So freaking sad. I remember that when I taught underpriveledged kids in Delhi, every day they had the same lunch. It was rice porridge (I don't know what others may call it but my guju family calls it "kichree") out of a barrel. Two large spoonfulls. Even off of that they had so much energy and would be running around all over the yard right after lunch. They lined up so politely and never complained.

It's incredibly horrible, just wrenching.

I believe it.
sad, sad, sad.

"India has seen unprecedented economic growth in recent years but many remain untouched by the improvements".

It's sad. Likewise, I have always wondered why millions in the USA live in poverty although it's the richest country in the world.

The fact is governments don't give a damn about the poor anywhere in the world.

Truly tragic ! No kid should ever be allowed to starve.

Whatever happened to the much applauded Indian government's free lunch program at schools?

Anna

1.$20 =price of one cd= cost of food for one child for a month
2.$100=cost of one outfit=cost of food for a family of four for a month..

Oh one can go on with all this....

What does feeling sad really mean?

Does it ever raise questions among the priveleged what price privelege comes at?

What brings people to different places?

If successful and wealthy, what is the responsibility that comes with it?

Is lip service enough?

Would you give up a party to feed the hungry?

Every little thing one consumes, what exactly it means to those who manufacture and where profits go to and why?

And what works and what doesnt?

So what if kids die?

Is saying "its sad" the only thing one can do?And then go on to live life with thoughtlessness?

These are questions I ask myself...

I feel heartwrenching stories become voyeurs delight, and serve no serious purpose. I dont really see anyone really changing one thing in their life so that one person can live. Very few live their lives with responsibility without whining. There are arenas around us we can make a difference in. Showing sympathy for those thousands of miles away with an air of detached superiority is of no meaning...

This touched a nerve, sorry...guys...Really sorry. Please stop posting such blogs and turning this into entertainment. Please... This is not the way to feel better about one's own lives. A really sincere request. You finishing your food is not comparable to starving children Can we show a little more mature sensitivity.

Does anything come of blaming governements and socitieties? Even without understanding their history?

Sumita

jb said

The fact is governments don't give a damn about the poor anywhere in the world.

Mr. Naidu began with much goodwill. (Earned by the public's acceptance of him as N.T. Rama Rao's true successor.) His energy, his attitude towards technology (if not his grasp of it) seemed refreshing at the time. All of this went down well. As did his impatience with bureaucracy. But in the next few years, it became clear that the policies driven by that enthusiasm were disastrous for millions of poor people in his state. However, the more he disconnected from the poor, the more the corporate world loved him. He was now the champion of `the reforms.' The darling of international donors... Two months after the polls, the media barely mention Chandrababu Naidu. The most written about Indian politician has vanished from their vision.

India has seen unprecedented economic growth in recent years but many remain untouched by the improvements

I second that, Sumita.

This is happening in a state run by communists, the supposed protector of the poor.

Please stop posting such blogs and turning this into entertainment.

Sumita, I take great offense at this sentiment in your comment. What the hell gave you the impression that the chief purpose of this blog was to "entertain" you? On multiple instances you have come across as condescending but this one touched my nerve.

SM tries to raise awareness of a great variety of issues that affect the South Asian American community. Sometimes we do so by providing a sarcastic and often entertaining perspective of certain issues. Other issues are as serious as a heart-attack and we treat them as such. You are entitled to your opinion as to whether or not a story like this "serves a purpose." That's fine. Don't accuse us of turning it into entertainment though. A story about kids starving isn't meant to "entertain."

sentiment presupposes coherency.

I feel heartwrenching stories become voyeurs delight, and serve no serious purpose. I dont really see anyone really changing one thing in their life so that one person can live. Very few live their lives with responsibility without whining. There are arenas around us we can make a difference in. Showing sympathy for those thousands of miles away with an air of detached superiority is of no meaning...

