Africa is giving nothing to anyone -- apart from AIDS

[volatile]

Just about the most vitriolic piece of cruel, immoral invective idiocy I've seen in a good long while.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/co...s-1430428.html

The guy lost all respect for what little argument he may have had at "Japan, China, Russia, Korea, Poland, Germany, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia in the 20th century have endured worse broad brush-strokes than almost any part of Africa.", which is beyond nonsense. I'm kinda sympathetic to his general point -- that perhaps giving money to Africa isn't necessarily the best way to solve it's entrenched problems -- but when you come out with sentences like "Africa, with its vast savannahs and its lush pastures, is giving almost nothing to anyone, apart from AIDS", it becomes impossible to take seriously.

Thoughts?

[BirdStrike]

"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime."

Chinese Proverb

[Sefarst]

There are success stories in Africa, Botswana being a good one.

It's important to point out that it took a long time for western civilization to get to the point it's at. We went from roaming bands and tribes to small independent fiefdoms, to empires, spilled rivers of blood over pretty much everything imaginable, and only through a gradual upwelling of reason and scholarship were we able to (mostly) break out of that cycle. Unfortunately, much of African is still stuck in that tribal stage and suffer from lacking a proper foundation for modern innovations. What once would have been only confined to small border skirmishes can now flare into brutal warfare with the addition of guns and rocket launchers. I feel there's a certain learning curve to all of this and it's somewhat unrealistic to think that dropping the latest technologies on people without the philosophical underpinnings to use them will make an enormous difference.

They need their own enlightenment more than cash. There's something to be said for figuring it out yourself. That said, I actually do see progress on the continent. Don't forget that it was only 60 years ago that western civilization was tearing itself apart at the seams in a war that was far more costly and destructive than anything the Africans are facing today.

[Demigorgon]

Pfft..where else am I to get those shiny rocks so my wife can look all sparkle-y?

[Hubert Cumberdale]

Originally Posted by Sefarst

There are success stories in Africa, Botswana being a good one.

Botswana is doing well in comparison to other African nations. Botswana is actually a bit of a dump.

Originally Posted by Sefarst

I feel there's a certain learning curve to all of this and it's somewhat unrealistic to think that dropping the latest technologies on people without the philosophical underpinnings to use them will make an enormous difference.

Maybe, but no other continent has had quite such trouble with philosophical underpinnings as Africa.

Originally Posted by Sefarst

They need their own enlightenment more than cash. There's something to be said for figuring it out yourself.

Indeed. I would argue that the masses of aid being paid to Africa are in fact a hindrence to the enlightenment - the "figuring it out for yourself" or the "moral underpinning" if you like - basically all this aid and charity and all those thousands of UN Land Cruisers are doing a whole lot of harm, not good. It benefits the local people little but secures the tenure of the despots.

As someone else said, give a man a fish and you feed him for a day...and he will need you to give him a fish for the rest of his lifetime.

Read Dark Star Safari by Paul Theroux. He puts it most eloquently.

[Madalch]

Originally Posted by Demigorgon

Pfft..where else am I to get those shiny rocks so my wife can look all sparkle-y?

The NWT of Canada, of course.

[Bob Blaylock]

This thread brings to mind my recent comment in another thread about reparations for the descendants of slaves being best offered as a one-way trip to Africa for any who really think that their life here in the U.S. is so rotten because their ancestors were forcibly brought here from Africa.

Perhaps the Bloods and the Crips would do a better job of running the various African nations, than the leaders who are currently doing so. At least they could teach the natives how to more efficiently kill one another.

[The Painter]

Originally Posted by volatile

Just about the most vitriolic piece of cruel, immoral invective idiocy I've seen in a good long while.

--- but when you come out with sentences like "Africa, with its vast savannahs and its lush pastures, is giving almost nothing to anyone, apart from AIDS", it becomes impossible to take seriously.

Thoughts?

It looks like he's got your number

Quote:

and will provoke the self-righteous wrath of, well, the self-righteous, letter-writing wrathful, a species which never fails to contaminate almost every debate in Irish life with its sneers and its moral superiority.

[Sunstealer]

Originally Posted by BirdStrike

"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime."

Chinese Proverb

Give an African a fish and you feed him for a day. Give him a fishing rod and he'll break it for fire wood or swap it for a fish.

