I Volunteer As Tribute!

Some of the main objections to Voluntourism revolve around the idea that voluntourism is only a temporary solution that could potentially cause problems in the future, instead of make a difference.

Despite that, I don’t think it is right to say that voluntourism should be stopped altogether. I think that with proper improvement to the program (more frequent voluntourism groups visiting, continuous turnover), much more substantial differences could be made in whichever third world country. Having said that, I think it is a little unrealistic to put so much weight on a single organization to make a difference such that it is expected to do so every time. I think it takes a continuous effort to really turn things around, and with more investment to voluntourism programs this might be able to be done.

Even so, I think that even though the good effects of voluntourism are only temporary, it still opens up opportunities for people who face time constraints and cannot commit to a project for so long, to do their part in helping. At the same time, I think it also helps to promote the importance of helping those in need. If anything at all, I think that voluntourism serves as a stepping stone. I think to say voluntourism is wrong is to also say that any kind of short-term charity work is also wrong if it doesn't last long.

*edit* In terms of the inequality that was described in Sin’s piece, I think that the “misunderstanding” of culture can go both ways. The Cambodian respondent is failing to understand the difference in culture of the volunteers, the same way the volunteers do not understand how the Cambodians live. And while there is some inequality, I feel like that’s more of a problem with labeling. Perhaps I don’t quite understand the problem with the labels, but I feel like if you’re not so economically stable and need some help, it doesn’t mean you are inferior, neither should it have a negative connotation of any kind. I get that equality is important, but to base equality of economic status doesn’t quite make a lot of sense since it is almost arbitrary. Countries don’t get to decide where they are geographically located, neither do they get to decide their size. Therefore I think that not every single country can achieve economic prosperity at the same time.