I'm willing to believe that Sumita didn't mean any offence and may have phrased her sentiments incorrectly. The last thing on any of our minds is entertainment and I haven't detected any air of superiority.

Anna posting this may have a negligible effect on the life of a Kolkata pauper - but then again she didn't need to post it in the first place, she could've stuck to bubblegum topics and fun stuff. But perhaps one of the thousands of people that visit will be inspired to do something. That's what happened with me - I was planning a trip to Martinique and after reading a personal account from Sri Lanka (not a blog, but an interview) made me pack a pack of medical supplies and spend a month in Sri Lankan tsunami relief camps.

Don't assume that words mean nothing Sumita.

Bong Breaker,

I salute you. I think Sumita's sentiments are sincere, but perhaps a little too severe.

Who knows how someone could do something of value as a chain reaction from this blog? Aren't books, movies, and comics (yes, comics) supposed to do the same.

Kush

Is saying "its sad" the only thing one can do?And then go on to live life with thoughtlessness?

These are questions I ask myself...

You are not alone in asking these questions of yourself. Please don't think that you are.

I don't think anyone who read and responded to this post did so for entertainment. There's is not a shred of reason to believe the poster would have done so out of self-interest. CNN would be a different story, but Anna has nothing to gain - no ratings, no advertising $$ in posting this story. Please think about self-interest before questioning a person's motives.

Finally, acknowledging that something is sad does not mean that we, as individuals, don't do what we can - even if it is not enough. I hope that I never lose my (human) ability to acknowledge that something is horrible or wrong or unjust or sad.

ps. When I wrote "I believe it" I meant it, had good reason to write it, and thought about it before writing it. I didn't go into great detail because I didn't want this SAD story to turn into a post about me, me, me.

Abhi wrote about his direct experience in Dehli, so it should not be a stretch to imagine that he, and others who have posted here, has a great deal of empathy for this mother and her daughter.

But enough with justifying our feelings or even our contributions to society...

I would take issue with Sumita's sentiments if the blogger had done even a modicum of independent research. Absent this research, the charge of voyeurism or bandwagon jumping has some merit. Consider some additional facts in this matter:

1. Sania's house had been washed away by a flood over a month ago. Her mother , Jainab, with four sons and Sania, had been living in a makeshift hut provided by the government.

2. Sania usually never took lunch to school (i.e. she rec'd lunch at school).

3. Sania was the youngest of three daughters. Her sisters, aged 24 and 15, have been married off.

4. Two of the sons work as daily wagers, but they apparently have no regular employment income.

Clearly, this family was going through a particularly tough stretch & Sania simply snapped. Extremely tragic.

To blame the government, india's development etc. is a red herring.

Sanjay

I didn't read Anna's post as "blaming" India's development but as pointing out the obvious, that the recent economic growth has passed many by, and that Sania's tragic death was a direct consequence of the sort of grinding poverty that blights hundreds of millions in India (that she may or may not have been psychologically more fragile is beside the point, as it is the MARRIAGE of such fragility with extreme financial deprivation that may be expected to yield such a result). Where's the "voyeurism"?

To dissect this particular case is to miss the point. Despite the praises I sing of India to all and sundry, much remains shamefully underdeveloped. China's even-more-rapid economic growth has left even more behind and created a worse situation than exists in India, so we can at least be thankful things are not worse.

The government is at fault. Perhaps this case is more complex than appears on the surface of things. And no one is claiming the government is wilfully and deliberately creating widespread suffering, but little is being done of any significant effect to make a dent in the vast number that exist below the poverty line.

I would take issue with Sumita's sentiments if the blogger had done even a modicum of independent research. Absent this research, the charge of voyeurism or bandwagon jumping has some merit.

People who do poor research themselves shouldn't be calling the kettle black, should they? Regarding your second point, that

"Sania usually never took lunch to school (i.e. she rec'd lunch at school)."

The very article ANNA linked to clearly states:

Sania normally ate nothing at school but on Friday saw classmates eating rice and asked for one rupee.

