(Photo: Taminator) The Most Important Story of the Day: Should we be vacationing in Haiti? In one corner: a family of four with good intentions who bought tickets for a Royal Caribbean cruise months in advance. In the other corner: an island and a people, ravaged by a recent earthquake, with an unscathed northern coast developed by Royal Caribbean ripe as always for vacationers. What happens now? Does the family for four board the tenders and ship over to the pristine beaches of northern Haiti? Do they cancel their cruise and try again when things are a little better? Do they stay on the ship on the day that they stop in Haiti? Or do they cancel the plans to rent Wave Runners and instead find ways to make a small but meaningful impact on the people of Haiti? I like to believe that in situations like this people rise to the occasion to help their fellow humans. It’s easy to donate to the Red Cross from the comfort of your stable-grounded living room, but what do you do if those cruise tickets have been sitting in your kitchen drawer for months and now it’s time to embark? In an article on CNN, Chris MacDonald, a senior fellow at Duke University’s Kenan Institute for Ethics, writes: People who believe it’s disrespectful for tourists to enjoy themselves so close to a disaster zone should realize that the alternative of avoiding the area wouldn’t be more respectful. The article goes on to loosely state how business from tourists to Haitian locals could “trickle down” to those in need but how much do the funds from that souvenir coconut football really trickle down? The rabbit hole can’t be very deep. And surely Royal Caribbean isn’t organizing humanitarian efforts among its customers to help those affected by the earthquake (an obvious insurance and safety nightmare). I pose that the question of vacationing in Haiti is similar to the question of the Buddhist eating meat. The similarity comes from what’s in the mind during such a situation. Buddhism teaches that if one pauses to reflect on the animal who gave its life for the purpose of being another’s meal, they have done their part; their intentions are right. Similarly, if the vacationer focuses their trip to Haiti on the ways in which they can make an impact rather than lay around in the sun, their intentions are right. What few mention in this ethical dilemma are the facts that most of the other Caribbean island ports of call are also extremely poor, though the nice white resort walls do a good job of keeping the guilt out and the fun in. So should the family of four go to Haiti, step foot on the island, and enjoy their day? Absolutely. Instead of bartering as some tourists do, they should pay double for goods that they buy in the markets. Maybe triple. They should ask locals that they come in contact with how they can help without putting themselves in danger. Because donating from miles away is great but making an impact at ground zero, no matter the size, is immeasurable.

(Photo: Taminator)

The Most Important Story of the Day: Should we be vacationing in Haiti?

In one corner: a family of four with good intentions who bought tickets for a Royal Caribbean cruise months in advance. In the other corner: an island and a people, ravaged by a recent earthquake, with an unscathed northern coast developed by Royal Caribbean ripe as always for vacationers.

What happens now? Does the family for four board the tenders and ship over to the pristine beaches of northern Haiti? Do they cancel their cruise and try again when things are a little better? Do they stay on the ship on the day that they stop in Haiti? Or do they cancel the plans to rent Wave Runners and instead find ways to make a small but meaningful impact on the people of Haiti?

I like to believe that in situations like this people rise to the occasion to help their fellow humans. It’s easy to donate to the Red Cross from the comfort of your stable-grounded living room, but what do you do if those cruise tickets have been sitting in your kitchen drawer for months and now it’s time to embark?

In an article on CNN, Chris MacDonald, a senior fellow at Duke University’s Kenan Institute for Ethics, writes:

People who believe it’s disrespectful for tourists to enjoy themselves so close to a disaster zone should realize that the alternative of avoiding the area wouldn’t be more respectful.

The article goes on to loosely state how business from tourists to Haitian locals could “trickle down” to those in need but how much do the funds from that souvenir coconut football really trickle down? The rabbit hole can’t be very deep.

And surely Royal Caribbean isn’t organizing humanitarian efforts among its customers to help those affected by the earthquake (an obvious insurance and safety nightmare).

I pose that the question of vacationing in Haiti is similar to the question of the Buddhist eating meat. The similarity comes from what’s in the mind during such a situation. Buddhism teaches that if one pauses to reflect on the animal who gave its life for the purpose of being another’s meal, they have done their part; their intentions are right.

Similarly, if the vacationer focuses their trip to Haiti on the ways in which they can make an impact rather than lay around in the sun, their intentions are right.

What few mention in this ethical dilemma are the facts that most of the other Caribbean island ports of call are also extremely poor, though the nice white resort walls do a good job of keeping the guilt out and the fun in.

So should the family of four go to Haiti, step foot on the island, and enjoy their day?

Absolutely.

Instead of bartering as some tourists do, they should pay double for goods that they buy in the markets. Maybe triple. They should ask locals that they come in contact with how they can help without putting themselves in danger. Because donating from miles away is great but making an impact at ground zero, no matter the size, is immeasurable.

  1. zackshapiro posted this