Hardin uses the metaphor of rich countries on a lifeboat and poor on the outside to explain that we can't possible support all the poor countries in the world. We can't support them at least not without falling into poverty ourselves. Only a certain amount of countries can be rich in order for there to be a rich and poor. If everyone is rich then no one is, the price of living goes up to fulfill the greedy who want more and then there is once again a rich and a poor. The idea of society requires a rich and a poor, poor being the majority and rich the minority that rule over the poor. It is similar with countries in order for there to be a successful world there has to be a rich and a poor. If everyone is rich then there is going to be someone who wants more power over the majority and thus wars start and there becomes once again a rich and a poor.
We shouldn't save the poor countries from their own destruction. It's hard to accept thousands dying from starvation when we have the power to help but by helping we are not doing them any good. It's like trying to plug the holes in a sinking ship; the pressure of the water outside will eventually be too much to stop the boat from sinking. After a certain point it's useless and we must prepare for evacuation. Some countries are well past that point and there isn't anything we can do to help. A poor country can be seen as a phoenix in its last stages. It's sad and dying and as hard as it is to watch an organism die knowing there is something you can do to help it. You can give it medicine, food, nurse it as much as you want but you are only prolonging its unavoidable death. Like a country from the horrible flaming death of the phoenix there is rebirth from the ashes. If we allow poor countries to run their course we will be able to help it to greatness in its rebirth. By helping them we are only hurting ourselves.
We are "our brother's keeper" but only to benefit them in the long run. We must think of the long term effects of our actions. The World Food Bank is not a good idea. In the long run it'll just be a continual cycle of give and take. The poor countries will always be poor and the rich always rich. The idea of the Green Revolution, making plants that grow in different environments to help world hunger is a good idea in theory but it could end up only contributing to unhealthy life styles. This food isn't natural upset the balance of nature. In nature there is life and death, by trying to cheat death we are messing with nature's balance. Interfering with nature's course is only selfish on our part for not wanting people to die.
We shouldn't help poor countries fight world hunger. From the struggle and death of their country with time will bring forward the rebirth of their county with a chance to start over and do things right. There will always be rich and poor we can't stop human nature and the rules that our society survives by. We can only be willing to help in a brotherly way to aid the country in the direction of prosperity in their re-birth.