Poverty in Africa - a spiralling problem

[Matt W]

Africa appears to be once again on the political horizon - however briefly - due to Tony Blair's efforts/rhetoric as current president of the G8:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programme...nt/4586763.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4337853.stm

Do you see the situation of capable of improvement? Or are there any ideas you have to help this?

[Nono]

Of course it's capable of improving -- in principle. But here's why I'm pessimistic:

1) Nobody's really interested in Africa until a Cold War or something like that comes along. Yeah, well we like the parts with oil, but that doesn't do the people living in those parts any good (see Angola, Nigeria, etc.)

2) Most African countries are inherently unstable if only because of their absurd borders, which lump together mutually hostile ethnic groups. This is the result of the Berlin Conference over a century ago, but it's hard to see how that could be undone.

3) Much of Africa has a culture of unquestioning obedience to the clan elders and of powerless women exploited by contemptuous men. Only Africans can change this, and it ain't gonna happen quickly, if ever.

4) Africa is awash in weapons (see Cold War).

5) Africa is the playground of the IMF, World Bank and other purveyors of neo-liberal ideology. And if you're a cash-strapped government, any port in a storm, right? This plus European and North American protectionism is forcing a lot of people off the land and into the sweatshops. This runs counter to sustainable development.

I actually believe that Blair is sincere about this (as far as that toothy freak is "sincere" about anything). I wish him luck, but am not hopeful.

[tman_ndsu08]

The saving grace of African might actually be Somalia.

I'm not joking.

This country is an anarchy state right now. But, most importantly, with anarchy comes a free market. Look what a free market did for a bunch of rocks in southern Asia. You might call it "Hong Kong".

Give them 20 years to build up an infrastructure and Mogodishu could be the next HK and a model for leading the rest of Africa out of the dark ages!

[G. Adams]

Quote by: tman_ndsu08 The saving grace of African might actually be Somalia. I'm not joking. This country is an anarchy state right now. But, most importantly, with anarchy comes a free market. Look what a free market did for a bunch of rocks in southern Asia. You might call it "Hong Kong". Give them 20 years to build up an infrastructure and Mogodishu could be the next HK and a model for leading the rest of Africa out of the dark ages!

I'll admit, my history on Hong Kong is lacking, but as far as I know, they had both a system of law and order and a civic culture. Somalia lacks both, to the best of my knowledge.

[Chalk]

I was debating this with some other people my age.. and we came to the conclusion that poverty will exist as long as there are 'well off' and 'poor'. People in western countries tend to have certain aspirations; finish school, get a decent job, buy a house, buy a car, if there's a little spare cash take a holiday.. but where does 'give to charity' come into play? There are some religions that believe you should give a small percent of your wages to charitable causes, but even with that, charities can be seen as dubious; 'how much of my money REALLY goes to help the starving?' and such. Though this does concern me.. to be honest when I wake up tomorrow morning I'll probably be thinking about myself rather than all the injustices in the world. Which is perhaps wrong, but I duno.
Social attitudes need to change before any progress can be made. I mean if you won £1,000,000 how much of that would you spend on yourself, and how much would *really* find its way to charity?

Some days I wish I wasn't so cynical.

[tman_ndsu08]

they had both a system of law and order and a civic culture.

Neither of which are relevent. No judge or buddhist monk made Hong Kong a world economic power. It was the free market and the large, cheap labor force. Both of which Somalia now has.

[tman_ndsu08]

and we came to the conclusion that poverty will exist as long as there are 'well off' and 'poor'.

Hmmm....so let me get this straight: as long as there are poor people existing there will also exist poverty. And that, somehow, using some sort of black socialist voodoo magic, translates into the rich are are not giving the poor enough free handouts.

THIS is the only attitude that needs changing.

[Chalk]

I didn't say free hand outs. Its funny how the west raped the countries that aren't doing so good today of their resources years ago, and now put on the 'aww those poor suffering countries, but t'hell if I'm going to give up my wealth' stance. Maybe it's attitudes like that which are asking for a 'socialist voodoo magic' retaliation? Though I'm not particularly any way inclined politically myself.. some would argue if you make a mess you clean it up, i.e. a lot of people were put off the Lib Dems because they wanted to act like the Iraq thing never happened.

[tman_ndsu08]

If we had never had slaves from Africa, it would still be the poorest continent on the earth simply because it lacks natural resources. They have lots of trees, yes, but worthless rainforest trees.

[Chalk]

Hmm, yes I'm sure that's why Egypt in it's glory days was so poor.

[Nono]

Quote by: tman If we had never had slaves from Africa, it would still be the poorest continent on the earth simply because it lacks natural resources. They have lots of trees, yes, but worthless rainforest trees.