The BBC didn't feel that it was necessary to mention the extra facts you cited and they probably did a modicum of research. I agree that it's always interesting to learn more about what is initially posted here, but that's what makes this blog so successful; the bloggers aren't preaching at or teaching us, it's a cooperative effort between them and us. They start a conversation which we contribute to with our knowledge and experiences.

It would be one thing if that's what you were doing, but you had to take it beyond that and somehow leverage those points as proof that the blogger is a bandwagonesque voyeur, i.e. a heartless, creativity-free person who gets off on watching what in this case is a pure tragedy. That is an offensive charge with no merit. I'd tell Sumita the same thing, since her comments actually outraged me while yours merely offended, but Abhi already addressed her. In any case, she is safe in her position as "elder", so serious criticism of her is almost never tolerated.

To blame the government, india's development etc. is a red herring.

Maybe that's why she didn't.

Indians, especially the poor, should not have more than one kid at any point in time. I can't understand why the poor should have lots of kids. This is one issue they have absolute control over and they do nothing about it.

Yes. True. But there's hope. Can hunger be solved... ? I hypothesize that kids go hungry today because of poor logistical management, not of poverty or governmental apathy. If true, better telecommunications, better roads, better infrastructure will help alleviate child hunger... and yea.. i will take extra care on finishin what's on my plate tonight.

This is very true. The world produces enough food, it just isn't getting to the right places in the right time. India for example does produce enough food for itself, however the lack of good logistics and transportation/storage infrastructure results in much wasted food. Rodents raiding warehouses, farms, and facilities screws things up further. Research institutes from the United States actually helped the GOI in the 50's spread a strain of resilient and healthy wheat, a mexican one, into India. This helped India's grain output tremendously.

Infrastructure, prudent governance, and implementation of technology is the spinal chord of any society. India continues to fail miserably in building these up. If your core isn't strong enough, rest of your body will only strain harder (and injure itself) in an attempt to compensate.

I attended an elite, progressive type school in India, that served its own lunch meals. Despite the fairly well off lot we were, all students were forced to finish off the initial serving in their plates. Didn't matter if kids cried, faked dry heaves, were really dry heaving, etc.

Teachers and monintors made sure you ate it all. Even though I hated this at times, especially when they served eggplant in 2 inch giant slimy cubes, I really feel it made me better. I can eat anything. To this day, unless I'm about to yak, I WILL finish my food and if friends at Denny's decide they just weren't feeling their food that day, I'll gladly clean it out for them.

This sucks. Poor child.

I attended an elite, progressive type school in India, that served its own lunch meals. Despite the fairly well off lot we were, all students were forced to finish off the initial serving in their plates. Didn't matter if kids cried, faked dry heaves, were really dry heaving, etc.
Teachers and monintors made sure you ate it all. Even though I hated this at times, especially when they served eggplant in 2 inch giant slimy cubes, I really feel it made me better. I can eat anything.

i had a dosco ex-bf who would agree with you. he really COULD eat anything, which made cooking for him very easy.

"Indians, especially the poor, should not have more than one kid at any point in time. I can't understand why the poor should have lots of kids. This is one issue they have absolute control over and they do nothing about it."

Guy, that is their only social security for their old age, especially in poor agrarian society, and also have quite high rate of infant mortality. This has been true even for North America and Europe when they were poor agrarian socities.

Now, the above quotes response is a tuely condescending viewpoint.

Now, the above quotes response is a tuely condescending viewpoint.

Yes. I eagerly await Sumita's take on it.

"I can't understand why the poor should have lots of kids. This is one issue they have absolute control over and they do nothing about it."

