Social Research // Case Study 4

Our very first assignment in Social Research CCO105 had us choosing between 5 cases. 

After choosing one, we were then to use our knowledge of the 3 theories, which were Karl Marx's Conflict Theory, Emile Durkheim's Structural Functionalism, and Max Webber's Symbolic Interactionism, to deduce and come to a conclusion on the issue.

The case I chose was about the growing trend of Orphanage Tourism in Cambodia and it's effect on the locals and the on a global stage. 

I chose Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim.

“Voluntourism, and it’s the down side.”

Case Study 4: Orphanages in Cambodia: The good, the bad and the exploitive.

Using

Karl Marx’s Conflict Theory

&

Emile Durkheim’s Structural Functionalism

Tourism is finally picking up in Cambodia, voluntourism (volunteerism combined with tourism), to be more exact. This booming industry has caused a 75% increase in orphanages and a 250% increase in foreign arrivals, favoured by voluntourists, who range from the backpackers to the influential. Tourism, worth US$7.6 trillion, with voluntourism a major contributor, is poverty-stricken Cambodia’s saving grace. (World Travel and Toursim Council, 2015). However, tourism is now seeping into a part of Cambodian society that it has no association with whatsoever, orphanages. This dire situation has resulted in orphanages being exploited and commercialized, disrupting the social fabric of Cambodian Society (Hartley and Walker, 2013).

For Karl Marx, society is in a state of perpetual conflict due to competition for limited resources and is maintained by domination and power between the Proletariat and the Bourgeoisie. In this case the poor Cambodians and the ones owning and running these orphanages accordingly. This situation provided a favourable medium for Voluntourism to flourish, pacesetting a surge of hoax orphanage businesses. This created a divided society between the poor, the middle class and the rich with inequalities in each group, all trying to better themselves and improve their economic status.

The exploiters who run these orphanages found an opportunity to exploit Cambodia’s poor to their advantage. They convince these poor parents to send them their children with the assurance of food, a roof, education and a better life, in return for money (Goldberg, 2012). This therefore creates a win-win situation for both sides. The poor parents improve their economic prospects by “selling” their children with a false consciousness that they will be well taken care of, and the exploiters getting their “commodity” for their business on the other end. Evidence shows over 71% of “orphans” in Cambodia are not real orphans at all. (Hartley and Walker, 2013) These “bought” children are crammed into deplorable living conditions, receiving neither the food nor proper education promised to their parents (Davidson, 2014), but instead forced to perform and tug at the hearts of the good-willed voluntourists who flock to see them, and who pay to “help” and improve their lives. These payments and donations however, go neither to the children or the “orphanage” but into the pockets of the exploiters. This detrimental situation creates an unending repetitive cycle. In hope to ease their financial burden, families resort to the selling of their children for money. This cycle continues when these children reach adulthood, reintegrate back into society and start families of their own.  Without proper education or means of a livelihood, they are stuck in poverty, leaving them in a position to be continuously exploited by the exploiters, who continue to progress. This results in the phenomenon of the poor staying poor and the rich getting richer, proved by the fact that a third of Cambodia’s children are still under the poverty line (UNICEF, 2003). These beliefs and mindsets are why these cycles of exploitation and poverty continue to prevail, resulting in the distinctive class division in Cambodian society.

The children are suffering the brunt of this. It is known that children as products of their environment (Carlson, n.d.). Hence, the basic lacking of family affection and healthy environment (Shine Education, 2013) leaves children vulnerable. The process of being “sold” by their parents, to live and perform in deplorable conditions by their “caregivers”, and receiving temporary affection from the many voluntourists, causes a negative psychological and emotional effect. This invokes a sense of abandonment, anger, helplessness and resentment. The children perceive themselves as just temporary companions and “journey trophies” for voluntourists, worth only as much on how they victimize themselves to be. All of these accumulated into an estrangement from consciousness and morals and a detachment from mankind.

On the other hand, Emile Durkheim believes society is maintained by consensus and conformity, and has a larger scale perspective. Voluntourism in Cambodia is successful as the organic mutual interdependencies between the proletariat and bourgeoisie provide a stable environment. Both parties have a specific role but rely on each other to survive. In this case, exploiters rely on poor families to surrender their child, while the poor families rely on the exploiters for monetary returns in exchange. Since the children are a demand, exploiters then in turn make use of them to perform and earn their living with. However, most importantly exploiters depend on the donations and payments from voluntourists which is the basis for exploiting voluntourism in the first place. The children depend on voluntourists and exploiters for their survival or die on the streets. Cambodia’s Tourism industry depends on the millions of kind-hearted voluntourists who flock to Cambodia, who in turn depend on Voluntourism. It gives them a sense of accomplishment and achievement that they have done something to make a difference someone else's life. This social cohesion of willingness to co-operate for their survival is the only thing keeping Cambodia from crumbling.

This is a dangerous phenomenon, where the traditional foundation and role of an orphanage is being removed and substituted with an exploitative prospect. The fact that the Cambodian society now treats this as the new norm while actively allowing it has resulted in a blur of consciousness within the Cambodian Society. The lack of Government intervention and legislative implementation has resulted in a breakdown of the true nature of Cambodia’s social structure which is a tight-knit family oriented one (Detzner, 1999). Moreover, with the blurring of one’s accountability in society, it has turn to a treacherous fight for survival. Moral values and consciousness are thrown out the window with selfishness and self-interest taking over with little regard on how this may affect others.

            Marx would claim that the Cambodians should be treated equally, and have the equal opportunity and circumstance to improve themselves. This, however, could have resulted in the emergence of individualism in the families and capitalism and in this case, the manifestation of the exploiters. Durkheim as well agrees that all Cambodians are equal too, in the sense that each one had a specific role to play in society and were equally important to each other to make a cohesive stable environment and satisfying the status quo.

The removal of this exploitation between Cambodia’s poor (proletariat) and the exploiters (bourgeoisie) and to emancipate the perspectives of families in Cambodia’s poor societies is Marx’s vision. Durkheim on the other hand argues that this structure is perfect and has a goal and reason, which is conformity. Though having little regard for the individual, the success of the overall structure and its workings is all that is needed.

With globalization and modernization, the fabrics of societies around the world, will continue to evolve. Humans always feel obligated to help those who are not as privileged as them. However, this does not remove the reality of those from these underdeveloped societies obligated to advantage themselves from such situations. This is a global social phenomenon and it will only continue to manifest itself more. Societies need to know and understand that even though, their intentions are good, it does not mean that it will benefit the recipient society. Until then, social phenomenon like these will be a major global problem.