Jeez, tman, you're far more pathetically ignorant than I'd imagined.

As for this Somalia/HK crap, anarchy-leading-to-free-markets is the sort of mirror-image-of-the-Khmer Rouge garbage we hear from the looney right these days, but has nothing to do with reality. Hell, man, you should pop over to Somalia sometime. It'd open your eyes right up.

HK, of course, was created by the Brits to promote the opium trade, the better to seize control of China. It's an excellent port and holding it meant the Brits had Canton by the balls. Bunch of rocks my ass.

[tman_ndsu08]

Anarchy doesn't lead to a free market, it allows one.

A free market is a living, breathing lifeform that makes the universe warm.

[Matt W]

Anarchy doesn't lead to a free market, it allows one.

Right. Warlords vying for control with rival militias are just the conditions a free market needs. :rolleyes:

What about the rest of Africa, people? We've touched on Somalia...who's next?

[G. Adams]

Quote by: tman_ndsu08 If we had never had slaves from Africa, it would still be the poorest continent on the earth simply because it lacks natural resources. They have lots of trees, yes, but worthless rainforest trees.

No resources, other than oil, natural gas, diamonds, vast land suitable for agriculture, essential locations in world trade (suez), huge amounts of cheap labour, essential minerals such as coltan. The country deemed the most devestated in the world, the Congo, is perhaps the most mineral rich in the world, with millions of tons of diamonds, copper, cobalt, zinc, manganese, uranium and coltan.

Unless we are talking about places like Chad, to say African countries lack resources is bullshit, and to speak of the whole continent as lacking resources is absolutely moronic.

Many African states lack law and order. This is neccesary for people to respect other peoples property, essential for building a free market. Many African states lack a civic culture. This is neccesary for trust in politicians, and for the politicians to respect both the population and rules regarding corruption. They also lack a decent infrastructure, neccesary for transporting goods quickly, essential for perishable goods such as food.

And besides, when the West rigs the system against Africa, through ridiculous subsidies to keep out African products, how will it ever succeed through free market solutions?

Personally, I believe it will be neccesary for most of the African states to either form an internal free market like the EU, while being quite heavily protectionist to the outside. Afterall, when the leading states of the West were developing in the industrial age they were highly protectionist.

[Nono]

Quote by: G.Adams Afterall, when the leading states of the West were developing in the industrial age they were highly protectionist.

As were the post-war Asian Tigers.

[castille]

You want Africa to throw out foreign influence and adopt a heavily protectionist policy?

Simple. Stop lending them money, stop buying them products, and stop selling them products.

I predict Africa will last about 2 years under their new ultra-protectionist policy.

[G. Adams]

Quote by: castille You want Africa to throw out foreign influence and adopt a heavily protectionist policy? Simple. Stop lending them money, stop buying them products, and stop selling them products. I predict Africa will last about 2 years under their new ultra-protectionist policy.

How do you mean Africa will last? You mean they will suffer gripping poverty and food shortages? Oh hang on, thats what happens now. I'm not saying ultra-protectionist, to the level of autarky or shut off from the world as in NK. I'd want to see tariffs go up on food imported to Africa, they can grow it locally and process it locally, creating jobs. Currently they grow the food, sell it uber cheap to foreign states, who process it, then sell it back with large margins attached.

If the West wants to get involved, it should invest in developing the infrastructure to make it easier for Africa to get itself running, rather than creating dependency problems.

[Chalk]

Quote by: G. Adams No resources, other than oil, natural gas, diamonds, vast land suitable for agriculture, essential locations in world trade (suez), huge amounts of cheap labour, essential minerals such as coltan. The country deemed the most devestated in the world, the Congo, is perhaps the most mineral rich in the world, with millions of tons of diamonds, copper, cobalt, zinc, manganese, uranium and coltan.

EXACTLY what I was thinking! (except I couldn't name the exact things they had at the time of posting)

[tman_ndsu08]

Quote by: Matt W Right. Warlords vying for control with rival militias are just the conditions a free market needs. :rolleyes:

Now wait just a darn second here.

Where am I promoting anarchy on this thread? I'm not a promoter of anarchy. I believe in having a tax supported law system and law enforcers.


I do, however, believe in an unregulated free market. You should simply understand that what I meant is that anarchy allows a free market, but it's certainly not the only system to do so. You can still have laws and government allowing a free market.

[castille]

Quote by: G. Adams I'd want to see tariffs go up on food imported to Africa, they can grow it locally and process it locally, creating jobs.

That's assuming they stop fighting long enough to actually use their farms.

I mean, Rwanda has plenty of farms that could still be functioning. The only problem is nobody is there working.