Exemplifying an institution such as SEWA, Chanda argues that because women provide the basic necessities in many families, and therefore “are hit hardest when development destroys or consumes scarce resources” (495), feminist needs are life or death. This possibility of life-threatening scarcity consequently forces women to collectivize in grassroots efforts to influence politics. These grassroots movements are based on the material realities of these women, a singular reality, a need for survival that unites women of different religions, tribes, castes, and socioeconomic classes (494). The fact that collective action is a necessity for survival and is based on individual material realities is something that development strategists must take into account when attempting to empower women. Since trickle-down wealth has failed (494), just as the modernization of the third world economy reflects how the industrialized West has ignored the conflicting realities of third world infrastructure, the attempt to empower women in the third world in an identical way to those of the West it is equally irrational. As Chanda explains, Third World women may have the power to collectivize and contest the patriarchal structural systems that suppress them, but not by trumpeting a humanist “human essence” (492) or by importing Western feminism that echoes both the “savior complex white” and “Western intellectual imperialism”. To provide aid to women in “post”colonial underdeveloped areas, one must first critique one's own perspective in setting unjust development standards (493), understand that economic aid helps individuals in different ways based on age, gender, sexuality, community and class, (487) and finally that to provide help the "needs" of the beneficiary must be taken into account”