Is Aid killing Africa

waraf

walshb wrote: »

Aid is needed, but it's the incessant western interference that is killing Africa.
They not only want to give aid, they want to dominate and take over. Africans'
need to be in charge of their destiny, helped alright, but from a distance.
Africa is a damn powerful continent, but it suits the west to continually
advertise it as a desolate hole with nothing. It keeps all these wetsern do gooders in the lime light, gives Bono and Geldof a pedestal and all the other so called charities a name for themselves

Jaysus that's the most cynical post I've read in a long time. :rolleyes:

bakkiesbotha

waraf wrote: »

"The biggest problem in Africa is Africans" is plain insulting. What I hope you meant to say was "The biggest problem in Africa is crime/corruption" which stems from a lack of stable governments and a lack fo education of the general public.

Logic fail

Who commits the crimes?
Who forms the governments?
Who makes up the general public?

Africans!

Cookie_Monster

bakkiesbotha wrote: »

Logic fail

Who commits the crimes?
Who forms the governments?
Who makes up the general public?

Africans!NWO & the Lizards

FYP

waraf

bakkiesbotha wrote: »

Logic fail

Who commits the crimes?
Who forms the governments?
Who makes up the general public?

Africans!

ok so the problem with Ireland is the Irish. We're ALL to blame for crimes committed ny individual people. Gimmee a break :rolleyes:

prinz

waraf wrote: »

Also your statement that "The biggest problem in Africa is Africans" is plain insulting. What I hope you meant to say was "The biggest problem in Africa is crime/corruption" which stems from a lack of stable governments and a lack fo education of the general public.

Hope away but I'm generally careful in choosing my words so I usually mean exactly what I say. Where does the crime and corruption come from.. uh Africans. Where does the lack of education come from - African governments...... why is there a lack of stable governments - probably because large parts of sub-Saharan Africa are still run by war lords and tribally, under the guise of nation-states and proper governance. One warlord dictator after another comes along rapes and pillages their own country for as long as they can before they get replaced by another up and coming warlord. Even in countries with properly developed local government and official administration problems are rife due to incompetence, corruption, lack of will and lack of effort.

walshb wrote: »

Africans'
need to be in charge of their destiny, helped alright, but from a distance..

Africans were given charge of their own destiny. Some countries seized the opportunity and progressed to stable viable countries. In other countries the reigns were seized by tyrants and the problems continue and intensify to this day.

bakkiesbotha

waraf wrote: »

ok so the problem with Ireland is the Irish.

Yes of course it is! Are you blind? Have you noticed any problems caused by corruption, and parochialism, and cronyism, and low-level dishonesty, and sneakiness, and cute-hoorishness recently?

waraf wrote: »

We're ALL to blame for crimes committed ny individual people. Gimmee a break :rolleyes:

Another logic fail. That doesn't follow from anything.

prinz

waraf wrote: »

ok so the problem with Ireland is the Irish. We're ALL to blame for crimes committed ny individual people. Gimmee a break :rolleyes:

You're missing the point. The rulers in sub saharan Africa have to a large degree gravitated towards savagery and ignorance. The instituions and administrations which were well developed and stable in many countries under the colonial rule, quickly floundered post-independence.... Senegal is a prime example. The reasons some countries prospered and others didn't cannot be blamed on westerners, big corporations etc, but it's down to the people who ruled and inhabit it. Zimbabwe, from the so called "breadbasket" of Africa to stone age backwater...

bill_ashmount

prinz wrote: »

The biggest problem in Africa is Africans, this only applies to sub-Saharan Africa for the most part. You can't help someone who has no interest in helping themselves. Obviously this does not apply to refugee camps or droughts etc, but I have talked to people who have done work in Africa and they're fighting a constant losing battle, one man was over building houses in a village and training people in trades, tailor, mechanic etc, and when he returned sometime later everything was gone. The houses built had been stripped down and all the materials sold, tiles, bricks etc, the 'tailor' had sold his sewing machine to buy a machete, or the mechanic had upped and left town etc etc. Basically a year of work and training had taken a few months to be undone and the town was back to square one.This was in a productive part of Africa too, with lots of crops and no problems so it wasn't an excuse of starving, or needing to do it. The people just weren't interested. Unless they have someone there directing them and instructing them it won't happen. It's no coincidence that many African nations were far better off under colonial rule, because they actually got things done. And before any jumps in shouting racism and white rule, in many of the colonial nations the civil service, and administration work was done by locals.

