George Kent has written extensively on the issue of global hunger, therefore it is unlikely that he will write something positive about the issue, and hence it can be said that the article is satirical. 

 6 July, 2022

An article published by the United Nations hailing the benefits of hunger has gone viral on social media today, with netizens expressing shock over the claims made in the article titled “The Benefits of World Hunger”. Written by retired Hawaiian professor George Kent, the article explains how hunger is needed to get workers for low-level manual jobs. It was published on UN Chronicle, the flagship magazine of the UN.

The article argues that people work to fight hunger, and if there is no hunger, there will be nobody to do the manual jobs. Kenk shockingly says, “For those of us at the high end of the social ladder, ending hunger globally would be a disaster. If there were no hunger in the world, who would plow the fields? Who would harvest our vegetables? Who would work in the rendering plants? Who would clean our toilets? We would have to produce our own food and clean our own toilets.”

George Kent also claims that only hungry people work hard, while well-nourished people are far less willing to do such work. He termed the notion that people should be fed well to make them more productive ‘nosense’, saying that “No one works harder than hungry people.”

The article caused great outrage on social media across the world, with common netizens and well-known people slamming it for glorifying hunger for the benefits of the rich.

While the article has gone viral today (6^th June 2022) for some reason, actually it was published more than a decade ago. The article was originally published on the UN Chronicle, the flagship magazine of the United Nations, way back in 2008 in printed form. Later the article was republished on the UN website in 2019, which has gone viral now.

The same article is also available on researchgate, the repository of research papers, which says that it was written in June 2008.

While the premise of the article is indeed absurd, it actually seems to be a work of satire. George Kent, who was a professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Hawaii and now a Professor Emeritus at the university, had actually written the article to claim that the rich keep the poor people hungry so that they work for the comfort of the rich.

In fact, he has added in the article, “people at the high end are not rushing to solve the hunger problem. For many of us, hunger is not a problem, but an asset.” In the article, George Kent also claimed that people at the high end are not rushing to solve the hunger problem due to this reason. Although subtle, this suggests that the article was satirical in nature.

 George Kent has written extensively on the issue of global hunger, including a book titled “Freedom from Want: The Human Right to Adequate Food”. Therefore it is unlikely that he will write something positive about the issue, and hence it can be said that the article is satirical. 

THE BENEFITS OF WORLD HUNGER

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297751609_The_benefits_of_world_hunger  

George Kent

University of Hawai’i

June 11, 2008

We sometimes talk about hunger in the world as it were a scourge that all of us want to see abolished, viewing it as comparable with the plague or AIDS.  But that naïve view prevents us from coming to grips with what causes and sustains hunger. Hunger has great positive value to many people. Indeed, it is fundamental to the working of the world’s economy. Hungry people are highly productive people, especially where there is a need for manual labor.

We in developed countries sometime see poor people by the roadside holding up signs that say “Will Work for Food”. Actually, most people work for food. It is mainly because people need food to survive that they work so hard, either in producing food for themselves in subsistence-level production, or by selling their services to others in exchange for money. How many of us would sell our services if it were not for the threat of hunger?

How many of us would sell our services so cheaply if it were not for the threat of hunger? When we sell our services cheaply, we enrich others, those who own the factories and the machines and the lands and, ultimately, own the people who work for them. For those who depend on the availability of cheap labor, hunger is the foundation of their wealth.

The conventional thinking is that hunger is caused by low-paying jobs. For example, one report tells about “Brazil's ethanol slaves:
200,000 migrant sugar cutters who prop up renewable energy boom (Phillips 2007; also see Simoes 2008).” While it is true that hunger is caused by low-paying jobs, we need to understand that at the same time hunger causes low-paying jobs to be created.  Who would have established massive biofuel production operations in Brazil if they did not know there were thousands of hungry people desperate enough to take the awful jobs they would offer? Who would build any sort of factory if they did not know many people would be available to take the jobs at low pay rates?

The hunger literature talks about how it is important to assure that people are well fed so that that they can be more productive. That is a mistake. No one works harder than hungry people. Yes, people who are well nourished have greater capacity for productive physical activity, but well nourished people are far less willing to do that work.

The nongovernmental organization Free the Slaves estimates there are about 27 million slaves in the world (Free the Slaves 2007). They define slaves as people who are not allowed to walk away from their jobs. Their count includes people who are literally locked into workrooms and bonded laborers in south Asia. However, they do not include those who might be described as slaves to hunger, people who are free to walk away from their jobs, but have nothing better to go to. What are their numbers? Maybe most people who work are slaves to hunger?

For those at the high end of the social ladder, ending hunger in the world would be a disaster. If there were no hunger in the world, who would plow the fields? Who would harvest the vegetables? Who would work in the rendering plants and the canneries? There are many things that those at the high end would not want to do themselves. When poor people work cheap, others get inexpensive food and shirts and televisions. Of course the people at the high end are not rushing to solve the hunger problem. For them, hunger is not a problem, but an asset.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Free the Slaves (2007). Website. http://www.freetheslaves.net/

Phillips, Tom 2007. “Brazil's ethanol slaves: 
200,000 migrant sugar cutters who prop up renewable energy boom.” The Guardian.  March 9. http://environment.guardian.co.uk/energy/story/0,,2030144,00.html

Simoes, Eduardo and Inae Riveras 2008. Amnesty Condemns Forced Cane Labor in Brazil. Reuters. http://in.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idINN2844873820080528?sp=true