Ghana is doing all right. They have a president that is stepping down after his tenure even though the public want him to stay.

Quote:

Despite his genuine popular following, Mr Kufuor will hand over next month. Under his stewardship, Ghana's gross domestic product has quadrupled from £2.6 billion in 2000 to almost £11 billion today.

Instead of squandering this windfall, Mr Kufuor halved the level of poverty and increased the number of children in primary school by almost a quarter.

He introduced free medical care for the poor in 2004 and free meals in schools. All this has made Ghana one of Africa's rare success stories

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...in-Africa.html

Biggest problem for Africa are people like Bono, Gordon Brown, Tony Blair Geldorf etc.

[KoihimeNakamura]

Originally Posted by The Painter

It looks like he's got your number

he thinks he does, but I bet he doesn't.

[Hubert Cumberdale]

Quote:

Quote:
Despite his genuine popular following, Mr Kufuor will hand over next month. Under his stewardship, Ghana's gross domestic product has quadrupled from £2.6 billion in 2000 to almost £11 billion today.

Gordon Brown borrows that much for brekkies.

[Wolfman]

I disagree very much with the way this person has framed their argument.

But I agree with some of the actual points he makes.

Too much of the effort to help African countries has been a guilt-based thing. "Oh, look at those poor people...let's send them money, they they'll be better off, and I can rest content that I've done my bit to help out."

The result? Almost all the aid to Africa has been bandaid packages, programs that address short-term, temporary situations, without addressing the larger, long-term problems.

Feed a starving kid? Sure, that's a good thing to do. Pay for a kid to get an education? Sure, that's a good thing to do, too.

But what about when he grows up? Will the problems that caused his difficulties and struggles as a child have improved at all? Or will his kids be born into essentially the same situation, starting the cycle all over again? Or an even worse situation?

The vast majority of aid to Africa, for all that I'm sure it was sent with every sincere desire and intent to help, has not really helped them at all. In my opinion.

And its not just my opinion. In Beijing, I had the opportunity to attend various embassy functions hosted by different African nations, and to discuss these issues with diplomats and leaders from those countries. And almost all of them expressed the sentiment that while they greatly appreciated efforts to help, and certainly wouldn't say they'd prefer for children to starve to death for lack of food, that nothing much had been done about improving the overall situation.

"But that's their fault"

In some ways, yeah.

But what about the fact that medical programs funded by the U.S. government are forbidden from mentioning or promoting the use of condoms? Overpopulation and sexually transmitted diseases are two of the biggest problems facing many African nations, and the country that is contributing the most money to help them is at the very same time imposing restrictions that virtually guarantee the problems will continue. Add in the influence of the Roman Catholic church (any form of birth control is wrong), and Islam (female circumsision).

There's a lot to be said for helping people one at a time...and I certainly wouldn't criticize those who desire to do so. But we've gotta' take a step back, and see the bigger picture. Helping people one at a time isn't gonna' make a hell of a lot of difference if the nations they live in are not improving also.

Right now, our African aid programs just seem to guarantee that we'll be feeding starving children forever. This generation. Next generation. The generation after that one. And the one following that.

I don't have concrete answers...in fact, even viewing it as an "African problem" that has some sort of "African solution" is wrong. Africa is a collection of diverse countries and cultures, that all face different problems and challenges.

I don't have concrete answers...but I do have a personal strategy that I think would be better. That we stop putting money into the countries that are the most impoverished, that have the most abuse. That instead, we identify the countries that are doing the best, that are providing the best examples, and help them. And, by helping them, provide a model for other African countries to copy, and build upon.

Right now, the poorer your country is, the more money you'll get. The more developed it is, the less money you'll get. So exactly what incentive is there to improve?!? If you just sit on your butt and do nothing, you'll continue to get handouts.

But if the leaders of these countries see that they'll get more money by changing and improving...then it would be a very different situation.

Problem is, its a very hard sell. Show pictures of one country with starving children living on the street, and another with healthy children studying in school...which one are people more likely to end up giving money to?

[Darth Rotor]

The Peace Corps was a good idea, in terms of empowerment from the ground up. Part of the trouble is some of the imbalances in resource demands and availability, and management, at the macro level.

As to Africa and what it gives, man, loads of minerals it has provided the world for years, and the best marathon runners on the planet.