Absolute rubbish. Africans are more than capable of running their own countries.

bill_ashmount

On a side note Africa's biggest problem in the next 50 years will be their TFR. It's massive and will lead to the population hitting nearly 2,000 million from only 700 million today.

Cookie_Monster

bill_ashmount wrote: »

Absolute rubbish. Africans are more than capable of running their own countries.

Yeah they've proved that pretty well to date haven' they?

prinz

bill_ashmount wrote: »

Absolute rubbish. Africans are more than capable of running their own countries.

Some are, some aren't. It's fairly obvious that some countries are not being run by people capable of it.

waraf

prinz wrote: »

Hope away but I'm generally careful in choosing my words so I usually mean exactly what I say. Where does the crime and corruption come from.. uh Africans. Where does the lack of education come from - African governments...... why is there a lack of stable governments - probably because large parts of sub-Saharan Africa are still run by war lords and tribally, under the guise of nation-states and proper governance. One warlord dictator after another comes along rapes and pillages their own country for as long as they can before they get replaced by another up and coming warlord. Even in countries with properly developed local government and official administration problems are rife due to incompetence, corruption, lack of will and lack of effort.

Much like the problem with Europe is Europeans or the problem with Asis is Asians. :rolleyes: Come on, Africa is a huge continent with many ridiculously divided countries. Some of the borders drawn up by the colonial powers actually split tribes in half. Travelling from east to west DRC is the same distance as travelling from London to Moscow. There is less than 100km of road in the whole country and in most places there is no electricity and no clean water. There is no democratic system in place to elect officials. How to expect to rid a place like this of corruption? Foreign aid is absolutely necessary in a place like DRC. The locals are dying on a daily basis from starvation and treatable diseases.

dlofnep

Did anybody watch the Louis Theroux program on Johannesburg?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1-Tb84uDsc&feature=PlayList&p=E272A664C8FB5F77&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=3

Watch that - About 3 minutes in, and see the evil that is produced under extreme poverty. Guy is batshít crazy!

Africa will never be free until we canel their debt and let them figure it out for themselves.

waraf

bakkiesbotha wrote: »

Another logic fail. That doesn't follow from anything.

Jaysus :rolleyes: All I'm saying is that the statement that "Africans are the problem in Africa" is an absolutely pointless statement. Irish are the problem in Ireland, English are the problem in England etc. So what!!

The point is that a minority or corrupt politicians or criminals are ruining what a lot of foreign aid is trying to achieve in may African countries. Saying that there's no point in sending aid to African countries cause it's full of Africans is essentially racist.

waraf

dlofnep wrote: »

Did anybody watch the Louis Theroux program on Johannesburg?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1-Tb84uDsc&feature=PlayList&p=E272A664C8FB5F77&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=3

Watch that - About 3 minutes in, and see the evil that is produced under extreme poverty. Guy is batshít crazy!

Africa will never be free until we canel their debt and let them figure it out for themselves.

Yeah I saw that. Horrifying stuff.

Unfortunately even if all foreign debt is cancelled it's not going to solve the problem. It would be a good start but the issues are much more complex than that.

Long Onion

waraf wrote: »

Much like the problem with Europe is Europeans or the problem with Asis is Asians. :rolleyes: Come on, Africa is a huge continent with many ridiculously divided countries. Some of the borders drawn up by the colonial powers actually split tribes in half. Travelling from east to west DRC is the same distance as travelling from London to Moscow. There is less than 100km of road in the whole country and in most places there is no electricity and no clean water. There is no democratic system in place to elect officials. How to expect to rid a place like this of corruption? Foreign aid is absolutely necessary in a place like DRC. The locals are dying on a daily basis from starvation and treatable diseases.

I don't think that Foreign Aid is absolutely necessary at all. Modern western societies have evolved over millenia and have got to current levels of structure without foreign aid, it was an economic and cultural revolution.

Did it strike you that perhaps countires need to evelove at their own pace and in their own time and that by pumping money in to try and speed up the process we are actually creating more problems than we are solving - we can't artificially stimulate natural progeression without some kind of backlash.

prinz

waraf wrote: »

Come on, Africa is a huge continent with many ridiculously divided countries. Some of the borders drawn up by the colonial powers actually split tribes in half. Travelling from east to west DRC is the same distance as travelling from London to Moscow. There is less than 100km of road in the whole country and in most places there is no electricity and no clean water. There is no democratic system in place to elect officials. How to expect to rid a place like this of corruption? Foreign aid is absolutely necessary in a place like DRC. The locals are dying on a daily basis from starvation and treatable diseases.

