Guest
Guest
;D
What should the world do about Africa?
- Thread starter Feldschlacht IV
- Start date
Feldschlacht IV
Member
You're obviously not following the thread because you're talking about England and obligations or something and everyone else is talking about the UN.
And no I'm not suggesting the UN storm in there nor throwing them gratuitous amount of money. So instead of just going "WE TRIED LET'S JUST GIVE UP ENTIRELY", perhaps another alternative would be trying alternate ways of helping, such as increasing education for the young people there, teaching the people there agriculture and farming skills, more medicine, HIV awareness, etc. I understand that some of this is either already being done or not possible all at the same time, but the means to help is there and there is an organization that's partly obligated to do these things.
And no I'm not suggesting the UN storm in there nor throwing them gratuitous amount of money. So instead of just going "WE TRIED LET'S JUST GIVE UP ENTIRELY", perhaps another alternative would be trying alternate ways of helping, such as increasing education for the young people there, teaching the people there agriculture and farming skills, more medicine, HIV awareness, etc. I understand that some of this is either already being done or not possible all at the same time, but the means to help is there and there is an organization that's partly obligated to do these things.
Guest
Guest
;D
Feldschlacht IV
Member
Fair enough, but this all stemmed from this comment
which was entirely out of left field and wasn't relevant to anything anyone said within the last 5 posts.
ДГъÃтÉГ":1jpynkha said:
which was entirely out of left field and wasn't relevant to anything anyone said within the last 5 posts.
Guest
Guest
;D
Feldschlacht IV
Member
And I countered that in the post after it. So yeah.
Guest
Guest
;D
Feldschlacht IV
Member
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on fundamental values.
Guest
Guest
;D
what i think is cute is when people think the U.N. is like a country or something, as if they have some vast repository of funds coming in and an army of employees at their disposal, or the power and persuasion to do anything.
think of the U.N. like a company. It's a big building with a bank account and a few employees to run it. diplomats go there, and they discuss shit occasionally. usually just little interpersonal things, like treaties, and "hey how's that national disaster thing going". they can help ORGANIZE ORGANIZATIONS which ALREADY EXIST (ex.: red cross) to focus on something. THEY (the U.N.) don't go out and do diddly squat. and even if they did it'd be like 30 caterers, 40 accountants, a few white collars, and about 90 diplomats, going out to save the day.
quit assuming they have all this power and sway and resources lol it's cute but it's getting old now
"whoa where does this estimated 30+ billion in international money go every year? weird i guess it disappears"
done
example: http://www.ifesh.org/
done
example: http://www.up.ac.za/academic/ecoagric/
done
example: http://www.medicinemd.com/
done
information: http://www.avert.org/aafrica.htm
yes they are partially capable of channeling SOME money that is not theirs into specific relief efforts which already exist.
here is something else they do with that money. (i.e.: waste it).
if you're serious about helping africa get serious about raising awareness for it yourself, not by complaining that the world isn't COLLECTIVELY socialist enough at bringing themselves down to bring up the poor.
think of the U.N. like a company. It's a big building with a bank account and a few employees to run it. diplomats go there, and they discuss shit occasionally. usually just little interpersonal things, like treaties, and "hey how's that national disaster thing going". they can help ORGANIZE ORGANIZATIONS which ALREADY EXIST (ex.: red cross) to focus on something. THEY (the U.N.) don't go out and do diddly squat. and even if they did it'd be like 30 caterers, 40 accountants, a few white collars, and about 90 diplomats, going out to save the day.
quit assuming they have all this power and sway and resources lol it's cute but it's getting old now
Feldschlacht IV":3ck8x0i1 said:
"whoa where does this estimated 30+ billion in international money go every year? weird i guess it disappears"
done
example: http://www.ifesh.org/
done
example: http://www.up.ac.za/academic/ecoagric/
done
example: http://www.medicinemd.com/
done
information: http://www.avert.org/aafrica.htm
yes they are partially capable of channeling SOME money that is not theirs into specific relief efforts which already exist.
here is something else they do with that money. (i.e.: waste it).
if you're serious about helping africa get serious about raising awareness for it yourself, not by complaining that the world isn't COLLECTIVELY socialist enough at bringing themselves down to bring up the poor.
