Happy but Angry at the same time
The 2006 Nobel Peace Prize has gone to Muhammad Yunus and Grameen Bank.
I’ve written about them here before because I really believe in his banking model. Microfinance and lending is a powerful force for change in developing nations. I think we should try it more in the US.
However, the thing that sticks in my craw is the headline that CNN put on it from their front page, “Bank for dirt poor wins peace prize.” The article itself has this title, ” Bankers for poor win peace Nobel,” which is just awful headline grammar if you ask me, but at least it doesn’t say ‘dirt poor.’
Why is economic standing still a value judgement? I don’t think that’s very fair or rational. ‘Dirt poor’ implies that people living in poverty are unclean and creates an image of the poor that infects the mind in a insidious way that continues the value judgement upon an economic status, which maybe correlated, but not necessarily causative.
What am I trying to say? I’m trying to say that it’s great that Grameen has won the Nobel Peace Prize. I have written about them before because I honestly believe they do amazing work. But I am disappointed that CNN has called Grameen’s clientele dirt poor, because these are people who have made a serious commitment to improving their lives, contribute to capitalism in a tangible way and deserve our respect for taking the steps to getting out of poverty. I respect a client of Grameen Bank much more than a CNN Millionaire in the Making. It’s easy to make yourself a millionaire when you already have some money. It’s quite another to break a cycle of poverty lasting for generations.
Ok end of my ranting. Back to work you serfs!
Post a Comment