On poverty, toilets and the rich-poor divide

The Jakarta Post ,  Jakarta   |  Sun, 10/07/2007 8:28 AM  |  Life

""The deeper the pocket, the tighter the fist. The more you have, the more you want and the less you give. There, am I sounding like Confucius yet? Or Lao Tzu, maybe?""

Our ruminations currently revolve around the rich-poor divide, and how the chasm seems to be growing exponentially, giving further credence to the (paraphrased) words of Johann Friedrich Von Schiller: The rich get richer, the poor get poorer.

So, how did we get started on this particular conversational thread? A couple of weeks ago, I got sucked into developing an emergency email appeal for a fund-raising drive; we had just three days to raise the money for a trash picker colony of 75 people, who were under imminent threat of losing their only toilet.

No, it hadn't got up and walked away; the landlord had sold off the adjoining plot of land, arbitrarily annexing the trash pickers' toilet and bathing facilities as well. And being lowest in the pecking order, trash pickers have no rights; they just have to sit there and take it. Literally.

Thus far, it had been 75 people, roughly two-thirds of them children, to one toilet. And now it was 75 people, no toilet. For an idea of what that feels like, the next time you need to go to the loo, don't. Hold on for a couple of hours instead. Maybe even for a couple of days.

My mother, being fastidious-bordering-on-obsessive about most things, is particularly anal about toilets. Naturally, she was therefore extremely agitated about this whole situation; the thought of 75 people without any loo facilities whatsoever was giving her rather graphic nightmares.

She took to asking me rapid-fire questions every three seconds, like I was some sort of self-updating toilet-status hotline:

Mum: ""So do they have a toilet yet?""

Me: ""Not yet, they're still digging the septic tank...""

""Did the appeal bring in enough money?""

""More than enough, actually. Some donors suggested putting in two toilets and two bathing spigots, one of each is hardly enough for that many people. So you won't need to invite them here to use ours, after all.""

""But how long will it take to get the whole thing up and running?""

""Another two days, they say.""

""Oh dear, and how are they going to manage in the meantime? Particularly the women and children?""

""I don't know Mum, I guess they'll probably have to go out in the open?""

*******

We were quiet for a moment, both silently pursuing scatologically-oriented cogitations: no toilet, violation of basic need for privacy, state of ambient cleanliness or rather, absence thereof, risk of groundwater contamination, spread of disease -- not to mention the odiously odiferous aspect -- till finally, I broke the loaded silence in an effort to extricate ourselves from sewage-and-sludge mode:

""I learnt something new today that I've learnt a million times before.""

""Oh? And what was that?""

""Practically 80 percent of the well-heeled people you'd expect would dig deepest into their pockets, turned out to be the most stingy. Apart from a few notable and very generous exceptions, that is. And those not that flush (pun intended) with funds actually gave more, on an income-to-contribution percentage basis. I know this is hardly news, but still, it never fails to amaze me.""

""So, how did you think the rich get richer? Not by giving their money away, that's for sure.""

*******

Whether it's individuals, politicians or corporates lining their pockets, or biz tycoons lobbying ministers/senators, or back-room deals being worked at international conferences, it all usually plays out the same way.

The guys with the money cut bigger deals to make more money, most of them dispossessing the poor of their livelihoods (think farm subsidies, import tariffs, WTO), of their meager tin-roofed shanties (think more new hi-rise developments built on repossessed land for which the poor are never compensated) or any other exploitatory consumerist situation you care to name.

And it seems to work that way across the board, from the individual to the national and international levels.

The voiceless are never those with the money, because money talks. It's always the poor who are forced to remain silent, and go out into the fields to answer the call of nature when the landlord repossesses their loo.

This is just one story, and it ended better than it began because a few people jumped in with both feet and helped change the ending. There are many, many more stories out there, waiting for a different ending.

So when you next go to the toilet, enjoy the privacy, and remember to give thanks for the privilege of using your own privy. And then maybe instead of just sitting there, you might want to ponder a story near you that's looking for a different ending. Because the bottom line is, change happens one person at a time.

Priya Tuli is a strategic communications consultant with well over 25 years of wide-ranging experience in corporate, developmental and NGO communications. She is currently engaged in research into lotus-eating and islands. If you own one, please do let her know at priyatuli@randombloggz.com

Copyright © 2008 The Jakarta Post - PT Bina Media Tenggara. All Rights Reserved.