Changing Mindsets on Poverty?

It might be drawing a long straw to equate Nelson Mandela's legacy to life in Indonesia, but waking up to the news of Mandela's passing makes some form of reflection mandatory.


Mandela believed that Poverty is caused by humans and that  the path out of poverty is through the actions of humans. Is this message plausible in a society where millions are earning $1 a day and money directed to schools does not always get there due to corruption in the institutions of government and bureaucracy.

Having spent the last week asking international schools in Jakarta to be part of a fundraiser for  a social organization working with street children,  it occurred to me that perhaps raising money through donations from those more fortunate heightens the barriers between those who can afford a private school education and those who cant.

One school rejected this model of fundraising by stating;
"For over 5 years I’ve been trying to cultivate very direct responsibilities in my students regarding how to effect equality: it led us to building a tiny school – and that reminded us – and still does – how hugely challenging acting against poverty is. But, we’ve pressed on, and the school is running , still, with the same direct, personal involvement from students, who manage all aspects of the school – and who know that by direct action, in complex circumstances, society can be changed. It’s precisely this form of deep involvement that effects change in mindsets: I’m less tolerant of fundraisers because they tend to ‘distance’ those in need – in fact, ‘reduce them’ to a need, rather than allow them to exist in their full and complex humanity"

 Should an organization be asking for funding from those more fortunate if it simply perpetuates the status quo? Is it any different to giving money on the street? 

Indonesia has committed to spend 1/5th of it GDP budget on Education. The World Bank states  that "access to senior secondary –SMA (and sekolah menengah atas) – and tertiary education, while improving on average, still remains extremely low for the poor". Quite simply, children from poor families cannot afford to go to school.  Without further government reform of the education sector, the only way for these children to receive an education is through the charity of social organisations, or through the direct action model explained above.

In my opinion, both models; of providing scholarships to children from marginalized families through donations and the direct action model have their positives and negatives. They are an essential tool of advocacy in the fight to change mindsets about poverty and universal education. However, they are not sustainable long term model.  Education is a human right and should be government funded.Indonesia has the commitment to change the lives of millions of poor people through its Education Policy. But it is lacking the capacity to implement this commitment as the money is not being spent in an equitable basis.    
The commitment to spend 20% of the budget on education is part of the 'demographic dividend' that will see Indonesia become a major world power. Changing Mindsets on Poverty is largely driven by an economic imperative to compete with its neighbors in a global market, not a conscious decision to help the worlds poor live a more comfortable existence. The middle class in Indonesia can already attest to the benefits of capitalism. 

Advocating for an economic imperative to include the poorest in society is one legacy of Nelson Mandela's that Indonesia should take to heart.