Africa

[Alan Stubbs]

Using that rational when the UK was banckrupt in the seventies and had to go Cap in hand to the IMF they should have refused Aid untill our democraticaly elected goverment was replaced with somthing more atuned to thier liking?

 

or does this condition only apply to third world countries, Also most of the aid raised by charities is distributed By NGOs would this also be stopped to prevent Dieing Children and the Elderly begging as it is obviously there fault that they are in that situation.

 

 

Not in the least. I was making no reference whatever to the IMF...I was talking about our own independent overseas aid. If my money is being given away, it should be on infrastructure projects where there would be a clear return to UK PLC on their investment. In terms of regime change, we supported Iraq for years and ultimately forced regime change. Using your emotive starving and elderly point, the NGO's are Non-Governmental Organisations - a subtle point, but they operate at two levels - one is to avert the immediate humanitarian problem and then to help develop self-sufficient strategies for the future.

I do not approve of governmets providing funds from the taxpayers for this - it should be entirely voluntary, a tleast until we put our own house in order. Physician heal thyself, and all that.

 

As for the IMF, they did and still do lay down conditions for lending to countries. As a condition of their loan to the UK in the 70's they insisted on a cutback in public spending...and they got it. It is a reasonable argument that after the IMF's intervention, there was a regime change in the UK - albeit by the ballot box, but as a direct consequence of the politicians' mismanagement of the economy.

Edited April 3, 2009 by Alan Stubbs

[Sportsman]

Once again the talk is of Africa the country or Africa the state, and the problems that beset Africa.

Africa is a massive continent stretching from the Mediterranean in the north to the tip of South Africa. There are 54 countries in Africa with 54 separate governments and 54 sets of problems, all different.

To say that we should stop sending aid to Africa because Mugabe is corrupt is like saying Gordon Brown must go (hmmmm, not a bad idea at that) because the government of Kazakhstan is a bit iffy.

It doesn't help that in many African countries, instead of growing food for their people they are growing roses or runner beans to service the luxury markets of the West, forced into it to repay the interest on the international loans.

It's been said that Africa has a "handout" culture or that help doesn't get through to the people that need it, well, that may be true in some countries but is not true for the vast majority. The amounts that are talked about are a drop in the ocean when spread across a continent the size of Africa and so has to be focused on the areas of greatest need, hence the images we see are of starving people in sub Saharan countries that have been hardest hit by drought and starvation. Not the case the the vast majorities of countries in this diverse continent.

[chesters1]

its the very sub saharan and north african countries that should look at their history and sort themselves out its that area where "civilisation" began ,they had no problem piping water hundreds of miles and irrigating vast regions 4,000 years ago why not now?

is it islam a new religioun which stifles free thinking or simply the population cant be arsed to sort themselves out?

they can kill each other easily enough plenty of money for that! why not feed themselves?

we know africa is big so is china (and different states as well) they havnt done to bad ,the rest as will africa trundle along as it always has.

 

they know at the first sign of a bony fly covered kid the money will come its africas biggest money spinner

Edited April 3, 2009 by chesters1

[kleinboet]

Both ColinW and Chersters1 are right in a way - Africans are VERY tribal! The padlocked quarters that the ex South African correspondent paraded joyoously as "prisons" were there to keep the other tribes out!!

 

BUT - if there were no more handouts, they would HAVE to work with one another to survive.

The Africans have used the barter system for thousands of years, so it is not something new to them.

It would take a lot of explaining and coertion to get it to work but if this was the only way they were going to survive, they will eventually agree.

 

It is funnny but there have been many documented cases where tribes that were absolute enemies have formed a brief coalition in order do defeat another foe, so it shouldn't be so hard to get them to agree.

 

 

 

And we can return to the old adage "charity begins at home"

Edited April 3, 2009 by kleinboet

[Sportsman]

Both ColinW and Chersters1 are right in a way - Africans are VERY tribal! The padlocked quarters that the ex South African correspondent paraded joyoously as "prisons" were there to keep the other tribes out!!

