During the civil rights movement Dr. Martin Luther King preached about the brotherhood of all people of the human race.  He rallied for the co-existence of all children of father God regardless of race, socioeconomic status, political views and religion.  In The World House, King focuses on the role of poverty in dividing the world between the rich and the poor.  King uses the metaphor of "The World House" considering different groups of the world as family members, who must learn to put aside each other's differences in order to pull each other up and be successful.  The burden of poverty and other problems are leading to a state where it will be impossible to co-exist in the world successfully and risks the future well being of mankind.  The legitimacy of problems and solutions facing the "world house" in King's work are confirmed and conflicted by others.

Doctor King blames poverty as the main preventer of the brotherhood of citizens of the world.  As the developed countries have continued to develop, the undeveloped countries have lagged further behind.  Canadian Diplomat Escott Reid claims that while developed countries continue to become richer and richer, the population of undeveloped countries grows at "twice the rate of developed countries" (Reid 144).  Both King and Reid plea for ideas of "rich nations us[ing] their vast resources ...  to develop the under developed, school the unschooled, and to feed the unfed"(King 290).  King argues that the developed and rich nations of the northwest have experienced a "scientific and technological abundance" and this has caused these successful nations to lose touch with their morality and spirit for the world community and forget about the suffering of the rest of the world (King 286).  King claims that the developed countries are experiencing a "poverty of the spirit", while the undeveloped countries face literal poverty (King 286).  This is a contrast between the state of the rich countries and the poor, and how their shortcomings are different: lack of concern for their peer countries success, and lack of development and economic success respectfully.  In order for the world to be successful as a whole in the future, the problem of world poverty needs to be addressed.  Reid concurs that if world poverty is not addressed "the world ... will be a bleak place for ourselves and out children"(Reid 143).  

Because of this "scientific and technological abundance" in the developed world, the economically successful countries of the world have the resources to eradicate poverty (King 286).  King gives an example of this by questioning the reason of existence of world hunger.  King cites "25 million square miles of tillable land on earth ...  amazing knowledge of vitamins, nutrition, the chemistry of food and the versatility of atoms"(King 290).  It is evident that technology and resources exist to overcome the problems that face the undeveloped world, but "there is no deficit in human resources, [but] a deficit in human will"(King 290).  King would ideally use the existing resources of developed countries aid undeveloped countries.

Ideally, countries would voluntarily provide aid to the less fortunate with motives of philanthropy.  Dr. King believes that "all wealthy nations ...  must see it as a moral obligation to provide capital and technical assistance to undeveloped areas"(King 290-291).  Reid supports that "the main reason [behind aid] is humanitarianism" and that "all religions and philosophers unite in asserting that all men are brothers" and so "to those who believe that all men are brothers it is intolerable that three out of five of people in the world are desperately poor at a time when about one quarter are richer then previous generations could have imagined" and because of this people will naturally support their brothers (Reid 145).  This explanation perfectly supports King's view of the World House and universal brotherhood.  However, Kings theory of this moral obligation is also questioned.  Griffin and Enos conflict King's belief in moral obligation by saying "it would be naive to assume that the major objective of foreign assistance is economic development"(Griffin & Enos 314).  Griffin and Enos also discount the motive of philanthropy, "people may be humane and disinterested, but nations are not"(Griffin & Enos 314).  Although it was hypothesized, King's theory of philanthropy as a motive behind major aid isn't present. President Bush bluntly announced that US Aid would not be provided to areas that have no strategic importance to America.  During his campaign for President leading up to the 2000 election, President Bush spoke against providing development aid to Africa because "Africa [wasn't] an area of strategic importance to the US"(Smith 698).  It was only after the discovery of oil in the area that the Bush administration decided to provide aid.  Doctor King also calls foreign aid as an alternative to war.

Because King's The World House was written during the Cold War, Doctor King cites that the "final problem that mankind must solve in order to survive in the world house [is] finding an alternative to war and human destruction"(King 292).  Dr. King supports his claim's importance by quoting President John F Kennedy: "Mankind must put an end to war or war will put an end to mankind".  King also calls out the powerful for "talk[ing] passionately of pursuing peace while expanding defense budgets that already bulge"(King 293).  While the powerful rulers of the developed world preach for world peace, "NATO countries spent alone on defense $104 billion US dollars in 1968" while only contributing to the economic development of the poor nations $5 billion a year (Reid 143).  The horrors of war "cannot be reconciled with wisdom, justice and love"(King 297).  Instead of massive spending on unjustifiable military defense, the money needs to be reallocated toward foreign aid, which has humanitarian effect and can prevent violence and war.  "Money devoted to foreign aid can ...  lessen chances of war"(Reid 145).  King states that the use of aid can "remove ...  conditions of poverty, insecurity and injustice which are the fertile soil in which the seed of Communism grows"(King 297).  Not only would investment in world development be an alternative to concentrating our energy on the horrors of war, it would also prevent those horrors.  This investment will also help stop Communism, the root of the great military conflict of the time.

Doctor Martin Luther King preaches the need for foreign aid addressing poverty and its urgency.  Although some of King's ideas for solving the issue are discounted and contested he has drive and new ideas to better the world and solve its great problems.  Progressiveness and peacefulness in times of severe problems, violence, threat and hostility is what made Dr. King such a unique and outstanding figure of this period.  Dr. King was able to rise above and thing about problems in a why most people couldn't.

