Re. the conflict of interestings, maybe Lorde could phone it in - by way of live feed to a not-particularly-big screen?
Also: I enjoyed this tear it down and put it back together acapella.
Who’s watching from the sidelines?
Many, many, many people.
I wasn't accusing you directly Lilith and I apologise if that was how I came across. I know the PA community is full of really good people, but it is a small sub-section of society and is certainly not representative of society as a whole.
You’re not making a great case for tolerance here!
I wasn't really trying to but I see your point and apologise for getting a bit ranty. I guess my point was that while critiquing the methods organisations use to try and alleviate suffering is all well and good and important, the scale of the actual suffering is so horrific and entirely solvable if only it was deemed of higher priority than nit-picking the tactics that some are using. Everyone is welcome to step up and use what they believe to be the best methodology in addressing the issues, but I find it hard to be tolerant of those who criticise and then continue to watch from the sidelines.
I agree with everyone who has said that poverty is something we are all responsible for addressing, but the reality is that most people seem to find the problem too big to engage with or that those suffering have somehow deserved it and it's not their problem.
I guess the main source of my frustration here is that some commentators have dismissed the Live Below the Line campaign as tokenism with little impact on the overall picture, and I find that to be somewhat distressing and, from my limited experience, entirely untrue.
And what are you playing there fella? Still off-topic and seemingly with a personal bone to pick. Don't you remember me, I once said you'd make a great president?
It shouldnt be an industry it should be what we do as a matter of course.
But we don't so do-gooders try and pick up the slack.
But surely it is still doing something and that's the change you want, no? However clumsy or patronising or whatever judgement is made upon it, it is something tangible and relatively timely for really hungry people.
you made me
Praise is a mighty motivator for some. The fact is they’re doing something, not nothing, for a change and that generally feels good. Some good will come of it. Why is it naff?
(I have helped by endeavouring to not bring any caramel slice into the office)
That’s what I take issue with, right there.
How can this not seem like tokenism?
Admittedly a bit flippant Lilith, but the reality is that a large amount of money will be raised that would otherwise likely not have been - due to the impact of the campaign and the fact that it draws people in and gets them participating. Doesn't every little bit count and, god forbid, it may just be an idealistic means to an end. How much real damage is done in tokenistic behaviour as opposed to the tangible alleviation of immediate suffering in some poor bastard's life half way around the world? It strikes me as highfalutin concern trolling to weigh one up against the other.
Anyway, I was supposed to be making a shamefaced withdrawal and you made me rant all over the place again.
I've made a terrible mistake.
My earnest rant above is completely codswallopy. Kind of. I was defending a different campaign - Eat So They Can - which is also run by my colleagues (told you I was new). However, I've come to realise that the original post was more to do with eating disorders than objectively assessing poverty reduction campaigns - so I spoke out of turn.
So...ahem...as you were.