The Instagrammed Degeneration of Charity
The tattered encampment of Zaatari, just thirty minutes away from Amman, Jordan, holds host to nearly 80,000 refugees. Occasionally, it becomes the site of much attention, as a well-known figure descends upon the camp to “slum it” with those less fortunate.
This is a palpable manifestation of the savior complex.
The notion that the privileged can simply waltz into areas of abject poverty is ingrained into the Western mentality—a mentality rooted in imperialism. Nevertheless, this trend is no longer exclusively Western. It has seeped into the minds of a generation of youth across the globe, aided by the diffusion of Western media, norms and practices. Among these practices is that of voluntourism, a combination of volunteering and tourism.
I’m sure that members of our community have taken part in voluntourism—willingly or not. This is not a condemnation of those who have. Rather, I hope to highlight the fact that there are two approaches to volunteer work: one that elevates the “giver,” and one that elevates the “receiver.”
There is a difference between service and voluntourism. The former espouses genuine interaction and connection, while the latter involves self-aggrandizement and ego. One is non sibi, the other is not. In my view, the metric for voluntourism is three-fold: intention, action and impact. As students endeavor to better the global community, they should keep these three things in mind.
Firstly, the intentions behind service work should be to legitimately better a community and broaden one’s awareness of the issues facing that society. The result should be new experiences and not a new Instagram post. Those who take part in service should eschew all notions of heroism and commit themselves humbly to be exposed to a different set of circumstances.
Before taking part in service abroad, students should also work closely with those they intend to serve. If students simply decide that a need exists—and they impose this need upon those who they are serving—their actions do not constitute service. Hence, serving others involves a constructive partnership between the “giver” and the “receiver.”
The actions of those who engage in service differ from those of voluntourists. This begins with dress. It is critical that those who conduct service dress in a way that maximizes comfort for both parties. I’ve noticed that more often than not, the celebrities who travel to distant locations for photo opportunities still don the glitz and glamor that defines their regular lives. That should not be the case. The way that voluntourists dress may amplify the disparity between the privileged and those less so.
Furthermore, voluntourists tend to act in a manner that is largely patronizing. They treat themselves as though they have been divinely anointed to save the poor souls that are in need of their generosity. This type of behavior deprives those in need of the dignity that is essential to fostering respect. It continues the narrative of superiority and weakness that currently encumbers many in communities that are suffering. This condescension is further a hindrance to building connections, to understanding the experiences of those whose lives differ from our own. Without authentic, equitable interaction, service becomes a sham.
Lastly, the impact of service is empowerment. Service endeavors to bring those who need it self-sustenance. Conversely, voluntourism focuses on the “hole-filling” work that seems to ameliorate the problem without addressing its roots. Instead of helping, voluntourism fosters further dependence.
These differences may seem subtle, but they are deeply felt by those who are on the receiving end of both voluntourism and service. At the end of the day, I’m not saying that people should not go out and help others. Still, when considering acts of non sibi, Exonians should make sure they’re taking the time to make sure their work is truly service-based.