Wow, I mean wow-- spoken like someone who's always had the privilege of feeling himself/herself in control.

yikes.

i have posted once before -- i work in ngo type environments in india, am an italian american so no desi blood here, but i'd like to comment on a few things, both from my own experience and from my own vantage point.

re: sumita's post

"I feel heartwrenching stories become voyeurs delight, and serve no serious purpose"

Are you joking? NGOs like the ones I work for rely entirely on the concept of pity, empathy, and the reactions such stories elicit. people do not give money to poor people because it is on their tax form, they give because they have an emotion that precipitates an action, which usually leads to either them acting, or giving to someone who can... what bullshit to say that stories such as these serve no purpose.

furthermore, one issue that comes up a lot in developing countries such as india (and other places, don't jump on me here) is the "cover-up"... e.g. "India doesn't have an AIDS problem" "Development will reach everyone... soon" and "Things aren't really *that* bad".

things are *that* bad for so many people -- and if we stop writing about it, if we stop bringing it to people's attention we'll lose the chance to make a difference.

another quote: "You finishing your food is not comparable to starving children Can we show a little more mature sensitivity."

actually, i take issue with this too. a child being told to finish their food because there are children starving DOES do something... it puts the idea of a "civil society", or "civic-mindedness" into that child's head, the concept that we are all connected, and that we shouldn't forget those that go without.

a quote from jb: "Indians, especially the poor, should not have more than one kid at any point in time. I can't understand why the poor should have lots of kids. This is one issue they have absolute control over and they do nothing about it. "

uhh.. what? are we channeling indira here? do you want to set up sterilization camps? this stuff is a big "yikes" for me.

i could talk at length here -- but i think i'll leave it at this.

---

kudos to anna for showing the story, i am continually impressed with SM's broad array of ideas and opinions. as a non-desi who lives in india i appreciate your refreshing ideas.

and also, abhi, where did you work in delhi?

i had a dosco ex-bf who would agree with you. he really COULD eat anything, which made cooking for him very easy.

Most wouldn't call my similar culinary skills cooking. "Project Mayhem" is a title that comes to mind. But yes, it makes life quite simple.

Focus:
Food processing plants is something that India has never invested in volume either. Though today, it seems industry has taken significant steps in that direction. It's a double edged sword. You don't want to process and mechanize till you pump out crap, but you do want a system in place to adequately balance the needs of society.

Ugh.

Meant to say "Most wouldn't call my culinary skills cooking"

Bengalis are supposed to be the smartest Indians. But when it come to issues like poverty they seem to be all talk and no action. Why can't smart people use their brains to help ease poverty instead of intellectualizing everything to death in their safe little addas?

Abhi

I apologise at unintended offense.

For all those who felt defensive, I apologise too. I dont know any of you personally and hence there is nothing directed at any person. Its the process of examining very serious issues that affected me. But then, I guess, in the digital age, this is probably one of the methods of creating awareness. That I recognise, most definitely.

There is not much more I have to say on the matter.

Sumita

Mafi. Yes Bengal is the ONLY state in India with poverty in, isn't it? Sorry, your statement holds no water. I'm not defending Bengalis - I'm attacking all Indians. Have you taken a trip to UP, MP or Bihar? Have you walked through Mumbai's slums? Rich Indians, as a rule of thumb, are canjoos.

Rich Indians, as a rule of thumb, are canjoos.

Rich Indians being stingy is the least of our problems. It's not like wealth distribution is the answer to mass poverty. The reasons for poverty have been well documented. It's the political framework that prevents the 'smart people' (regardless of where they're from) from working towards solving social/economic problems.

eofia: Just my opinion but perhaps it would be a better use of keystrokes to discuss the key issues rather than wasting them on ANNA's defense. Although, I'm not sure she would be particularly thankful for this defense if you continue giving us the impression that her blogging quality would improve if she were paid for it. Regardless, I, for one, do express my appreciation for pointing out how BBC had twisted at least one statement:

India Tribune version: "Sania usually never took lunch to school" (i.e. did she receive lunch at school?)
BBC version: "Sania normally ate nothing at school"

If someone presents just one side of the story without attempting to independently verify it, then it certainly gives the impression that little has been done other than to join the parade. Or just watch it from the sidelines. Your outrage, while unfortunate, is wholly unnecessary.

