Is Traveling Wrong?

Ikuru

Recently I found myself in a conversation with someone about Backpacking.
The person was saying how she thought that she had done her fair share of backpacking and she would never do it again.

When I asked her to explain why, she was saying she thought that backpacking was a bit like exploiting another culture. And she did not want to participate in this anymore.

She thought that backpackers are putting poor people beneith them etc by traveling... And she was compareing backpackers to the colonialists. Saying backpacking is no better than lets say when the english or spanish "invaded" india etc...

I for one can not agrea with her. But She does make some kind of point. Allthough I can not see that I would be making the world a worse place by traveling to countries with a less fortunate ecconomy than my own countrys.
Sure if it wasnt for the fact that this countrys are cheaper than my own I wouldn´t be able to be their for such a loong time (or any time at all).
But I´m putting my money in to that ecconomy by going their arent I?

I do think allot of people who work with tourists etc deep down inside dont really like the fact that these people come to their country with all their money etc...

So what do you think?

Should we stop travelling? Is Backpacking wrong?

I know that Most things we have in the west are made cheap by beeing mainfactured in parts of asia etc by CHEAP labour. But what does this mean in practice?

Should we end shopping and travelling in order to make the world in to a better place?

Frankly I cant be bothered to think like this... Im not really interested in saving the world anyhow (Its enough work trying to save myself).

Whats your oppinion?
Are we exploiting the third world by travelling there? Is their a opption? A better way to do it? If so... How can their ever be ballance? How can we make things right?

__________________
http://www.ikuru.se My art.

camelgirl

Yipes, I'm glad I didn't meet that person. I don't agree at all. But I'm sure I wouldn't be able to convince someone with those kind of opinions of anything at all anyway. I've met and known people like that for years, and I pretty much keep quiet (hard for a blabbermouth like me). I almost can't think of what to say even here on IM.

I'll have to introduce her to a friend of mine who throws garbage on the ground "because it gives jobs to poor people" (like there isn't already enough trash everywhere!) Got nothing to say to her either! Talk about turning reality on it's head! I've never seen a "poor person" thank her for her littering

My only comment is, nothing is that simple in life. Don't backpack and the world will be a better place? I think not

Nick-H

When I lived near Stratford-upon-Avon the local people hated tourists. We moved to Cornwall, where tourists were viewed with contempt. By this time I was old enough to realise that, without those tourists, the local economy would have been pretty dire.

asucka

The thought about backpacking being just another side of the Third World exploitation by developed countires is obvious for anybody. It became very clear to me when I stayed in Manali for about 5 days and saw long-timers who whom the whole concept of being in India is just relaxing, etc. The bad thing is that there is some terrific illusion popular among young travellers. People come to India and say "we do not do touristy staff (like sightseeing). we just want to experience life". And then they actually enjoy the resorts , thinking about themselves as being very cool, open-minded, tolerant and actually being even more colonialistic than the brits in the 19-th century who at least did some work.

<bWhat disturbes me the most is not how bad or good backpacking is for the countries of destination, but what to hell is going on with our countries where for thousands of young people going to the cheap place and spending several months there not doing much at all sounds like the best idea of life. And it is notlike the hippes who at least had some ideology under their lifestyle. Now there is nothing more to it than just mere living a life without a hassle. Have we lost any productive drive? Are we at a point where the western civilization is dying? Whhat is the fate of next generations?</ b>

Ikuru

Verry interesting post. I do agrea with you in a way...

A bit off the topic at hand...
If someone asked me what I would be doing with my life if I was a milonare, I would normally respond something like "just lazing about with a girlfriend in thailand or India, building sand castles, chilling in a hammoc, watching sunsets etc.

Not that there is anything wrong with that but...

I think this sort of passesivety/lazyness comes from broken dreams or depression or hopelessnes...

Thankfully, I do have some other creative/spiritual drives too these days, more so than JUST lazing about.

Newmark

Is travelling wrong......

Hmmm. Although I have done, and continue to do, a lot of travelling, the morals of it does bother me. Surely, if we were truly socially responsible with money to spare we'd give it to charities dedicated to helping people rather than travelling to the other side of the world on polluting aircraft that contribute to climate change to spend a large amount of time doing nothing really. It's hard to admit, but I think I'm probably just a little too selfish to worry to much about it though.

torryquine

Is it wrong to satisfy your curiosity about how the rest of the world lives? Those of us who have the means to travel, are privillaged and the privillage of knowledge should never been thrown away. Is it wrong to educate yourself? Because to me, that's what travelling is all about. Wether it's doing batik with a master-craftsman in Java, or trying a few words of Hindi, or just watching the world live it's life - all the time, I'm learning something.

People travel for different reasons of course. Yes, you get the ones who are only there for the sun-tan. But then, who hasn't chilled out on a beach for a week during a long trip? As long as travellers act with respect for their hosts and their environment, they're fine with me.

Frankly, I get more worried about the future when I look at how people behave at home - the ones who travel have at least dragged themselves away from the television and discovered a world beyond the pub.

snowcrab

Even people who just go traveling in poor countries for the economical, laid back lifestyle are going to learn something more about themselves and the world than their cousins who just stayed at home, whether they plan to or not.

Newmark

I accept that those who travel to places like India do learn a lot about the world and themselves, but in the big scheme of things, is that really important? If we wanted to live in a truly altrusitic way and do what's right, we'd spend the money we use travelling on development projects and so help improve the lives of the world's poorest. Whichever way you look at things, that would be better for the region than just travelling there.