So you continue to pump foreign aid in which goes on arms to prop up the corruption that's already there... and this benefits people how?

Nation building starts at grass roots level up, not the top down. European countries didn't just pop out fully formed as they are now. You need stability at a village level first. And that isn't present in many places - not because of war or famine or disease, but because people on the ground don't see the benefits of a social contract.

Even Bóthar found many of the cows etc which were sent over supposedly to begin a herd which could benefit an entire community were being slaughted and eaten on delivery, which makes for tasty dinners for a week, but a month later you're no better off and are back looking for foreign help. There's no long term view, no commitment to make things better. Many countries in Asia, Central America, South America etc were colonies and had borders drawn up rather arbitrarily but they succeed (to a degree in some cases).... how?

waraf

Long Onion wrote: »

Did it strike you that perhaps countires need to evelove at their own pace and in their own time and that by pumping money in to try and speed up the process we are actually creating more problems than we are solving - we can't artificially stimulate natural progeression without some kind of backlash.

Yes you're right, countries did evolve at their own pace but do you think in this day and age it's morally correct for us to allow millions of people die unnecessarily each year while we sit back and say "sure it's just nature taking its course"

prinz

waraf wrote: »

Yes you're right, countries did evolve at their own pace but do you think in this day and age it's morally correct for us to allow millions of people die unnecessarily each year while we sit back and say "sure it's just nature taking its course"

Perhaps the millions of Africans who aren't dying unnecessarily each year could think about that one. Africa has the resources to prosper, it has the ability to prosper, it has the right to prosper. What it doesn't have are the people with the determination and drive to make these things happen in many countries. What it needs is a couple of selfless individuals to rise up, accept power and do what needs to be done. Unfortunately large parts of the continent have actually regressed since the 1950's and 1960's.

waraf

prinz wrote: »

So you continue to pump foreign aid in which goes on arms to prop up the corruption that's already there... and this benefits people how?

Nation building starts at grass roots level up, not the top down. European countries didn't just pop out fully formed as they are now. You need stability at a village level first. And that isn't present in many places - not because of war or famine or disease, but because people on the ground don't see the benefits of a social contract.

Even Bóthar found many of the cows etc which were sent over supposedly to begin a herd which could benefit an entire community were being slaughted and eaten on delivery, which makes for tasty dinners for a week, but a month later you're no better off and are back looking for foreign help. There's no long term view, no commitment to make things better. Many countries in Asia, Central America, South America etc were colonies and had borders drawn up rather arbitrarily but they succeed (to a degree in some cases).... how?

Listen, all of the NGO's working in African countries are tryig to get help to the people in the villages but it's not as easy as it sounds. Governments "taxes" have to be paid in many cases just to get access to certain areas. These taxes are essentiall bribes to local officials but there is no way around them if you want to work in the country.

You talk about stability at village level, about cows getting slaughtered and social contract. You're applying first world thinking to a third world issue. A person in poverty doesn't employ long term thinking to an immediate problem. By that I mean that a man doesn't care about social contracts, local governement, education etc. when his wife and children are dying from malnutrition. If he sees a cow he's going to kill and eat it before someone else steals it and uses it to feed their family.

You also mention how other countries have succeeded post colonialism. Every country has it's own individual problems and I think we're all guilty at times of lumping every sub Saharan African country in together and just considering it as "the problem in Africa". It's impossible to go through each counry in detail and list the problems with each one but I would say that there are still serious probems in Asia (eg Laos, North Korea, Indonesia, Burma) and South America where people are dying unnnecessarily every day due to poverty related diseases and corruption.

waraf

prinz wrote: »

Perhaps the millions of Africans who aren't dying unnecessarily each year could think about that one. Africa has the resources to prosper, it has the ability to prosper, it has the right to prosper. What it doesn't have are the people with the determination and drive to make these things happen in many countries. What it needs is a couple of selfless individuals to rise up, accept power and do what needs to be done. Unfortunately large parts of the continent have actually regressed since the 1950's and 1960's.

Absolutely. I agree with you 100% on that one. Unfortunately power and corruption go hand in hand and the scale of the countries involved make them nigh on impossible to control.

