked European countries such as Netherlands, Brazil, France and Germany. Timely provisions by charities to South Africa the medical donations and personnel might have controlled the spread of infections and prevented consequent tragedies.
Another reason for the charities of the first world to do so is that the laggard regions need more than money. Only with the support from within, backward countries can barely deal with issues concerning education and technology. Well-educated Western pedagogues and advanced textbooks sent by charitable organizations could break the educational vicious circle in underdeveloped countries. What’s more, the introduction of high-tech products such as LED will enable those poverty-stricken areas to foster economy effectively and efficiently.
In contrast, for philanthropists in impoverished countries, priorities should be given to recipients of their own regions. It is utopian to look after the penniless around the world, because the budget is limited, and there are simply too many issues to be resolved. Currently, to provide for itself is what can be expected most from the third world, let alone worrying about those better off.
In conclusion, charitable organizations of affluent societies should extend their financial wealth and technological advantage to poverty-stricken areas while those of impecunious communities should focus on improving their own performances.
Globalisation has become and irreversible trend, which can be shown in different aspects, including international aid. while some people claim charity organisation should focus on residents in their own countries, I would argue their responsibility should go beyond that.
Obviously, the whole world is developing into an international community and a variety of resources are increasingly shared by global citizens as fuel energy, education and medical services. If charities could lend a help to those foreigners who are in desperate help, they would give their support in return once in need and this would go beyond the individual level or organisational level to the national level, which means recipient countries may also help donor countries in corresponding perspectives.
Another point is that delivering international aid can also help to establish a good reputation globally, especially when some natural disasters happen, which also displays the principle of humanitarianism. Some disasters are inevitable and it is still quite common to see the reports in respect to was and other calamities. Although we can hardly prevent these tragedies, there is something we can do to relieve the situation and charities should take the responsibility.
On the other hand, those who maintain aid from charity organisations should be restricted to their own people deem that resources are limited and helping people overseas may harm the interest of their own country, For instance, developing countries are still concerned about their own development in the aspects of finance or even food and clothing. Without the help from charities, those living in poor areas would face starving and poverty.
From my perspective of view, international aid should be encouraged and charity organisations should take the responsibility of helping those who are in need regardless of their nationalities. Nevertheless, if it conflicts with their own interests to a great extent, they should ensure the well-being of their own people first.