What nags me is that while I might learn a lot about myself, about other people and the world through travelling, my net impact on raising standards of living for the people I see is negligble. In short, I'm taking far more than I'm giving.

snowcrab

In the short term maybe.

But who knows how what people learn by seeing how the other half lives will impact their way of responding to the world down the road? It is of course a gamble, some people will remain takers all their lives, there is no getting away from that, but many will become just a little more open minded, open hearted and depending where their life's path takes them that may make a difference in the kind of effect they have on the world.

Newmark

I see your argument Snowcrab, but it seems a little too wooly to give me any real comfort. The chances of someone possibly doing something better with ther lives because of their travelling experiences seems far less concrete than the real, quantifiable good a donation too, for example, an orphanage would do.

I've actually used your argument when faced with someone who's against travelling in the developing world, but found myself thinking that all I was doing was justifying my decision and that I wasn't really convincing even myself.

I live with myself by accepting that the world's not a perfect place and that I'm not perfect either. I do my best day to day to live 'right,' but won't flog myself for not being perfect.

thirdreel

One way or another, the question isn't that simple. Backpacking is not in itself exploitative, but we do need to be aware of who we are and how it affects others. Those of us with the wherewithal to travel need to know that we're the lucky ones in the world.

I think the hostility Nick-H notes is part of an unbalanced system. The workers all hate the boss, even though he's the one who signs their checks. The townies all hate the tourists, even though they're the ones who bring business to town. Part of this is inevitable, but part of this is the choices we make when we travel. We need to treat locals with dignity, not as servants, not as zoo animals, not as our own private tutors, but as fellow people. That's a tough line to navigate sometimes. When my brother studied in England, he said his friends were most annoyed by the word "quaint." It suggests that you're looking at their world as an exhibit for your own entertainment; "This isn't quaint, it's my life!" But I think American tourists think they're complimenting other lives by calling them quaint.

The way I see it, there are some principles of ethical travel:

1. Don't try to change the culture you're visiting. Don't judge it as a problem that must be fixed.

2. Don't pretend you're something you're not. If you're an American, you're an American. If you're a tourist, you're a tourist. Be the best American tourist you can be. Don't try to prove you're not an American tourist.

3. Be friendly with your fellow tourists, but be aware that clustering with other foreigners can shield you from the actual culture you're in.

4. Make mistakes. When you do, admit you made mistakes.

5. Challenge your own expectations, even when you think your expectations are reasonable and enlightened.

6. Don't look at one person as a representative of an entire place. Respect the diversity of opinion--some locals will want you to be an active participant in culture, others won't. Don't think that one opinion is "The Indian view."

I think it would be a waste to renounce traveling entirely. It's better to be responsible.

Newmark

That's the argument though Thirdreel - given that travel is expensive and the money could arguably be better used helping those in poverty, isn't the very act of travelling in itself somewhat irresponsible?

snowcrab

There is absolutely no one stopping anyone from spending the money that they would have spent traveling on charity if that is what they feel is the most effective use of those resources. However, to try to impose your attitude on someone else who has different priorities is a waste of your time, it's not going to change their choices and a waste of your outrage which could be better directed at the actual causes of poverty at home or abroad.

Travelers will have their impact on the places they go, including injecting cash into cash starved regions in return for modest outlays of that regions resources and they have an impact back home when they interact with their own culture again. There can be good in all those things that are just as important, and maybe more important in terms of long term good as giving another days rice to an orphan child.

whatsilliness

I cant agree with you more. I think it is ridiculous to get so self-righteous about the problems of the world, taking it as your own personal anger, as if it has personally offended you.. a great example of this is cheap labor: all those activists who are all like STOP CHILD/CHEAP LABOR! do they NOT understand that those 20 cents a day are keeping the entire family alive?
granted, IDEALLY the company who is providing cheap labor would pay employees abroad as much as they do the workers in its own country... but tahts not the way most people work; humanity is selfish.
furthermore, finances are still relative.
i mean, isnt globalization an ideal example of this.. ideal?
for the world to be a whole, one unit
and well, we see how well that is going with the EU right?
and how globalization is sadly leading to a lot of exploitation?
ideal verse reality.

I think you are doing the BIGGEST deed to the world by going out there and learning as much as you can about it: YES, even if that means going to a country in which you are considered a millionare even if in actuality you are a struggling college student and living cheaply and travelling for months.
and nearly all those organizations only contribute maybe 5%? of your total contribution into the actual cause.. everything else is gobbled to bureacracy, peoples pockets (and not the people who actually need it)
all the global volunteering organizations that ive ever heard of through research or other peoples stories, such as cross cultural solutions, are INCREDIBLY corrupt-- non for profit my ass!
the best way you help people financially is to put money directly into the economy! (short term help)
long term help?
education. which is why international teachers are so important right now.

maybe if people werent so busy trying to save the world, and focused more on themselves, their issues, and how to solve their own fucked up lives.. well, maybe the world wouldnt be so comprehensively fucked up!

be a responsible traveller- yes!
be civil towards all people- yes!
but isnt that basic human decency?
and if you dont have that decency in your every day interactions, you dont have that as a traveller.

so maybe the ultimate goal here is to be a good human being, to all human beings: too bad that term (good) is relative!

"help yourself and you help the world"
im in full support of that.