Working in the field of international development, there is an assumption of working and living overseas; there is an inherent instability and level of flux and motion. It’s great to work and live in a dynamic environment that is always changing: it is never boring. There is always new-ness: new tasks, new things, new places and new people.

In working for a large NGO, I also have the luxury of job stability. But sometimes I feel as though I’ve “sold-out” to the template of a productive member society: go to school, graduate, get a stable job, get married, have kids, etc, etc. ad nauseum. A friend of mine started a tiny organization, Raising the Village, that goes against the grain of both our model of society as well as the business model of NGOs.  At times, I envy the singular drive that distinguishes RTV from other organizations. But of course, every NGO and every person has their niche: I am still figuring out mine.

The rhythm of relief and humanitarian work is 3 months somewhere, home for a break, and then another 3 months in the next disaster zone. This schedule doesn’t allow room for family, friends, relationships, and the rest of life in general. I know people who were able to manage this lifestyle, but not many, and probably not me.

Should I be looking for more stability or more security? I have been told to expect uncertainty, and to be certain of the unexpected. In any case, “You can’t always get what you want” (sing along to that tune!) or that you can’t always get everything you want.

It’s all about contrast and our sensitivity to poverty. Village
poverty is wide spread through a village. Usually, the entire village
has very little, including the elders and leaders of the community.
Village poverty is more akin to rural poverty, in that people are
usually survive through subsistence activities. It is usually no
market economy. Also, villagers are usually more spread out having
more land with which to scavenge materials like firewood, as well as,
land for their cattle to roam. Slum poverty usually occurs in pockets
within a larger city. Slums are packed and congested, and usually
without proper sanitation or water. A lack of sanitation isn’t a
problem in isolation. The diseases occur when people are congested,
bringing the lack of sanitation closer to each person. Slum poverty
might be a stones throw from a 5-star hotel. I was once in the Ritz
Carlton in Shanghai, and it overlooked a neighbourhood on the other
end of the economic scale. It wasn’t necessarily a slum, but you can
easily translate the scenario to Africa, and Asia and shift the
economic scales downward.

So slum poverty akin to acute pain and village more like chronic pain.
If you stayed in villages and small towns for long enough, you become
inured to the standard of life that people “enjoy”. But in a city,
it’s easy to see the horrible conditions endured in the slums,
especially when you sleep in a nice house with guards at the door.

Your comments on this would be very appreciated. I haven’t fleshed this out completely, but it is still on my mind.