Lirange

Everyone always lumps the African countries together. Fair enough some problems are pan continental issues. But many of the difficulties are regional and country specific. Some are actually relatively stable politically but are economically stagnant or lack economic diversity. One aspect that isn't talked about enough is education. Expanding literacy is just the first step. Access to quality education to learn valued skills could help transform many of these countries. They won't have to feel as dependent on importing solutions and opportunities from abroad

waraf

Lirange wrote: »

Everyone always lumps the African countries together. Fair enough some problems are pan continental issues. But many of the difficulties are regional and country specific. Some are actually relatively stable politically but are economically stagnant or lack economic diversity. One aspect that isn't talked about enough is education. Expanding literacy is just the first step. Access to quality education to learn valued skills could help transform many of these countries. They won't have to feel as dependent on importing solutions and opportunities from abroad

Yeah I agree to a certain extent on the education issue but having spoken to someone from Concern last week about that very issue they made the point that I made earlier about the irrelevance of education to a starving man. I can understand his point and Concern's focus is mainly on disaster refief but I do feel that without education the curret cycle will never stop in Africa.

prinz

waraf wrote: »

Listen, all of the NGO's working in African countries are tryig to get help to the people in the villages but it's not as easy as it sounds. Governments "taxes" have to be paid in many cases just to get access to certain areas. These taxes are essentiall bribes to local officials but there is no way around them if you want to work in the country.

But by that very practice they are infact perpetuating the vicious cycle? You're paying corrupt officials, giving them the means to stay in power, and justifying the corruption in the first place = nothing changes....

waraf wrote: »

You talk about stability at village level, about cows getting slaughtered and social contract. You're applying first world thinking to a third world issue. A person in poverty doesn't employ long term thinking to an immediate problem. By that I mean that a man doesn't care about social contracts, local governement, education etc. when his wife and children are dying from malnutrition. If he sees a cow he's going to kill and eat it before someone else steals it and uses it to feed their family.

Not all African nations have food problems etc., yet they still cannot manage a stable responsible system of governance.The problems are not always immediate. Like the example I gave already of a man I was talking to who develops villages in Kenya. This was a joint project with Kenyan business men and officials. Yet when they spent time, money and effort building homes, schools, hospitals etc. All these things were ruined within months. Building materials sold, anything wooden used in fires, tools sold or destroyed etc. These people weren't starving, they weren't in dire poverty, and while a government official was in the village overseeing the project everything worked well. It was when they left the townspeople to their own devices everything fell apart.

waraf wrote: »

You also mention how other countries have succeeded post colonialism. Every country has it's own individual problems and I think we're all guilty at times of lumping every sub Saharan African country in together and just considering it as "the problem in Africa". It's impossible to go through each counry in detail and list the problems with each one but I would say that there are still serious probems in Asia (eg Laos, North Korea, Indonesia, Burma) and South America where people are dying unnnecessarily every day due to poverty related diseases and corruption.

Undoubtedly there are problems in other places, there are problems in this continent with corruption and poverty. The difference is we're not pouring billions worth of "aid" into these countries on an ongoing basis which only serves to keep them corrupt. You're judging the problem as something that has always been so, and your solution is to keep it always so. Like I said many African countries have regressed in the last few decades. Countries which were once quite developed and prosperous have gone backwards post-independence, because people just stopped keeping the countries working.

prinz

prinz wrote: »

What it needs is a couple of selfless individuals to rise up, accept power and do what needs to be done. Unfortunately large parts of the continent have actually regressed since the 1950's and 1960's.

waraf wrote: »

Absolutely. I agree with you 100% on that one. Unfortunately power and corruption go hand in hand and the scale of the countries involved make them nigh on impossible to control.

waraf wrote: »

If he sees a cow he's going to kill and eat it before someone else steals it and uses it to feed their family.

THAT is the 'I'll take what I can get and screw everyone else' attitude that permeates sub-Saharan Africa which is the foundation on which most of the continent's problems are based. That is what needs to change before real progress can be made in Africa, and throwing cash around isn't changing that mindset.

Long Onion

waraf wrote: »

Yes you're right, countries did evolve at their own pace but do you think in this day and age it's morally correct for us to allow millions of people die unnecessarily each year while we sit back and say "sure it's just nature taking its course"

That's not really what i was suggesting. To date, Aid to African nations has totalled €2 trillion and the situation remains by and large the same as it ever was. It seems fairly obvious from this that our current approach is not working. The African nations who are the worst hit need to find their own pace of development which they can sustain. What I would think is that a deadline for the withdrawal of Aid should be set and the requisite support structures be put in place to allow these countries to develop in a way which best suits their own unique demographics and cultural tapestry.