Mafi. Yes Bengal is the ONLY state in India with poverty in, isn't it? Sorry, your statement holds no water. I'm not defending Bengalis - I'm attacking all Indians. Have you taken a trip to UP, MP or Bihar? Have you walked through Mumbai's slums? Rich Indians, as a rule of thumb, are canjoos.

Bong Breaker, which statement holds no water? I never implied that Bengal is the ONLY state in India with poverty. However, I did state that Bengalis are supposed to be the smartest Indians. Since you didn’t get on your defensive soapbox to attack that statement, I will add that
most Indians view Bengalis intellectuals as the crème of Indian brains. These brainy folks have the capacity to use their collective brainpower to ease poverty but why don’t they?

I’m outraged by the poverty in India (and the rest of the world). But other than giving money to charities and volunteering in my community I don’t know what else to do affect poverty. If the brainy folks can’t or won’t do anything about poverty, what can we lesser brained folks do?

Indian telegraph:

was tempted by the sight of classmates eating puffed rice and oil cakes.

BBC:

Sania normally ate nothing at school but on Friday saw classmates eating rice and asked for one rupee.

Which one is it ? Rice or 'puffed rice and oil cakes' ?

Rich Indians being stingy is the least of our problems.

Well it will atleast make a difference. What do people in India, on the average, give as charitable contributions? What do the rich give?

Blaming everything on the political frame work is a lame ass excuse. Manipulate it, if need be, just as they do for selfish reasons.

Well it will atleast make a difference. What do people in India, on the average, give as charitable contributions? What do the rich give?

Indians do donate as much money as they can, most Indians are quite poor so they can't donate, even the relatively rich middle class ones are fairly poor by American standards.

Though I should point out there was a lot of outpouring of support following natural disasters in recent years (i.e. the tsunami, guarat earthquake)

India is americanizing its economy along reagonomics model leaving the poor out of the economic growth. I hope the katrina disaster and episodes like this will help america and india move toward more socialist model (like the one followed in scandinavian countries).

Mafi I'm not sure what exactly you have against Bengalis; I certainly didn't get on my soapbox to defend them. Your assertion that Bengalis are the smartest and hence should be doing more about social ills is rather odd. 1 - What has brains got to do with anything? 2 - How did you decide Bengalis were the smartest? 3 - I would challenge that south Indians are smarter anyway, but yet poverty exists in the south too! Shock horror!

To assume poverty should be inversely proportional to brains is ludicrous. If anything you should use money as your yardstick - and West Bengal is not a rich state. Kolkata is one of the largest cities in the world, it deals with hundreds of thousands of immigrants, poor infrastructure, overpopulation...the problem is far more complex than simply brainy people aren't doing enough. For example, large Indian companies give far less to charitable causes than companies of a similar size in the West.

Several people here seem intent on singling out a cause. That's impossible as well as barmy. Politicians, businesses, rich people, filmstars, the colonial legacy, brainy people, dumb people, rainfall, corruption and so on and so on.

EVERYONE could do more. There are a number of people trying to change things. Just not enough.

Sumita/BongBreaker,

Good points.

Another point I would like to add: There is no point in airing dirty laundry in the West. BBC reports like this, documentaries like "Born in Brothels" do nothing to improve the situation locally, but make the westerner think: Ha! We told them they could not run their country - but they did not listen.

After a loooong time, WestBengal has a Chief Minister who has his head screwed right. He is actually trying to undo the damage by decades of unioninsm/communism. Just when he is trying to woo international investment, improve the business climate etc, if we desis start detailing how bad the people are suffering there, would it help matters or make them worse?

If we cannot do anything, let's at least shut up and allow the local people to manage themselves.

M. Nam

Indians do donate as much money as they can, most Indians are quite poor so they can't donate, even the relatively rich middle class ones are fairly poor by American standards.

