This review of Masooda Bano's 'Breakdown in Pakistan' examines how Western aid systematically destroys the capacity of local voluntary organizations to mobilize collective action, replacing diverse community-driven institutions with professionalized NGOs dependent on foreign funding.

Scott analyzes why people support government-funded foreign aid instead of donating voluntarily, examining and critiquing several theories including virtue signaling, coordination problems, and time-inconsistent preferences.

Scott Alexander responds to Tyler Cowen about USAID funding, correcting his own previous claims about overhead costs while maintaining that Cowen's criticism of USAID was misleading and potentially harmful.

Scott Alexander criticizes Tyler Cowen and others for misrepresenting USAID's funding model, explaining how regranting through other charities is both necessary and effective despite seeming inefficient to outsiders.

Scott argues that debates about prioritizing Americans over foreigners in the PEPFAR controversy miss the point, as cancelled foreign aid money wouldn't automatically fund effective domestic programs but would instead be spent much less efficiently.

Scott Alexander's poem, inspired by a tragic aid airdrop incident in Gaza, explores the challenges and unintended consequences of altruism through various philosophical lenses.

Scott Alexander argues that fundamental value differences are less common and less aligned with political tribes than often assumed, emphasizing the need for coexistence despite varying values.

Scott Alexander argues that military interventions can potentially be a cost-effective way to help foreigners, contrary to a Slate article's claim.