 

BUT - if there were no more handouts, they would HAVE to work with one another to survive.

The Africans have used the barter system for thousands of years, so it is not something new to them.

It would take a lot of explaining and coertion to get it to work but if this was the only way they were going to survive, they will eventually agree.

 

It is funnny but there have been many documented cases where tribes that were absolute enemies have formed a brief coalition in order do defeat another foe, so it shouldn't be so hard to get them to agree.

 

 

 

And we can return to the old adage "charity begins at home"

 

 

The Africans???

Which Africans are they?

 

With over 20% of the Earths land mass and over a billion people that is a fairly broad statement.

 

BTW I made a mistake in my previous posting, there are actually 61 countries in Africa.

One size does not fit all, and one description does not cover all.

Edited April 3, 2009 by Sportsman

[chesters1]

strange you never see those little guys (the naked ones with pointy sticks that run around) asking for hand outs .

they keep them selves to themselves,they dont put rabbits to shame breeding ,they dont need help to feed themselves .they may not earn a buck a day they dont need to they are happy with their lot.

no doubt the zulu's are pretty stable as well tribalism works in their case.

is it that africans have got too used to the very thing they hate? noooo the whiteman

they blame them too easily for their plight ,they accuse them of stripping their assets .did they know their assets existed before we came ?

they have no problems excepting aid from their hated foes though.

the countries as a whole have lost their pride ,are we to blame or is it the aid culture itself?

 

sportman be carefull substitute britain for africa and youl see the point i made that britain doesnt exist besides on a map

for the 3 people on earth that doesnt know where africa (yes it does exist) is its here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Africa

 

as sportman says its a collection of countries ,we agree ,can you be born african (you would have to be born in 61 countries at once)no! agree ? yes?

so if you cant be african then why is it my statement that you cannot be british (on another thread) is wrong?

i'm English by the way not british certainly not united kingdomish not even european

 

in roman times i was a brit because rome called england (england remember thats all they saw when they visited the first time) britania ,now we have england and the rest i'm english britain like africa doesnt exist except on a map

Edited April 3, 2009 by chesters1

[Sportsman]

The difference is that if I live in Britain (be it Brighton, Cardiff or Edinburgh) I am going to enjoy pretty much the same standard of living, use the same currency and have (unfortunately) the same government.

The same can not be said of someone who lives in Pretoria compared to someone in Sudan

 

(strange you never see those little guys (the naked ones with pointy sticks that run around) asking for hand outs .

they keep them selves to themselves,they dont put rabbits to shame breeding ,they dont need help to feed themselves .they may not earn a buck a day they dont need to they are happy with their lot.)

 

Err, I think they were ethnically cleansed some time ago

Edited April 3, 2009 by Sportsman

[chesters1]

The difference is that if I live in Britain (be it Brighton, Cardiff or Edinburgh) I am going to enjoy pretty much the same standard of living, use the same currency and have (unfortunately) the same government.

The same can not be said of someone who lives in Pretoria compared to someone in Sudan

perhaps your mistaken do you have free prescriptions ,what about university fees? ,no its 3 different countries with 3 different sets of rules .

notice though its the english that havnt a parliament (or assembly) the rest have pretty much their own ,the dammable thing is though these foreign powers make decisions how the english are run.

the standard of living isnt a country its an area theres just as many deprived welsh villages as there are english ones ,being deprived is local not a country.

when europe get 100% control over england england will cease to exist we will be "regions" (they are already there) "england" as a place is far to powerful historically to keep intact ,its to much of a threat to europe as a "place" and as a culture.

scotland will be fine once the oils gone they will go cap in hand to anyone ,wales on the map doesnt exist anyway

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/3715512.stm

Edited April 3, 2009 by chesters1

[Worms]

Both ColinW and Chersters1 are right in a way - Africans are VERY tribal! The padlocked quarters that the ex South African correspondent paraded joyoously as "prisons" were there to keep the other tribes out!!

 

BUT - if there were no more handouts, they would HAVE to work with one another to survive.