[gumboot]

I'm pretty sure they gave us Ebola too, didn't they?

Interestingly, some years ago I read an article by some African leader of some description, where he urged the West to stop giving Africa financial hand outs, and made a compelling argument that it was actually making things worse.

I can't recall his name, I think he was Zimbabwe. It was a really interesting read.

[kittynh]

you know "Africa" is like saying "Europe". or even the "North America".

South Africa hasn't gone the path of Rhodesia. Botswana spend more of it's total income on education than any other country in the world. Little steps in the right direction. But don't paint Africa with such a broad brush. Good things are happening.

[Wowbagger]

If the bigots don't like AIDS coming out of Africa, maybe they should be pushing something more effective than "abstience only".

[mhaze]

Originally Posted by kittynh

you know "Africa" is like saying "Europe". or even the "North America".

South Africa hasn't gone the path of Rhodesia. Botswana spend more of it's total income on education than any other country in the world. Little steps in the right direction. But don't paint Africa with such a broad brush. Good things are happening.

Right....are we talking SubSaharraen or what?

[kittynh]

Right, I know people from South Africa and while they admit things are rough, they are positive and upbeat. Botswana is an example for many FIRST world nations.

Africa... anyone who argues "Africa" is already losing any respect I'll have for his/her opinion.

It's like saying "Native Americans live in abject poverty and suffer from alcoholism and diabetes". Well, some, but others are doing just fine with high rates of college graduates and run their tribes with pride and good business sense. The point is to ever paint with such a broad brush is to be disrespectful of those that are beating the stereotype. And it's a lot more than you think.

[Roboramma]

Well said, Kitty.

Personally, I think we should be doing more, not less, for the developing nations of the world in general, and yes, many african nations in particular. Feeding starving children is fine, but how about helping them to improve farm yields, build infrastructure, supply 'micro-loans' etc. How about doing something more to combat AIDS and malaria?
The fact that what we've done so far hasn't been enough isn't reason to suggest that we should do less.

[phantomb]

Originally Posted by BirdStrike

"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime."

Chinese Proverb

"Give a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

[Sefarst]

Originally Posted by Roboramma

Personally, I think we should be doing more, not less, for the developing nations of the world in general, and yes, many african nations in particular. Feeding starving children is fine, but how about helping them to improve farm yields, build infrastructure, supply 'micro-loans' etc. How about doing something more to combat AIDS and malaria?

We've been doing most of that, but a great portion of the problems in many African nations are man-made. Giving micro-loans to the governments of many of these countries wouldn't work because it's the governments that are the problem. The famines are man-made and, in a lot of ways, so is the AIDS epidemic. The issue is not really a shortage of condoms, it's a socialized stigma against people with AIDS where tribes are quick to shun any member that has it, so everyone is afraid to be tested.

Quote:

The fact that what we've done so far hasn't been enough isn't reason to suggest that we should do less.

I agree with the earlier suggestion that we should start giving money to the countries that are making real progress and make them an example to the others.

[Hubert Cumberdale]

Originally Posted by kittynh

you know "Africa" is like saying "Europe". or even the "North America".

Actually I think you'll find that Europe and North America are a good deal more homogenous than Africa.

Originally Posted by kittynh

South Africa hasn't gone the path of Rhodesia.

Yet.

Originally Posted by kittynh

Good things are happening.

They are depressingly few and far between, Botswana aside, I look at Africa (yes I know), shake my head and so help me I'd cry if I hadnt fallen out of sympathy with it a long time since.

[gumboot]

Let's face it. There's a reason we all left.

[Hubert Cumberdale]

Originally Posted by Roboramma

The fact that what we've done so far hasn't been enough isn't reason to suggest that we should do less.

Odd logic. If you have been trying the same thing to combat a problem for 40 years and its actually got worse in that time, maybe its at least time to take a step back and ask why.

Everyone who has never lived there thinks they have all the answers. Throw a bit of money at this, build a road here, a well there, a school for this village and an ambulance for that hospital.

It never works though. In ten years the road is pot-holed, the well dry, the school's windows broken, teachers unpaid, books lost or burnt and the ambulance up on bricks with a seized engine.

