Self interest is why we should help, and why people will.

To continue the class discussion, and further debate why should we help slum dwellers and improve living conditions in slums.

In his book Planet of Slums, Mike Davis proposes that slums are one of the roots of terrorism, and that the scale of economic exclusion that occurs when slums are formed will inevitably lead into violence, drug taking and smuggling, as well as other forms of illegal activities. I for one cannot accept that slums are the only cause of these issues nor that by getting rid of Favelas we will win this so call “war” on terrorism. After all Osama Bin Laden didn’t grow up in a slum, nor was his family poor (on the contrary). However I can believe that slums provide a more productive breeding ground for those who want to recruit and train people to join extremist causes, or simply into drug trafficking or prostitution.

To follow the line of thought that was voiced on Tuesday that these illegal activities are a cause of slums, and that we should accept it as a natural consequence until “mother earth” sorts it out with some sort of mud slide or perhaps even bubonic plague is highly dangerous. It would be like saying, let the heroin addicts do there thing, I’m sure HIV will wipe them out eventually. Furthermore to suggest that we should spend the money on relief funds for when the terrorist attack/ armed robbery/ drug trafficking/ prostitution ring reveals its ugly outcome is naïve. This would clearly be a false economy, as the price of dealing with these outcomes will inevitably rise as the slums continue to grow. Far cheaper would it be in the long run to attempt to find a solution to the causes.

It is easy to get carried away in this line of thought and start believing that all slum dwellers are prone to becoming involved in illegal activities, that all slum dwellers live in total squalor, surrounded by pollution, excrement and decay- and this is simply not true. There are many people who live in shantytowns who work in the public sector, and are reasonably happy with their situation. However this is further reason why we should help improve infrastructure, sanitation, schooling etc…

I will concede that by continuously offering to “improve” slums the international community (donor countries, NGOs and multilateral agencies) run the risk of wanting (and trying) to impose a way of life, aspirations and rules of social behaviour on people, that are inappropriate, unwanted and maybe not needed. This should be avoided at all costs and it is exactly this criticism that has been raised against the World Bank institutions, international donors and NGOs in relation to many of the grand scale ideas and projects that have been promoted and financed over the years. It is not up to the “international community” (whoever they may be) to impose a way of life on people; it is up to those people to create one for themselves. I see the giving of a Noble prize to the founder of the movement for “micro-finance” and the growth of and support given to this form of very basic financing for individuals and communities who are otherwise cut off from the capital they need to self-improve as a sign that there is a recognition that we need to do things differently.

I recognise the moral obligation to at least attempt to ensure that no person should have to go without basic amenities (such as clean water and sewerage) or live and sleep in total squalor under the fear that things could get a lot worse tomorrow. If by doing this and improving the worst slums, we by result help reduce crime, terrorism and other forms of extremist antisocial behaviour, then that should be supported and encouraged. The moral obligation then becomes a matter of self-interest and self-interest usually motivates people more than their morals.