The Africans have used the barter system for thousands of years, so it is not something new to them.

It would take a lot of explaining and coertion to get it to work but if this was the only way they were going to survive, they will eventually agree.

 

It is funnny but there have been many documented cases where tribes that were absolute enemies have formed a brief coalition in order do defeat another foe, so it shouldn't be so hard to get them to agree.

 

 

 

And we can return to the old adage "charity begins at home"

A nice idea KB and I almost agree with what you have proposed. For several hundred years various European countries have 'ruled' a variety of African nations and imposed geographical boundaries. Over the last 50 or so years many of these countries have been 'given' their independence and the carefully set up democracies (snigger) have ended up in the hands of leaders of 'governments', whether elected or not, who have formed bastardised versions of 'democratic tribal' rule (varying from dictators to benevolent despots).the tribal issues and the new 'financial class divide' don't mix too well with this kind of culture.

 

Pre-white man and the biggest of all diseases....christianity.....The African continent was tribal, no countries as such just a huge area occupied by many different tribes. Whether they survived as hunter-gatherers or farmers they worked on the basis of intra tribal survival and, as you said sometimes inter tribal survival. Seasonal migration was commonplace for some tribes.

 

Now the situation in many African countries is closer to pre-medieval Britain. Powerful (in their own domain) rulers (who are usually present due to some western influence or interference) with a sub-class of variously educated 'ministers'. These may be all of one tribe/faction.

 

The rest of the country's people are invariably poorly paid subsistence workers. One thing binds these people. The underlying culture of many of the African peoples.......Subsistence.... Regardless of how much money is thrown at them a huge majority struggle to understand the western meanings of growth and prosperity. Give a Batswana herdsman the equivalent of £20 he will trek off to the nearest village and spend it. He will return with new shoes, a nice jacket, a new knife/spade/bicycle tyre and a case of beer and no change! Give him a couple of hundred and, he might go and buy a load of cattle or goats (and many cases of beer). In six months time, all of the cattle will be sick, the ground poached, the waterhole/stream polluted or dry and the herdsman and his family in desperate need of food. As has been said already they cannot manage, indeed do not understand western farming techniques.

 

So, basically I agree with not sending vast wedges of cash to Africa. As has been said, you have to get it past the ruling class first, secondly the western viewpoint of installing waterpumps etc won't always work because some enterprising young man will turn it into a carwash in the middle of the bush and it will end up full of diesel. If you give it to the man in the bush it will all be spent on shoes, three piece suits, and a frightening amount of 'mortality' (beer!).

 

So back to the point , Yes stop the influx of cash to the leaders. Next problem, you said KB "It would take a lot of explaining and coertion to get it to work". Yes it certainly would. Years of explaining that democracy was right didn't work. Now some have had a taste of western decadence and you want to tell them to forget that and to go back to their rondaval with a goat 'cos we're not going to supply them with Range Rovers, aircraft, gunboats and weapons any more..........hmm, a short term bloody massacre, increased asylum claims and a willing workforce at the beck and call of some currently well known 'alternative religion' terror groups.

 

The answer to the problem?...............absolutely no idea! How do you turn a pot of yellow paint back to yellow when somebody (from somewhere else) has tipped a pot of blue into it?

 

Human nature being what it is I believe the problem will always be there, no amount of western money or ideals thrown at it will help, in fact it will probably just make it worse.

 

I though, for all my spouting on, will still contribute to red nose day. At least the money goes everywhere, including this country. It eases my capitalist conscience and I can still afford to go fishing for pleasure!

[ColinW]

I know an extremely bright young man from The Gambia who came over here to study. When he first arrived he had big plans to go back and start his own ISP company. He's now got a first class degree and is trying like hell to avoid going back home! The reason for this change of heart is that he now realises that his life would be a lot simpler working here for a multi-national telecoms company than fighting corrupt officialdom back home. I hope he succeeds in staying here because it will be our gain and their loss! Sadly I suspect this is a brain drain being repeated across the continent.

Edited April 3, 2009 by ColinW