NGO’s: Modern Missionaries?

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Brooklyn, New York, United States of America (Free-Press-Release.com) October 25, 2011 -- During The First International Congress of the World Evangelization, held back in July of 1974 in Lausanne, Switzerland, the term Christian Missionary was defined as “one who is to witness across cultures to form a a viable church-planting movement”, however, these days modern missionaries tend to promote not just the religious movement, but also put a great deal of emphasis on the development of western government, education and economic structure in place of the pre-existing model.

When you think about it, that doesn’t seem too different from the role many NGO’s are playing in society today. To start with, many of the prominent NGO’s currently operating are either largely western based and/or at least founded by the Anglo American elite. While nearly all of them pursue some wider social aim with political aspects, they are meant to be relatively politically non-partisan by their very definition, however, the reality is that many NGO’s are simply tools used to shape foreign policy and western thought.

Of course, not that there is anything wrong with Western ideals or even Christianity for that matter, but as with the missionaries of old colonial times many NGO’s fail to recognize the philosophical and cultural differences of other countries who perhaps simply do not share the same ideas as the west.

It’s hard to imagine a group of Voodoo missionaries going from door to door throughout the quiet suburbs of America intent on converting your neighbors and defaming our democratic and religious beliefs via massive PR campaigns, however, this is pretty much what NGO’s are doing in some countries where they have very little understanding of people’s historical and cultural differences. Perhaps they don’t want t change. Perhaps they are simply content with the way things are.

In their book “New Roles and Relevance: Development NGO’s and the Challenge of Change” authors Howell and Pearce make a great observation when they note that “civil society cannot really be grown from “outside”: it comes from within society: it reacts to specific historical, social and cultural contexts”.

They go on to say “Apart from the question of neutrality, which serves to mask the distribution of power, there is also the larger question of the morality of interventionism. Is donor support to civil society another manifestation of neocolonialism in the post-Cold War era, aimed at controlling the nature of political regimes and extending global markets? Do donors have the right, let alone the capacity, to shape other civil societies? By projecting their own visions and understandings of civil society, do they not undermine the ability of local organizations to set their own priorities and agendas, to vocalize their own imaginations of social and political change?”

While an argument can be made that perhaps some of these less developed countries could indeed use help, but have they really asked for it?

New Roles and Relevance: Development NGO’s and the Challenge of Change can be ordered from Amazon and is now available for Kindle.

http://www.amazon.com/New-Roles-Relevance-Development-Challenge/dp/1565491211

foreign policy     NGO criticism     NGO s