“The End of Poverty” by Phillipe Diaz

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Body
Conclusion

Introduction

In the film End of Poverty, the filmmaker tries to unravel the mystery behind poverty in the world. He ponders on the question of why are there poor people living in such a resource-filled world? The film tactfully highlights the possible roots of modern poverty to that of a man-made origin by going back into history for over five hundred years ago. He systematically explains the cause of poverty in light of the world economic system that is capitalism. This system has made it possible for the developed economies to exploit the resources of the underdeveloped economies this is called modern-day enslavement. The filmmaker equates the effects of capitalism to amount to greed and a total disaster. The filmmaker tries to answer the question of whether it is possible to end poverty in the world. He raises critical a argument by saying that it is practically impossible with the current economic order. In this paper, we shall discuss in detail the phenomenon that is poverty. An analysis will be made as to whether the various arguments made by the filmmaker,the scholars and the interviewees in the film hold any ground.

Body

Ideas

In the film, the writer uses a lot of explanation that concurs with his thesis that the cause of poverty in developing countries has been caused by the developed countries. The filmmaker explores the use of western capitalization ideologies for example through the introduction of property ownership in a certain society in Kenya destabilizing the cultures and norms of the people. Showcases a scenario whereby the north countries depend on the south in terms of resources since they have non back in their countries.For example the writer gives a practical example as to how The British white settlers infiltrated Africa and took over all the arable land belonging to the natives and in return making them their slaves. Another example was the privatization of all state corporations and resources in Bolivia by the Belgian government which later resulted in an uprising by the masses.

Organization

The film is arranged in such a way that the author has persuasively argued his case that the cause of poverty is man-made and it was brought about by the scramble for resources in the developing countries.The film is full of rhetoric in the sense that one fails to understand the reason as to why the world is so rich in resources and yet there is extreme poverty in it. The aspect of rhetoric showcases itself is when the countries located in the southern hemisphere despite being naturally endowed with resources, form the bulk of the poorest population in the world. This is not the case with the countries located in the northern hemisphere which suffer from a scarcity of resources yet they are miles ahead in matters of development. The above examples have been used by the filmmaker to convincingly make a statement on the argument that the developed states are responsible for the poverty levels in the developing world.

Language

The filmmakers’ attitude towards the case at hand is that of a no-nonsense hardball since he has already formed a disposition on the matter. His take is that for poverty to end, then the developed nations must stop advancing economically and do the opposite stop growth of which is practically impossible. The kind of tone employed by the filmmaker varies from the somber and moody scenes an example being when he showcases the part of an eight-year-old child begging in the streets to the harsh dark and ominous tone used by the various interviewees while blaming the developed nations.

Credibility

The filmmaker is justified in his argument when he says that the root course of poverty has been as a result of man-made action which was centered on greed amongst the developed nations. The argument is supported by most if not all of the professors’ of economics in all the countries interviewed. It is also true to assert that the filmmakers’ views concerning the grants and loans being offered to the underdeveloped countries do not in any way help the situation in these countries it only plunges the countries into more debts.

Conclusion

The film highlights a very pertinent issue in our present society; it tries to demystify the reasons as to why some people are filthy rich while others are so poor yet they are endowed with the most resources globally. One of the interviewees, who claim to be an economic hit man, broadens the scope of the film and introduces another perspective that highlights the dirty tricks played by developed governments in their quest to control the flow of resources from the less developed countries to the developed countries. It brings to the attention that once the poor countries are developed there will be no raw materials to be supplied to the western economies thus the need to maintain this status by the developed nations. My take in this argument will be that poverty will not end the poor countries will continue to be poorer due to corruption amongst the leaders and the scarcity of resources such as oil which is a vital component for growth.

Click Here To Order Now!