The first essay I read is written by Charles Kenny “Haiti Doesn’t Need Your Old T-Shirt”, in Kenny’s essay, he argues that those who are in need would rather receive money instead of clothes, food and other necessities. As I was reading this essay, I question the validity of his arguments, does giving money solve these problems? I do think that when we give money to developing countries it is advantageous, however Kenny’s theme throughout his essay “bottom line: giving donations of cash are nearly always more effective” (254). I feel that his thought and claims are highly subjective.
Kenny talks of organizations such as the NFL, World Vision, and British NGO and how these organizations donate to “SWEDOW” (Stuff we don’t want). He mentions …show more content…
The impression I received from Kenny is, in his opinion, money is the only way one should donate. This is very evident with every example that he gives and also evident in his conclusion, he ends the essay by saying, “Much better to stop giving the stuff we don’t want – and start giving them the money they do”. (255) While repetition may be considered a good literary technique to emphasize important points; it can also create a reaction to those who disagree with his biased claims. By continuously repeating that money is the best form of donation, it appears to me that author is trying to coerce readers into agreeing to his claim. While this claim is very subjective, it can create other issues, such as people may view this as giving is only considered charitable if what is being given is money. I don’t believe that the generous act of giving/donating should be measured or quantified with only currency. What should be a consideration is that there are organizations and people who want to contribute to and are willing to help those in need, their kindness. Kenny’s very biased definition of charity may or may not be accepted by others, as charity is something that people base off their own individual
Kenny talks of organizations such as the NFL, World Vision, and British NGO and how these organizations donate to “SWEDOW” (Stuff we don’t want). He mentions …show more content…
The impression I received from Kenny is, in his opinion, money is the only way one should donate. This is very evident with every example that he gives and also evident in his conclusion, he ends the essay by saying, “Much better to stop giving the stuff we don’t want – and start giving them the money they do”. (255) While repetition may be considered a good literary technique to emphasize important points; it can also create a reaction to those who disagree with his biased claims. By continuously repeating that money is the best form of donation, it appears to me that author is trying to coerce readers into agreeing to his claim. While this claim is very subjective, it can create other issues, such as people may view this as giving is only considered charitable if what is being given is money. I don’t believe that the generous act of giving/donating should be measured or quantified with only currency. What should be a consideration is that there are organizations and people who want to contribute to and are willing to help those in need, their kindness. Kenny’s very biased definition of charity may or may not be accepted by others, as charity is something that people base off their own individual