I work for an NGO that works to improve health in low income countries. If you look at my office, it will look a bit like the graduating class of some small liberal arts collage - somewhat diverse, but not phenomenally so. But if you look at our organization as a whole, you will find it is staffed by hundreds and hundreds of people who work in their home country to improve their own people's health. I support them from here, acting as the interface between local systems and customs and the US government, which requires things to be done its own way. The US office is about 100 people. The global "office" is maybe 1000.

Why do I do this work? Well, I'm in my 40's and I still believe passionately that no mother should watch her child die, and no child should be left motherless because of lack of care. That is why I leave my own kid and travel places where terrorists blow people up. I have no trust fund, just a good education and a lot of motivation. I'm still a believer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:why are humanitarian and international development organizations staffed almost exclusively by white people?

i've been working in the development community for the past five years and im surprised by how all the jobs are held by white rich trust fund girls. it kind of baffles me because these are the most privileged people and they're trying to tweet about female maternal mortality in Kenya or India. The whole thing seems to fake to me.

I am not going to bother reading the whole thread OP, but you obviously work for a small US-based non-profit or contracting company.

If you worked for a large organization like the World Bank Group, you would see that it is very diverse, especially when taking into account the country offices, but also at HQ here in DC.

The issue is that only the World Bank and other large orgs pay well and carry prestige, and so those are the only places where the elite, well-educated (and non-white) people from developing countries want to work in development. It's not too difficult to have a $125,000-150,000+ salary at the World Bank, so a Bank job will allow you to live a good life and raise a family in DC, especially on two salaries.

In contrast, small US-based development NGOs pay very poorly, and so they tend to attract people who are happy earning very little money while living in an expensive city. In other words, young, white trust funders like you say.

Elaborating on my own post for people who are not familiar with what I mean in bold. For example, say you are the child of a wealthy (black) family in West Africa, and your family pays for you to attend private boarding school in France followed by Sciences Po undergrad followed by Harvard or LSE grad school. If you are interested in development, or just interested in a fulfilling and well-paying career in general, then the World Bank would be an attractive option. But such people will NOT be applying for a $65,000 job at some small NGO.

Anonymous wrote:why are humanitarian and international development organizations staffed almost exclusively by white people?

i've been working in the development community for the past five years and im surprised by how all the jobs are held by white rich trust fund girls. it kind of baffles me because these are the most privileged people and they're trying to tweet about female maternal mortality in Kenya or India. The whole thing seems to fake to me.

I am not going to bother reading the whole thread OP, but you obviously work for a small US-based non-profit or contracting company.

If you worked for a large organization like the World Bank Group, you would see that it is very diverse, especially when taking into account the country offices, but also at HQ here in DC.

The issue is that only the World Bank and other large orgs pay well and carry prestige, and so those are the only places where the elite, well-educated (and non-white) people from developing countries want to work in development. It's not too difficult to have a $125,000-150,000+ salary at the World Bank, so a Bank job will allow you to live a good life and raise a family in DC, especially on two salaries.

In contrast, small US-based development NGOs pay very poorly, and so they tend to attract people who are happy earning very little money while living in an expensive city. In other words, young, white trust funders like you say.

For real? I've worked in international development for the last 10 years and have found it to be incredibly diverse.

I work at the World Bank - a huge international development organization here in DC. It is completely diverse. I'm the only white person my team of 20+. Take a walk around the buildings - you will see people from all parts of the world.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:? I work for one of the biggest nonprofit development orgs in DC and we are incredibly diverse. OP, which orgs are you talking about?

Vital voices
Population services international

Vital Voices is an outlier, having emerged from the Clinton White House and being staffed primarily by Democratic Party types. It's not representative of the broader international development community at all.

Anonymous wrote:? I work for one of the biggest nonprofit development orgs in DC and we are incredibly diverse. OP, which orgs are you talking about?

Vital voices
Population services international

Anonymous wrote:I've always wondered why you only see white people (U.S. and European) going to help in countries in crisis, whether it's somewhere in Africa (Liberia, Sierra Leone) or the Middle East. Doctors w/o Borders, etc.

Why aren't more black people or people of color in general helping out in situations like these?

I think you are looking in the wrong places. Doctors without Borders might be predominantly white because they are a European (French) organization. But there are many other organizations that provide the same assistance in international humanitarian contexts, and those are often staffed by host country and third country nationals who are also from the Global South.

UNHCR has tons of people from the targeted regions working in their ranks, in fact it can be next to impossible to get into the UN as a US or European citizen because the competition is so fierce. The International Committee of the Red Cross/Red Cresent also hires from the region. Not to mention all of the development and humanitarian assistance organizations that are based in the target country and run by local nationals.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think some of it is a sense of superiority? That's why they get into development? Because they feel they know how to fix the person's abysmal situation?

Its so hypocritical. What would a privileged white trust fund kid know about human rights? or human rights violations?

I tis called empathy and wanting to help the world be a better place.

Anonymous wrote:I work for one such agency. We hire almost exclusively out of the very top schools. Those schools are still, sadly, mostly white. That's your answer right there.

Asians are a significant minority (so much so they are discriminated against) at the very top schools. Your answer is crap.

The answer is the pay is horrible but the work can be interesting. It's the same issue in the front offices of sports and other 'self-actualizing' careers - art, museum work, etc.

Wealthy families more often than not are white (asians have good income, but asian wealth in this country isn't comparable to white wealth due to generational factors) and these families can afford to underwrite their children pursuing self-actualizing 'dream' jobs.

Anonymous wrote:I've always wondered why you only see white people (U.S. and European) going to help in countries in crisis, whether it's somewhere in Africa (Liberia, Sierra Leone) or the Middle East. Doctors w/o Borders, etc.

Why aren't more black people or people of color in general helping out in situations like these?

Amen.

I suspect the children of rich parents that don't work in international development are, on average, worse than those that do, so I am not sure why we are picking on the latter.

I think some people here do not understand the word hypocrisy. Coming from a wealthy background and wanting to help the poor is not hypocrisy.

Now, if we think that some organizations or people are ineffectual, then yes, I am sure there are examples. But in my experience there are also NGOs doing amazing work in very difficult conditions, and I would not denigrate their work because some or their workers are white and well educated.

Anonymous wrote:Do you think some of it is a sense of superiority? That's why they get into development? Because they feel they know how to fix the person's abysmal situation?

You seem pretty determined to get someone to agree with your sweeping negative generalizations. And for some reason you are picking on people who choose to do low-paid work intended to help others? You sound like a really effed up person.

Anonymous wrote:Do you think some of it is a sense of superiority? That's why they get into development? Because they feel they know how to fix the person's abysmal situation?

You seem pretty determined to get someone to agree with your sweeping negative generalizations. And for some reason you are picking on people who choose to do low-paid work intended to help others? You sound like a pretty effed up person.

Anonymous wrote:I work for one such agency. We hire almost exclusively out of the very top schools. Those schools are still, sadly, mostly white. That's your answer right there.

This isn't rocket science, folks. Whites are currently the majority population. Of course, it makes sense that they would be the majority population at these schools. It is basic numbers and as the population changes these numbers will change.