Yes forget the poor, and lets look only at the rich and/or the upper middle class. Do it on a percentage of income/wealth basis? People in India jsut don't give back to society as much as they should.
One of the reasons the US is so succesful is because of the amount of charitbale givings and contributions made. For example, just take a look at the number of colleges and universities in this country, and ask where do they get their endowments from?
I am not trying to do a country to country comparison here, or make this the ONLY cause, but merely highlighting a notion.

Oya Bula Bula bi

Do it on a percentage of income/wealth basis? People in India jsut don't give back to society as much as they should.

Yes, I have seen this argument being bandied about very regularly. An organisation I know in the US has put aside a sixeable amount for charity on an annual basis. Am helping them identify the areas this money should go into, and hence these concerns are close to me personally.

Indian society is a network of relationships. Most people support a larger group of people, (through the help system and the family obligations) than people here. The percentage thing is a misnomer. Are you aware what it actually costs to live and pay for things in India. What obligations people live in? What causes this so called "stingy attitude?"

Y4es, there is a greater need for understanding what is the responsibility of being wealthy, and not many know it. It does not always mean giving money to charity and involves sometimes supporting employees personally and educting their children.

The social structure is very different and functions( if it did properly) in a very different manner from the foundation/charity/NGO model.

This is a great reason there is resitance to missionary charity. And other kidns of overseas help(which cannot come without any attached contingencies) I personally dont agree with all of it, but sometimes its better to let nations help themselves rather than "resuce them" which is why US foreignpolicies find so much criticism abroad.

Good intention without understanding of consequences may be dangerous. We all need to think of ways to help without creating more conflict than there is already.

Sumita

There is no point in airing dirty laundry in the West. BBC reports like this, documentaries like "Born in Brothels" do nothing to improve the situation locally, but make the westerner think: Ha! We told them they could not run their country - but they did not listen.

Yes. Let's circle the wagons, lest people see the truth, that we're not all rich, sane and perfect. This is the same bullshit attitude that keeps domestic violence victims living with their abusers, as they are pressured to "not air dirty laundry". "What will people think?!" What will they think, indeed.

Here's a ladder for you and all your deluded brethren-- now get over yourselves. India is powerful enough that it can stand multiple views of its reality. I might have listened to your point twenty years ago, but today, it's just ridiculous.

Poverty and ignorance exist in India and every other country in the world. We're not doing anyone favors by trying to hide it. Oh, and I'd love to meet a westerner who utters a statement like the one you fabricated. Wait one second, since I was born here, I AM a Westerner. Maybe that's why I don't have my head in the sand, hiding because of wholly unnecessary insecurity.

Are you aware what it actually costs to live and pay for things in India. What obligations people live in?

Yes, I am aware. I have lived there. Again, withouth dragging this any further, I am talking about people in a position to contribute. People everywhere, including here, have costs and obligations.

Absent this research, the charge of voyeurism or bandwagon jumping has some merit.

you didn't even "waste keystrokes" to address how unbelievably insulting the label "voyeur" is in this context.

here's wiki's definition of that term:

Voyeurism is a practice in which an individual derives sexual pleasure from observing other people.

i didn't derive sexual pleasure from a story about a little girl who committed suicide, and for you to insinuate that is sick. and wrong. if you didn't mean to imply that, then choose your words a little more carefully, when you're insulting someone you don't even know.

please don't bring up your coveted i "didn't do research" point. this blog was never meant to be a paper of record. sometimes i write long, in-depth posts, sometimes i merely bring things to your attention (we used to have a whole column for such things, they were called "shorts"). the entire point of a blog is speed and dissemination of information. if you want meticulous research, go get some MSM.

Oya bula bula bi.

I am talking about people in a position to contribute.

So am I.What i am trying to say is iving to charity is not the only way to give. It has not been like that tradtionally. Also without going into Weber's protestant ethic and spirit of capitalism and Gita's third chapter whic look at "giving" very differently , all I was trying to point out was there may be different ways to give.