Feldschlacht IV
Member
Fair enough, although I think a good point of discussion would be 'is it working', and what to do now? What's the projected outcome?
The state of Africa, created by circumstances in the past and it's state maintained by the great twenty countries, whereas America abandoned Africa heavily, ever since they set their colonies free - because as you know there isn't enough oil to gain that they know off - Russia, who took on the countries and their problems, let them fall as hard as the U.S. did. China, exporting those goods Africans can make. [not that it is their fault but they maintain the state of poverty]. And so on.
Is it our fault? Well no. It is not our fault, but it sure is our past. And as a loan inherits as inheritance when the owner dies, so could guilt and moral obligation for what our ancestors caused.
How can we help? We should stop sending money. Not only will more then fifty percent (go find your sources on google) of the money get in the hands of the already rich people in this countries - we should give 'em goodies instead. We shouldn't let the governments decide what to buy, but if we were going to help, we should make the total plan! Yes we need more education. Not the crap people do for 0 money, but organized, on a great scale. We could rebuild these countries one by one. More awareness. Enforcing democracy when it's necessary (although we know that won't work out quite well). Provided the rights to make medicines (so pharmaceutical company's don't sue the ass of those organisations trying to make medicines available to any- and everyone).
Should we help? If you are a humanist, you should say yes right away. If you're not, become a humanist. We're all citizens of the world and we need to support each other. In Europe we know that the common U.S. Citizen is too stupid to understand the Holland isn't a country and so isn't Europe, but that doesn't mean that no one cares. You should care, weren't it just because half of the shoes you have at home - and that counts for boys and girls - were probably (partially) made in Africa, although it says Taiwan.
Is there a reason not too? Sure - overpopulation. We wouldn't be able to withstand the enormous growth in population, if all those Africans would survive. And we shouldn't do it because of such a reason - but not because we aren't obliged or something like that. That you aren't obliged to do something, doesn't mean that you shouldn't - and on top off that, we are.
Wealth and welfare only exists on the costs of someone else's, which is logically. We don't want to lose that - so we stay where we are, and let them suffer in those African wastelands.
Is it our fault? Well no. It is not our fault, but it sure is our past. And as a loan inherits as inheritance when the owner dies, so could guilt and moral obligation for what our ancestors caused.
How can we help? We should stop sending money. Not only will more then fifty percent (go find your sources on google) of the money get in the hands of the already rich people in this countries - we should give 'em goodies instead. We shouldn't let the governments decide what to buy, but if we were going to help, we should make the total plan! Yes we need more education. Not the crap people do for 0 money, but organized, on a great scale. We could rebuild these countries one by one. More awareness. Enforcing democracy when it's necessary (although we know that won't work out quite well). Provided the rights to make medicines (so pharmaceutical company's don't sue the ass of those organisations trying to make medicines available to any- and everyone).
Should we help? If you are a humanist, you should say yes right away. If you're not, become a humanist. We're all citizens of the world and we need to support each other. In Europe we know that the common U.S. Citizen is too stupid to understand the Holland isn't a country and so isn't Europe, but that doesn't mean that no one cares. You should care, weren't it just because half of the shoes you have at home - and that counts for boys and girls - were probably (partially) made in Africa, although it says Taiwan.
Is there a reason not too? Sure - overpopulation. We wouldn't be able to withstand the enormous growth in population, if all those Africans would survive. And we shouldn't do it because of such a reason - but not because we aren't obliged or something like that. That you aren't obliged to do something, doesn't mean that you shouldn't - and on top off that, we are.
Wealth and welfare only exists on the costs of someone else's, which is logically. We don't want to lose that - so we stay where we are, and let them suffer in those African wastelands.
1st off, sorry to necro-post...
