Scan barcode
mokey4's review
This book has some interesting ideas on recent programs to address humanitarian crises, and the negative & positive aspects of these programs. However, the ideas aren't interesting enough to compel me to continue reading this book, which is full of jargon and poorly-written prose. I guess if I couldn't get through it in grad school, when it was required reading, there's no way I'd get through it now, when it's just recreational. If you're really into these issues, this might be a good enough read.
0xreid's review
5.0
If you can force yourself past the introduction (first 30 pages), then the book is an excellent look at humanitarianism through the early '00s. It discusses the pros and cons of humanitarianism, its relation to colonialism, how it has been co-opted for human rights, development, and political/military purposes, and why this can be considered a bad thing.
Rieff takes a pessimistic view, but not one that is unwarranted (except for the first 30 pages which start the book on an incredibly sour note and might drive off the very people who should read the rest of it).
It has certainly helped clarify the differences between humanitarian work, human rights work, and development work for me. Anyone interested in global politics, conflict zones, and humanitarian work should read this.
I will note that the end of the books feels incredibly dated. It was finished/published in 2003, and the afterword was written in July 2003. I feel that the ending of the book might be radically different if written today, largely because of Afghanistan and Iraq. That aside, the rest of the book is an incredibly useful history.
Rieff takes a pessimistic view, but not one that is unwarranted (except for the first 30 pages which start the book on an incredibly sour note and might drive off the very people who should read the rest of it).
It has certainly helped clarify the differences between humanitarian work, human rights work, and development work for me. Anyone interested in global politics, conflict zones, and humanitarian work should read this.
I will note that the end of the books feels incredibly dated. It was finished/published in 2003, and the afterword was written in July 2003. I feel that the ending of the book might be radically different if written today, largely because of Afghanistan and Iraq. That aside, the rest of the book is an incredibly useful history.
More...