Development Aid in Africa

[Samapico]

Read this:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiege...,363663,00.html

 

It all makes sense. The whole 'development aid' thing has become a business... And apparently it's screwing them up more than it helps them; it causes corruption and screws up the markets.

 

[...]No one in the low-wage world of Africa can be cost-efficient enough to keep pace with donated products. In 1997, 137,000 workers were employed in Nigeria's textile industry. By 2003, the figure had dropped to 57,000. [...]

 

I'd say one of the few things they might need from us is medication; but then again, the companies here are using Africa as a test lab, and are selling their stuff at ridiculous prices to aid organisms.

[Aileron]

That's one opinion. I'm inclined to agree. Not to criticize those who claim to be compassionate, but they weren't. They were trying to earn 'pat on the back' points.

 

The first step to solving the food problem in Africa is identifying it. I have some thoughts here, but ultimately I'd be exaggerating if I said I knew. Some simple possibilities:

 

1) The terrain cannot support the number of people on it. Possible in desert areas, though it probably isn't likely overall. Solution: people need to move out.

 

2) Some corrupt excuse for government is preventing it from happening. It isn't as far-fetched in third world areas, as starvation is and effective means of population control. Solution: Kill the ASSS.

 

3) Old traditional tribes are mandated by cultural belief to stay in the stone age. There are many tribes in which sons will inherit their profession and their tools from their father, a tradition which has been going on for thousands of years in some cases. Solution: They need to be persuaded to adopt a more modern culture.

 

4) There aren't enough people with enough training and property to start a farm. Solution: Train people to be farmers and give them investment capital. This is an unlikely problem, as if it were, the aid would have made a dent in it.

 

 

 

Most of those solutions are things people wouldn't consider as nice things to do. The major paradox is that in order to be compassionate, one needs to be discomp!@#$%^&*ionate, but if one becomes too discomp!@#$%^&*ionate, one loses the point of being compassionate entirely.

[AstroProdigy]

My professor discussed a great solution to the way our food aid has demolished Caribbean food industries that applies here as well. It would be nice in that it's politically correct while at the same time extremely effective. Instead of producing goods in our giant, mechanized factories and sending them to Africa so that it demolishes their own industries why don't we just go to a country in Africa that produces a certain product well, buy from them, and then give those products away as development aid to other countries. We reward countries in Africa for efficiency by buying their products while at the same time aiding them in a way that doesn't create a crippling dependence on the United States, but instead a beneficial dependence between African states that might also defuse many of the ethnic conflicts there.

 

Economic interdependence turned the most violent continent in the world (Europe) and turned it into a union (most of it at least) that's compe!@#$%^&*ive, prosperous, and peaceful. Africa has a huge wealth of natural resources and most of the population isn't located in the desert so only the arbitrary borders would pose a serious problem to African prosperity in the long term.

 

We'd be byp!@#$%^&*ing corruption by buying directly from producers so even if the development aid is stolen by corrupt regimes at least the people we bought the products from prosper and spur job creation. That in itself might be enough to break the cycle that grips the continent today.

Edited June 25, 2008 by AstroProdigy

[Dav]

the issue that comes up there again and again is corruption.

 

Will removing the aid stop it? I doubt that very much. Even when these nations have to stand on their own two feet those in power if allowed to do so will take their cut and live in luxury whilst people starve on the street.

[Aileron]

Well, removing the aid would mean less money in the hands of the corrupt to finance a 'security' detail. Money translates into a wider area which they are able to 'protect'. So, cutting the aid would mitigate the problem.

 

As I said though, the permanent solution is to simply throw down the oppressors.

[AstroProdigy]

The oppressors have any easy time there because there's little nationalism in those countries. How can there be when all the borders are arbitrary and cut right across ethnic lines? If you can give the major ethnic groups their states or combine ethnic groups that are similar into federation types of states with the borders drawn to match where the ethnic groups end then you can work towards better governance because then a leader who was corrupt would be screwing group A and since group A is united in a common culture they don't want to have their position in Africa hurt by incompetent leaders. Unfortunately to do this would require a huge commitment by the west and would lead to quite a death toll. Seeing as genocides happen routinely in Africa (Biafra, Southern Sudan, Congo, Rwanda, Congo again, Ethiopia, Darfur, Congo again) it can't be that bad. Unfortunately we also have to worry about the fact that western countries want to serve their own interests and this type of endeavor would get corrupted and make things worse. That's why I stand by the former idea I put out there of buying from African countries to give to other African countries. It promotes cooperation between them and makes them more self sustaining.

[Aileron]

Its a good idea, depending upon the nature of the problem. If the problem is local corruption, then they still find some way to get all the money themselves and we'd be back to square one.

 

It will work, though there is still a good chance that the money we paid to the suppliers winds up as a 'protection fee' to the local warlord, while the aid we give out ends up in the hands of another warlord on the receiving end. That's not insurmountable. If it starts to happen the warlords would just need to be taken out.

[JDS]

NO, there is plenty of space, resource, and will to live in africa, problem is that we are not letting them .. grow up. 'We' own the water, land, money, food, evrything... how can they advance as a people when we have our foot on their chest and hand on their neck

 

all we have to say to them is Die and make my Nikes' !@#$%^&*

Edited June 27, 2008 by Samapico
their... not there... had to.

[GameTime]

Is this all true about an opressed society or are they just lazy ASSS?

[darkhosis]

4) There aren't enough people with enough training and property to start a farm. Solution: Train people to be farmers and give them investment capital. This is an unlikely problem, as if it were, the aid would have made a dent in it.

I've made a ton of comments about Africa stuff before so I'm sure everyone already knows my views. Just thought I'd disagree with you saying that #4 is unlikely though.

 

You just have to take a look at Zimbabwe, where all the trained and properly equipped white farmers were driven out by Mugabe, to be replaced by (presumably) black subsistance farmers or probably in most cases govt officials or friends of govt officials that have no clue on how to farm. That's why there's 15 million% inflation and m!@#$%^&* starvation right now.

 

the same situation will happen in South Africa at some point. just stay tuned in the next decade.

[Aileron]

Well, I didn't say those 4 are problems. I said that I don't know what the problem is and if that is the problem, there is a solution to it.

 

 

GameTime, to answer your question, yes they are an oppressed society. I don't know if you've met a true born African, but those people are generally tough as nails.

 

Keep in mind though that we are making generalizations about an entire continent. There certainly are lazy elements in Africa.

[AstroProdigy]

Don't bother with Gametime he's just being a !@#$%^&*.

 

This boggles my mind Aileron. Occasionally you come out with great insight like you just did in your last post and with point 4 (although point 2 showed your biases). This shows me that you want to have intelligent opinions on these matters, but your rigid, predetermined cir!@#$%^&*stances just don't allow it for most situations. Here's what I suggest to you. Take some time to clear your head. Drop everything. Drop all of your opinions and start from scratch. Then challenge every opinion you make thoroughly to make sure you're right. If you rediscover a lot of your old ideas then fine, but there's just so much clutter and inaccuracy in your thinking you need a change. One of the worst things someone can do is be rigid and let themselves be fooled easily just because they secretly want to be. This creates a mindless society that allows events such as the Holocaust occurs. It doesn't just require evil people; it requires the masses to follow them.

Edited July 2, 2008 by AstroProdigy