The responsibility of the "able" I think we both agree on. They do have a responsibility and we all recognise it. I have heard mnay wealthy indians say that the western models of iving are hollow and create strife. I dont agree always but then I would hold them to their own standards and ask them whethe they do support everyone whose lives touch them as an extended family?

My guess is,( like you also rightly pointed out), they dont have good answers. My point is to use the model they use to shirk responsibility to question them. Using another model will reach closed ears.We are on the same page on their basic responsibility to give back.

Sumita

I dont know any of you personally and hence there is nothing directed at any person. Its the process of examining very serious issues that affected me. But then, I guess, in the digital age, this is probably one of the methods of creating awareness. That I recognise, most definitely.

Why did you address your original comment to me, if you weren't directing it "at any person"?

I was so insulted, I couldn't even respond yesterday. You don't know me, yet you cast some nasty words my way.

India is powerful enough that it can stand multiple views of its reality.

Anna

Thank you for your very valid question.I respect your asking it the way you have.

I addressed my questions to you as I felt you would share my questions.

You would be insulted only if those questions were not yours when you wrote the blog.

My hope is that folks here are of a greater sensitivity than the environment of "always being entertaining" allows. That burden is not just yours, but any writers's who has to always choose between sensational and serious treatment of a deep issue.

Sometimes that line is blurry( and we all fail to see it on some occasion or the other)

Criticism takes a lot more effort than "oh this is wonderful" It is in some ways a form of appreciation too. Maybe not sweet.

To be able to enagage postively and debate and analyse things helps all of us, you and me both.

Would you rather everyone say, "of great!" and agree all the time?and not really care for any of this except as time pass.

Please recognise that for me to write a serious response is my way of showing a blogger the highest respect. If I really did blame/condemn, I wouldnt waste a single breath/word. There is nothing I personally gain by saying nasty things either, and I hope you see that too.

Sumita

Can we say peace now? And find ways to seek common ground?

Communis R writes:

>>Yes. Let's circle the wagons, lest people see the truth, that we're not all rich, sane and perfect. This is the same bullshit attitude that keeps domestic violence victims living with their abusers, as they are pressured to "not air dirty laundry". "What will people think?!" What will they think, indeed.

Oh good. You threw the domestic violence angle in. Now let's just add Hitler, Nazi, caste and we will have a nice stew to boil me in.

Sorry - how is DV even remotely similiar to the case in hand? DV is illegal. Poverty is not. DV has a particular perpetrator - poverty cannot be pointed to a single source. Complaining about DV to the cops actually yields results. The BBC airing these "stories" in their paper yields...?

>>Here's a ladder for you and all your deluded brethren-- now get over yourselves. India is powerful enough that it can stand multiple views of its reality. I might have listened to your point twenty years ago, but today, it's just ridiculous.

You forgot my deluded sisters... but never mind.

India is powerful enough as a whole, but these stories appearing at the wrong time can give CM of Bengal a red-face when he is having a presentation in Boston on investment opportunities in Bengal. And this was true twenty years ago, is true today, and will be true twenty years from now.

M. Nam

Yes forget the poor, and lets look only at the rich and/or the upper middle class. Do it on a percentage of income/wealth basis? People in India jsut don't give back to society as much as they should.

Do you have any evidence to back up this assertion ?

Comparisons should be done on basis percentage of after-tax income that is not used for necessities like food, water, shelter etc.

Also you have to include any financial support that the income earners provide to their elderly parents and extended family.

"DV is illegal. Poverty is not."

There is no glamor in poverty - a lot of violence, domestic or not comes through poverty (not always, and has cultural factors too).

Sweeping a problem under the rug is the worst disservice one can do. Therefore, I never complain about a story if its done with careful research. General Musharraf does, though.

Transparency is key to progress.