2nd, I agree fully with everyone stating that we shouldn't do anything. It's outrageous feelings of responsibility and overwhelming concern such as this that are the root causes of war and the like. I'm no peace-loving hippy, but I honestly believe that none of this is really something people all the way on the other side of the world need to be concerned about. It really doesn't affect us until it spreads to us, in which case, then and only then do we need to take action. Jumping face-first into someone else's problems does nothing more than provide us with a good way to kill ourselves for something that may or may not resolve itself in time... and even if it dosen't; Again, why should we be concerned about SOMEONE ELSE'S PROBLEMS?! I believe in civil war, not global. If we have an issue with ourselves, then by all means fix it. But, if it's not our fight, why do we insist on making it our fight? An easy example is to look at Iraq. (I know, cliche.) We send over our guys, get ourselves knee-deep, and continue to step in some else's shit until we believe we've fixed the problem. Then, a couple years later, the same thing happens again. We're still not out of there... and even when we are, my bets are on it happening again. Why do we bother? It's stupid. I say, forget about Africa. Let them deal with their own problems. Every time we attempt to fix things, they just seem to jump down a whole new step of low. The money we've wasted on "trying" to pull them out of starvation, poverty, crime, etc. could have been used to help our own damn selves. Seriously.
2nd, I agree fully with everyone stating that we shouldn't do anything. It's outrageous feelings of responsibility and overwhelming concern such as this that are the root causes of war and the like. I'm no peace-loving hippy, but I honestly believe that none of this is really something people all the way on the other side of the world need to be concerned about. It really doesn't affect us until it spreads to us, in which case, then and only then do we need to take action. Jumping face-first into someone else's problems does nothing more than provide us with a good way to kill ourselves for something that may or may not resolve itself in time... and even if it dosen't; Again, why should we be concerned about SOMEONE ELSE'S PROBLEMS?! I believe in civil war, not global. If we have an issue with ourselves, then by all means fix it. But, if it's not our fight, why do we insist on making it our fight? An easy example is to look at Iraq. (I know, cliche.) We send over our guys, get ourselves knee-deep, and continue to step in some else's shit until we believe we've fixed the problem. Then, a couple years later, the same thing happens again. We're still not out of there... and even when we are, my bets are on it happening again. Why do we bother? It's stupid. I say, forget about Africa. Let them deal with their own problems. Every time we attempt to fix things, they just seem to jump down a whole new step of low. The money we've wasted on "trying" to pull them out of starvation, poverty, crime, etc. could have been used to help our own damn selves. Seriously.
Incognitus
Member
What's everyone's view on the application of odious debt to various African governments, and the World Bank and IMF validating TPLACs (tin-pot little African countries) with extortionate loans that the population haven't got a rat's chance in Hell of paying back?
Incognitus":enolyjxh said:
I'm not opposed to development loans in principle, but the IMF and World Bank do more harm than good by their requirements. They demand that countries adjust their institutions to better match our globalized world, these institutional changes work in a modern, industrailized society but not the countries that are typically coerced into taking these loans. As such, these countries try to get into the global market like they're told to, but end up suffering.
I'd get behind a nationally funded micro-lending program, though. Microloans have an outrageously successful record, and because they're targeted at the grassroots, people are helped directly as opposed to the theoretical trickle-down that IMF/WB loans give.
@TehSeph: I've never been a big fan of self-oriented philosophies. Afterall, I'm a humanist and believer of cosmopolitanism. While I recognize there are culturally relativistic morals that come into play when dealing with other countries (like female genital mutilation), there are some things that I think we can agree upon in general. I'm not a big fan of nation building, forced regime changes, or military interventionism. Hard power enforcement of our ideals results in apprehension toward the country that utilizes force. I do, however, support military intervention on humanitarian concerns. In Rwanda, I wish that the UN Peacekeepers had been allowed to raid the Interahamwe weapon stores, I wish that we could send a few forces to the Darfur refugee camps just to protect the women from being raped any time they leave to get supplies. There are ideals and morals that go beyond our cultural differences. A respect for the dignity of human life is one of those. An attack on someone's human rights is an attack on all humanity, therefore we should feel a responsibility toward assisting those under repression. These self-oriented philosophies like Ethical Egoism/Objectivism make my stomach churn because their very philosophical framework rely on the rejection of others' needs. Whether you want to accept it or not, the objective truth is that there are other people, and their needs do affect you.
Incognitus
Member
Vadon":3c86gq4x said:
Agreed. The IMF and World Bank are just vast corporate welfare schemes with a bonus feel-good factor.