Dialogue Post

So today for me has been a frustrating day of thinking, but I won't get into that. I'm currently writing my thesis on microfinance and a lot of thoughts have been running through my mind about this topic. Development. (This may not seem connected but it will).

After rereading my earlier post about ideology and Gabe's response, I realized that I agree with what Gabe's response was. I think I came across as negative with self-interest, but it's not negative, it's just the reality. And I think microfinance is a perfect example. Doing microfinance has become a popular development tool for a variety of reasons. One being that investors have found it profitable. While some practitioners and experts find this problematic (making profit off of the poor), others view it more positively. With investors seeing profit in doing microfinance, there is more money in to provide microfinance services to the poor. When interests can converge in a way that may not seem likely, good can come of it. Maybe not necessarily for the right motives, but if both investors and NGOs are both doing the same thing that has a positive impact (assuming microfinance has a positive impact), who cares right?

So, I do actually agree with Gabe, so don't worry I don't take it as an attack, because after rereading my post, I realized how my tone came off quite negative (I was having a bad day). I think there is nothing necessarily wrong with self-interest, but just that it needs to be recognized as existing and having a very significant role in foreign policy making. When looking at reasons for policymaking decisions, we shouldn't look at what might been given as an ideology and look deeper, not necessarily to critique it (sometimes we should though) but to recognize it as being perhaps more legitimate. In terms of my connection with microfinance, both actors are working towards a similar goal but have different self interests, perhaps working together doesn't seem so far-fetched Grieco? Creativity.........