Of course it would help if the debts were written off and if the development plan was free from foreign political interference.

waraf

prinz wrote: »

But by that very practice they are infact perpetuating the vicious cycle? You're paying corrupt officials, giving them the means to stay in power, and justifying the corruption in the first place = nothing changes....

what are the NGO's supposed to do reufse to pay these village Napoleons and let the starving people die for the sake of a few dollars??


Not all African nations have food problems etc., yet they still cannot manage a stable responsible system of governance.The problems are not always immediate. Like the example I gave already of a man I was talking to who develops villages in Kenya. This was a joint project with Kenyan business men and officials. Yet when they spent time, money and effort building homes, schools, hospitals etc. All these things were ruined within months. Building materials sold, anything wooden used in fires, tools sold or destroyed etc. These people weren't starving, they weren't in dire poverty, and while a government official was in the village overseeing the project everything worked well. It was when they left the townspeople to their own devices everything fell apart.

It's hard to comment on an individual case like that to be honest. Maybe it was a gang of criminals who stole the stuff to sell it on. Maybe it was someone who needed stuff to build a house for his family. Maybe it was was just vandals. Who knows....


Undoubtedly there are problems in other places, there are problems in this continent with corruption and poverty. The difference is we're not pouring billions worth of "aid" into these countries on an ongoing basis which only serves to keep them corrupt. You're judging the problem as something that has always been so, and your solution is to keep it always so. Like I said many African countries have regressed in the last few decades. Countries which were once quite developed and prosperous have gone backwards post-independence, because people just stopped keeping the countries working.

Yes may African countries have regressed in the last fifty or so years since they were granted independence from colonialsim but that is to be expected to be honest. The people who kept these countries "working" during colonialism did so through absolute brutality, slavery and apartheid. As soon as these colonial masters left there was an immediate rush for power which of course led to civil war in many places. Civil war is extremely common in newly liberated countries (we had it ourselves in Ireland) and all foreign aid is trying to do is stop the poor innocent people on the ground from dying whilst their countries go through a painful period of adolesence. They will come out of it eventually. Can we not try to help them in the meantime?

.

waraf

Long Onion wrote: »

That's not really what i was suggesting. To date, Aid to African nations has totalled €2 trillion and the situation remains by and large the same as it ever was. It seems fairly obvious from this that our current approach is not working. The African nations who are the worst hit need to find their own pace of development which they can sustain. What I would think is that a deadline for the withdrawal of Aid should be set and the requisite support structures be put in place to allow these countries to develop in a way which best suits their own unique demographics and cultural tapestry.

Of course it would help if the debts were written off and if the development plan was free from foreign political interference.

Unfortunately when we talk in terms of trillions of dollars we can't remove political influence.

I agree with you to an extent about the current approach not working but I can't agree that the solution os to cut aid. We should re-examine how aid is delivered and maybe come up with new ways of deliverig it to the most needy. Concern implemented a new idea in one of their African projects recently whereby they started a Dragon's Den style program which allowed local people to pitch business ideas to Concern and then if the idea was felt to be viable they were given money and support to develop the business. That's the sort of thinking that we need to encourage.

waraf

prinz wrote: »

THAT is the 'I'll take what I can get and screw everyone else' attitude that permeates sub-Saharan Africa which is the foundation on which most of the continent's problems are based. That is what needs to change before real progress can be made in Africa, and throwing cash around isn't changing that mindset.

I would see that more like a desperate person's instinct for survival. A man needs to satisfy the first couple of steps of Abraham Maslow's hierarchy before he is going to aim toward more lofty ideals. Cash can help him achieve this but as I said in my post above, it's how we dole out that cash that makes the difference.

JONJO THE MISER

Yes Aid is killing Africa big time, take Ethiopia for example the population in 1983 was 33 million and now it is 86 million:eek:, and this country complains about starvation, there is no point in collecting money and feeding these people when they will have 15 kids who in 20 years time will be starving again, its a vicious circle and you are only prolonging the agony. Africans need to help themselves and get rid of corrupt goverments and practice family planning, the rest of the world cant be there to support them and its as simple as that, I never give money to any African chaity now and i know a good few people who think the same.