

While I’m less hostile to the idea (actually, I kind of like it), ultimately it doesn’t make sense. Our geographic difference makes our situation very different from EU member states. Our resources and outputs are very different, our location and geography makes transport needs very different. Deals that make sense for us among the Americas would make no sense for the EU. And the EU isn’t just trade, free flow of citizens makes no sense in this context, either.
Brexit was dumb for them, but it doesn’t mean joining would be smart for us. We should be just be allies with the EU and have lots of friendly policies, yes.
To put it another way, just because you break up with a long time partner who became abusive, it doesn’t mean you should start dating the (long distance) friend who supported you through it. Sometimes you should just be friends, for the better.








I understand where you’re coming from, and it wouldn’t apply in this specific context (where locals had rejected the poor boy), but in a general sense, the idea is to partner or invest in such a way to enable locals to lead the change efforts, or at least have a significant stake and voice.
In the business world, there are often silent investors who back entrepreneurs. Their financial input make a business possible, but leave the operations to the entrepreneur. The investor backs the entrepreneur, and they both profit.
It’s a different model and it takes more time and effort to find local partners to build up their capacity over time, but enabling locals will get stronger long-term results for the recipients of charity. It’s the difference between providing food packages to people and giving people agricultural tools to provide food for themselves in the long run. Obviously, in a situation of dire need, providing food is an immediate need, but only providing food instead of also providing tools keeps the recipients in a dependent situation. If they’re dependent on foreign charity forever, it’s just another form of control and colonialism.
What this woman had done, by caring for this poor boy, was long-term investing in him. Now he has an education and will be able to work and care for himself.