While many Americans lack information about the mission of the Peace Corps, it must be recognized that the results of its objective in most countries are overrated and defunct. . After our visit from a Peace Corps recruiter, the presentation to our class was far from positive and actually proved that this flawed system of sharing peace across the world is a myth without any merit. While real aid is needed all over the world, trying to share peace, without carrying out projects, has more consequences than rewards. Celebrating fifty-five years this year, the Peace Corps is out of touch with reality and does not represent an American path to freedom for all, but gives false hope to those in need of services. It must be recognized that if peace is the ultimate goal, not carrying out the projects would have the opposite effect and create hatred towards the American government. In this article, I would like to argue against American taxpayers paying for the Peace Corps, against inexperienced volunteers being sent overseas, and against the Peace Corps being a failure for America and the countries that host them. Say no to plagiarism. Get a custom essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get the original essaySurprised and disturbed were a few well-chosen words that overwhelmed me at the conference, once we learned that taxpayers Americans continued to support the Peace Corps. Even though they continue to receive an annual budget of $250,000,000, that's not a drop in the ocean when you consider how painful it is for the average American to survive, here even in our own country. This money would be even better spent if we got rid of Peace Corp volunteers and gave this money to the professionals already in these countries. This theory was also put forward when cited by a Peace Corps leader who said: "I must acknowledge at the outset Mr. Rice's observation that money spent on the Peace Corps could also do a lot good if it were invested in local resources. third world organizations, and that perhaps it would go even further if it funded employees in the country instead of sending American citizens as volunteers. »(Rule 2006) This type of thinking makes sense as many volunteers go to these countries. without any goal in mind. While it seems easy to simply send a volunteer to a country to help with what the Peace Corps deems important, it would be even greater if the United States simply sent financial aid to that country in hopes of establish the intention, plan and execution with these. who already live there to overcome it. This type of relationship would bring more peace between the two countries and could make future relations more cordial and more effective in building bridges to the future. It is for these reasons that I believe that American taxpayers should no longer fund the Peace Corp and that the government should look for other ways to help countries in need of support and services. While funding for the Peace Corp should be alleviated from American taxpayers. responsibilities, the recruitment of young university graduates is an insult and a direct embarrassment to the social fabric. Although many graduates mature in school, it replaces life experiences and being sent to a foreign country with little or no knowledge. I believe many graduates embrace the challenges that volunteering in a foreign country can pose, but what kind of representation do they have?Is the United States providing to deal with real problems and real life in these foreign countries? While many volunteers already possess characteristics that will allow them to succeed in any field, dealing with the Peace Corps and its proven failures could take a toll on any young adult who signs up to serve and achieve certain goals. personal and professional to help their future. As one former Peace Corps volunteer said: “We have all experienced failures, and yet we bury them in the recesses of our past in the form of curious gaps in our resumes and in our enigmatic crypts.answers to questions direct. If we fail to emerge triumphant, our failures eat away at us.” This is a direct result of the lack of a plan and the fact that young volunteers are placed right in the middle of these efforts without a plan. A remedy to this solution would be to stop putting more effort into recruiting young students, but to start by including more mature U.S. citizens to help young volunteers provide assistance. While the Peace Corps was built on the recruitment of young students, many resigned and returned home for various reasons, but as one Peace Corps regional director stated: "Indeed, many volunteers, especially those who have just left university, resigned before their two-year commitment. is standing. Lack of maturity probably contributes to this in many cases, as two years is an incredibly long time for a 22-year-old, as is the feeling of trying to climb a mountain with a nail file. From what I've heard, one of the most stark realizations that comes to mind for many PC volunteers is that their work in the country probably won't make much difference in the grand scheme of things. . There's nothing that makes you pack your bags faster than feeling useless. » (Hotfelder 2008). As this is important information, it confirms that if the Peace Corps achieves the goal of recruiting mature volunteers, the vast majority of them will remain recent college graduates. Too often, these young volunteers lack the maturity and professional experience to be effective in the 21st century. It is for these reasons that the Peace Corps should rethink its recruitment plan and include more mature individuals who will volunteer to succeed in their host country. Since American taxpayers should not be responsible for funding the Peace Corps and a complete overhaul should accompany recruitment, what is most important is whether the Peace Corps is actually a failure for America and the countries that they welcome? As one political activist said: “Before AmeriCorps, the Peace Corps took the cake as the most arrogant and overrated government program in Washington. ” (Bovard 2011) While the founders of the Peace Corps emphasized university volunteers as a virtue, this proved to be a recipe for disaster. While government leaders were frustrated with the ineffectiveness of U.S. foreign aid to developing countries, they believed that personalizing aid through peace sharing would make it effective in some way. other. As Robert E. White, Latin regional director of the Peace Corps, said in 1970: “It was like a parachute drop. We said to a volunteer: “Here is the bust you are taking. Go look around you and go where you think you can do good. » (Bovard 2011) This is important because there was no plan from the US government or specifically from.