"Transparency is key to progress."

i agree.

it's not "dirty laundry" if it's true, and it deserves to be told.

re: indians giving back. i agree with epoch, i think that the support system for elderly and young people are compromised in many parts of india, therefore middle-class families expend a lot of that "extra money" on supporting family members who can't support themselves. even though they have a sense of civic-ness and would give if they could, it's simply not within reach.

of course, this excludes the super rich who seem happier to donate to PETA than to real live humans, while i was working in lucknow i had a good friend who would never, ever help out at the project i worked on (involving children's nutrition programs) and instead would spend thousands of rupees feeding cows in a lane by her house. i am also shocked at times in bombay and delhi when i go to fundraisers for HIV/AIDS programs and see a 80% foreigner attendance, and then i go to a fashion show for PETA and it's packed to the rafters with young hip indians. people are giving money, but the question is to what... maybe people here can help me, how do we get people to think that giving to people is "cool" or "trendy"? i know that getting celebrities involved in america was crucial, but what about india?

sumita said: "but sometimes its better to let nations help themselves rather than "resuce them""

yes, but when the knowledge of how to do that "helping" especially in regards to health care has been largely guarded by the elite in the world then it's up to those with the knowledge to bring it... i'm sorry but no one is pioneering HIV/AIDS work in India, yet they are in parts of europe and america, so bringing that knowledge in can do a helluva lot for india, africa, china and other places ravaged by HIV epidemics.

some things to think about.

theresa

Do you have any evidence to back up this assertion ?

Data for India is hard to find and you will have to go by what you undersand of the country, such as observing number of institutions etc. which run on endowment.
For the USA - about $250 billion was given as charitable contributions in 2004. And 75% of it was given by individuals.
And note that this is after the compartively higher taxes (including SS and medicare)paid in the USA.

I think the issue of "voyeurism" (or better wording) exists, but I think it is not important compared to the possible effects of making suffering known.

And I have no doubt Anna has done more than just expressed outrage.

There is a defensiveness in some of the comments through this thread, but rather than seeing it in the comments of those who took offense at charging Anna with "voyeurism," I see it in comments like these:

There is no point in airing dirty laundry in the West.

India Tribune version: "Sania usually never took lunch to school" (i.e. did she receive lunch at school?) BBC version: "Sania normally ate nothing at school"

If someone presents just one side of the story without attempting to independently verify it, then it certainly gives the impression that little has been done other than to join the parade. Or just watch it from the sidelines. Your outrage, while unfortunate, is wholly unnecessary.

Clearly, this family was going through a particularly tough stretch & Sania simply snapped. Extremely tragic.

No point in nitpicking the particular circumstances of the situation or decrying Western coverage of starvation in India since it actually exists as a major problem. This type of argument only serves to assuage the ego of people who feel defensive about the legitimacy/appearance of their country.

Theresa above makes a good point about NGO's relying on feelings of sympathy aroused by such articles. I am sure many of us do what we can to help people in many ways.

One does not solve the "starvation problem" in India by blindly accepting false reports in foreign newspapers. If this were true, India's starvation problems would have been over many moons ago. All we would have to do is to read all the foreign newspapers in the world and viola!

All the real, long lived, tangible changes in india are brought about by those living & working on the inside as members of a given community, not by motivated outsiders.

SM has a number of posts about the wretched state of affairs in the world, so, what's to stop you from creating a donation-link on the site (similar to what you did for bandwidth-fundraising), that you can highlight in every such post? I know it's a drop in the bucket, but it's better than everyone arguing about what is/isn't being done...

Maybe take a reader-poll regarding the "most preferred" charities, nonprofits, etc., choose three-four and then take donations and make quarterly or biannual contributions in the name of SM (considering the vigorous response to this post and others, I don't see why people wouldn't give). Or, have SM-supported fundraising-links for other organizations on the site (however, I think doing it yourself lends more power to the posts and discussions).

Just a thought.