"I always smile when a Westerner announces their noble, selfless plans to help poor unfortunates in what we call 'a third world country.' Invariably, they return home from their volunteer vacation suitably chastened, not sure who helped whom."

This is a quote from the article that I have been discussing in my last two posts. There is much that can be said about this one line: the obvious smugness of the smile, the condescending tone as she describes the "noble, selfless plans" of volunteers, but also the validity of the argument that perhaps the volunteer benefits as much or more than the recipients of the volunteer's efforts. That is, afterall, the thesis of her article - travel as a learning experience. Sure, the volunteer may set out with an inflated idea of what can be accomplished. Volunteering abroad is an important reality check. But whereas the blogger seems to downplay the needs in the Third World, others might find that the magnitude of the problems actually exceeds our preconceptions.

Take for example the terribly impoverished country of Uganda. It may surprise the visitor do discover how rich the agriculture is there. Fruit and vegetables are grown easily, but many lie rotting in the fields. Why? There is no infrastructure. No efficient way to get products from this landlocked country to the rest of the world. The government made a big push to plant sugar cane for the export market because it is less sensitive to export delays. It is never wise to rely too much on one product though. Markets go up and down. Diversification provides safety from this. What's more, the product has no nutritional value and its cultivation uses up valuable land that could be used to feed the people. So this fertile country, with so much agricultural potential, ends up importing food that could otherwise be produced at home. Nothing a volunteer does will change this.

Since volunteering is by definition an idealistic endeavor, it makes sense that inexperienced volunteers will likely have over-idealized expectations of their impact. In the best of all possible worlds, our efforts would lead to clear, world-changing results. The reality is that one person is lucky to make any lasting contribution. However, the sum of all of our efforts does impact the world. We must always remember that it is this cumulative effect that we strive for. It is only natural that we want the gratification that comes from immediate results. However, the gratification must come from the knowledge that we have tried to help.

This is perhaps an overly pessimistic portrayal of the nature of volunteering, but tempered expectations lead to a more fulfilling and effective volunteer experience. Certain projects like home construction, for example, have very concrete results. What a great feeling to see that you have made a substantial improvement in someone's living conditions! Digging a water well or an building irrigation system are other tangible projects that are commonly undertaken. But we can't restrict ourselves to such projects. Our personal gratification cannot be the impetus for our acts.

Realistic expectations must also include self-evaluation. What do you truly have to offer? The fact that you come from a wealthy country doesn't mean that you know how to recreate your country's success in a developing nation. Your comparative wealth isn't an indicator of superior skills or knowledge. Similarly, the poverty of someone in a developing country doesn't indicate a lack of skills. People with extraordinary talents often have no outlet for those talents for purely economic reasons. So unless you are highly trained in a particularly useful discipline, your value is simply to help where needed. In fact, your most valuable asset is perhaps the validation that you give to the project by your simple presence. An orphan in Africa is amazed, and perhaps puzzled, that you have come from some distant land to help. When a child feels abandoned, your attention can be an empowering experience. Is the result measurable? No, but you may notice positive changes in the child's demeanor.

By Kevin O'Neill

Yesterday I began a discussion of a Huffington Post blog article: "All I Really Need to Know I Learned From Traveling." In the first section, the blogger discusses how much more rewarding it is to meet the people than to simply see the sights. For the most part I agree. The second section is a big problem. She gives it the cliche title "Money does not equal happiness." Ever heard that line before? Sure, their are plenty of unhappy wealthy people, and there are happy poor people. The blogger discusses her experiences in Soweto where the 50% unemployment rate gives rise to "creativity and sheer genius." "Crafty entrepreneurs sell picture frames made from discarded Coke cans, zebras carved from table legs and statues made from bottle caps." Nothing like a little poverty to spur creativity. She sounds like the Koch brothers! No, money doesn't equal happiness, but the look of desperation in a mother's eyes when she can't feed her children is a powerful reminder that poverty truly can cause unhappiness. The well-off have always been drawn to the myth of the "happy peasant." It eases their conscience.

Unlike this blogger, I am always impressed when I travel by the injustice of poverty. People of incredible talent and integrity, with an endless work ethic are born into poverty in Third World countries and most never escape it. Making sculptures from bottle caps won't get them far. Then you see someone of limited talent and questionable integrity flourishing in an economically developed country, retiring to spend their "golden" years on the golf courses of Arizona.

