American volunteerism, especially in the area of International service, has undergone a dramatic progression over the past 50 years. Not a progression with respect to time, but an advancement and in some cases an improvement of ideas. Ideas that once focused on domestic camaraderie and good-will, but have since pushed for social understanding between cultures and sustainable development among communities all across the world. In some ways, it has transcended former expectations and allowed for young Americans to take up arms against social issues and global injustices. With globalization and the help of technology, nations are more linked and more reliant than ever before. It is especially in these times that the American culture of volunteering is more on the international stage than ever before. Between 50,000 and 60,000 Americans volunteer overseas every year, with 18- to 24-year-olds making up the largest age group. A majority of these volunteers serve through organizations like the Peace Corp, while others choose to work with area-specific Non-Governmental Organizations. In a recent editorial, His Excellency, the President Rwanda Paul Kagame said, “We view the return of the Peace Corps as a significant event in Rwanda’s recovery. These young men and women represent what is good about America.” This sentiment is not necessarily shared by many working in development and international aid organizations, however. But if there is one thing that is for sure about the needs that international volunteers aim to fill, it is that in one way or another the challenges of today not only ask for a better and more accountable individual, but demand it. Though this progression of volunteerism has indeed yielded positive results, it has by no means reached its destination. As an old Irish proverb says, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. This bit of wisdom can definitely be applied to the outcomes of many modern American volunteer projects abroad. So often do we see rigid ideals, one-size-fits-all strategies, and social indoctrination on the part of American volunteers. We see the spread of religion taking precedence over the spread of welfare and wellbeing. We see the overall experience of the volunteer yielding more importance than their own projects at hand. Until this point, American volunteerism has often left a cold and neo-imperialist taste in the mouths of community members all over the world. This introverted and egocentric practice of intruding on another culture, enacting changes or solutions to problems identified by an outside perspective, and then describing such work as a noble sacrifice of time and resources, is little less than an invasion of uninformed bleeding hearts, basking and healing their own social conscious with the hardships of others. The problem with International volunteerism is not the spirit or willingness to assist others that drives one to do service. This is in fact a noble cause. The issue is instead the hidden agendas, unqualified project attempts, and loose understanding of how to work alongside others, mainly the stakeholders, of a particular area. American volunteers are not necessarily seeking to sabotage communities, or inherently attempting to impose their religious or political ideologies onto those they work with. They are indeed trying to help. But ignorance of an injustice offers no justification for the actions in question. It is up to the volunteers to change their mindset and adjust the objectives they set out to accomplish while working abroad. As volunteers, foreign and often unskilled, it is imperative that the limitations, and frankly the powerlessness they have to enact positive and sustainable change is both realized and understood to the fullest extent. It is also equally important to realize that service can rarely impact those served as much as those serving. It can be argued that it is the volunteer that gains more tangible benefits than the supposed beneficiaries of most short-term American volunteer projects. The fact of the matter is Volunteerism as an ideology must further refocus its purpose onto reciprocal gains. It must instill responsibility among volunteers while upholding cultural respect and acceptance. It must understand that a classroom and a book report do not yield cultural competence. It must inspire volunteers to dig deeper and work harder to prepare themselves for a cross-cultural experience. And although for some these experiences are hard to come by, this certainly does not mean that a service project should act as a temporary social science experiment. Volunteers are dealing with human life, with friendships and family, with beauty and hospitality, with hope and resilience. We must take this calling seriously. dustin.r.daniels@gmail.com