I guess we don't all learn the same things from traveling.

By Kevin O'Neill

Continuing with comments on the Huffington Post blog entry "All I Really Need to Know I Learned From Traveling," the blogger had an important observation about the disservice that media reports do to travel. She talks about how someone can be holding a sign that says "Death to Americans," and still invite an American home for dinner. That's an extreme but valid example. When we see people as individuals as opposed to symbols or representatives of an idea or concept, goodwill generally prevails. The danger arises when we don't recognize the individual, when we're blind to their face, and see them instead as a group that has been defined, frequently by propaganda or misunderstanding. The two journalists who were recently beheaded by the terrorist group, ISIS, are a vivid example from today's news. They were not executed as individuals or for their actions. They were executed as Americans and therefore enemies of Islam. The perpetrators had no thought of the individual. Alain Finkielkraut discusse the concept in his excellent book, La Sagesse de l'amour, (The Wisdom of Love), working from the philosophy of Emmanuel Lévinas.

But back to the subject at hand, portrayals by the media of conditions in other countries have to be filtered by common sense as well as some basic knowledge of the country. When there are terror attacks in Kenya near the Somali border, many travelers are frightened away from the entire country, but most of the rest of the country is quite safe from such attacks. The current Ebola epidemic has frightened many travelers from the entire continent of Africa, even though thousands of miles and many borders might separate a country from the affected region. This can be crippling for countries that depend on tourism as one of their few sources of revenue.

A somewhat similar situation arises when governments proclaim a region dangerous. For years in the 1990 and 2000s, the U.S. State Department left in place a travel warning for Nepal. It's true that there was a Maoist uprising in rural, remote regions of the country. However, the insurgents never targeted foreigners, and in all the year of this uprising, Nepal remained a very safe destination for travelers. Few countries rely more on tourism than Nepal. So the damage to this impoverished country must have been devastating. For those of us who spent time in Nepal during that period, it was hard to understand the U.S. position.

As our HuffPo blogger says, there is much to learn from travel. First-hand experience often reveals the fallacy of media reports and government policies.

By Kevin O'Neill

I read a blog post on The Huffington Post today that had a provocative title: "All I Really Need to Know I Learned from Travel." I'm sure that the writer doesn't really mean this, but is simply trying to convey the importance and value of travel in understanding yourself and the world. Still, it got me thinking. There was a lot to comment on. Some things that I agree with, and some that I disagree with. I'll spend my next few posts responding.

First, a few general thoughts. Travel is much more rewarding with a foundation to work from. Language for example. Knowing a language creates opportunities to penetrate a culture that are unavailable to those who don't. Of course, you can learn a language by living in a country, but that will take a few years and isn't an option for most of us. That's why learning a language in school can be one of the most worthwhile parts of those many years we spend in classrooms. History, anthropology, literature, philosophy, political science, all can contribute to a foundation that will make travel a richer learning experience. Book learnin' has its place!

Another observation: travel can make you a better, more well-rounded person, but it can also make you an arrogant jerk. Hopefully, one of the lessons of travel is that you are not superior to others. If you feel that you have learned this lesson, and that's why you're superior to those who haven't, oh the irony, you haven't learned a thing! Anyway, many of the lessons learned abroad can be learned at home by experiencing the diversity - economic, cultural, racial - that surround us. The fact that we have the luxury to travel abroad and experience this means nothing if we don't apply the lessons learned when we return home.

Back to the blog post. The blogger divided her discussion into 5 separate points. The first, which stresses that travel is all about meeting people is titled "It's the people, stupid." Ouch. I agree, but let's lose the superior attitude! People form many of our most memorable experiences when we travel, but don't forget that museums, monuments, even shopping centers, tell us something about the world. Gazing on the wonders of nature teaches us important lessons as well. She writes: "Meeting Hank and his cat, Poop Deck, who live on Hank's sailboat in St. Croix's Christianstead Harbor was far more enlightening than visiting the island's bioluminescent bay." Maybe she needed to visit the bay with an oceanographer!

Ok. Back to work. I'll dive into the article more tomorrow."

By Kevin O'Neill