Time to tap up some old gaurdian reading handwringers for another slice of their pension. (Just £2 a month and this black kid with flies in its eyes and no goats will have a wonderful life!) It doesnt work though. Because when that black kid has finished dying of aids or war or being necklaced, its orphaned child will have flies in its eyes and no goats, and so we go round again.

Africa, or more correctly, African leaders need to start building their own countries and looking after their own people. Aid money simply gives them the finances to live the life of, well of an African leader, without having to take care of, or answer to their own people.

Aid makes it worse. Not better. Stop trying to teach them to fish, it doesnt work. Let them learn how to fish by themselves, stand on their own feet by themselves.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by BirdStrike

"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime."

Chinese Proverb

Build a man a fire you will warm him for an hour, set a man on fire and you will warm him for the rest of his life.

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by phantomb

"Give a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

I've used it before and I was going to use it again!!!

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

Build a man a fire you will warm him for an hour, set a man on fire and you will warm him for the rest of his life.

You missed about four above yours - but it beat me too.

[The Atheist]

Originally Posted by Hubert Cumberdale

Yet.

Damn, you beat me to it.

I'd lay reasonable odds that RSA implodes in the next 15-20 years.

[Hubert Cumberdale]

Originally Posted by The Atheist

Damn, you beat me to it.

I'd lay reasonable odds that RSA implodes in the next 15-20 years.

Took 20 years for Zim to begin to tip. SA has only been indie for 14......

[screensnot]

Originally Posted by BirdStrike

"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime."

Chinese Proverb

The way I heard it is:

Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he'll spend all his spare time and money pursuing the hobby.

[Toke]

I had one captain argue for direct 3.world aid to africa.
As in spending money on girls and beer when going ashore.

What is an african leader´s motivation for improving the lot of his countrymen?
Why should he fight corruption? It´s the point of the job, and how he keeps support.

If he gets past that, what is he supposed to do about international trade regulations?

[The Atheist]

Originally Posted by volatile

..."Africa, with its vast savannahs and its lush pastures, is giving almost nothing to anyone, apart from AIDS", it becomes impossible to take seriously.

Thoughts?

But does it matter if he's right? Looked pretty serious to me. It all reminds me of a hypothetical argument I'm having about the proles in Orwell's 1984. Does the population get what it deserves, or does it deserve what it gets?

Gotta say, I love his style:

Quote:

It is inspiring Bill Gates' programme to rid the continent of malaria, when, in the almost complete absence of personal self-discipline, that disease is one of the most efficacious forms of population-control now operating.

That's nicely put, if a little on the insensitive side.

[The Painter]

Sam Kinison knew how to help starving Africans.

World hunger starts at minute #4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1GjyrQiSRs

[The Drain]

I'm intrigued by the responses in this thread to Kevin Myers' article, which caused such outrage here in Ireland when it was published back in July.

Reading through everything, I get the impression that most contributors to this thread have never been to the continent of Africa - and those few who were there left with feelings of bitterness and an 'I told you so' attitude. (Former Rhodies, aka "when-we's", or Japies?)... in other words people who are looking for, and exult in, the failure of their former home countries.

As for those who've met African leaders overseas at diplomatic parties, of course they object to international charities working in their countries - they're embarrassed by them!

I was a journalist for many years all over sub-Saharan Africa - including PW Botha's South Africa in the 1980s, and the then newly-named Zimbabwe where I met and had a long interview with the former Rhodesian PM Ian Smith (for South African radio) as he was preparing to fight another election - and my honest opinion is that black Africa has a great future.

The pattern in Anglophone Africa has been for one-party regimes to take over post-independence, and to blame all subsequent economic problems on previous colonial rule. This works as a cheap tactic for about one generation, say 30 years max, before there's enough young people with no memory of European rule to tip the electoral balance: for example, Tanzania's Julius Nyerere, Zambia's Kenneth Kaunda, Kenya's Jomo Kenyatta/Daniel Arap Moi, and currently Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe. (He'll be gone before Zimbabwe's 30th anniversary). Currently there are also working democracies in Sierra Leone, Ghana, etc.

Francophone Africa is different, because of continuing French interference and effective French economic rule; Paris still has direct control over the West African and Central African currencies, known as the CFA. And the French Army is still active there: I was in Chad's capital Ndjamena when the French were holding the city against the Libyans (and supporting Habre's evil regime) and the Central African 'Empire' supporting Bokassa's even more evil regime.

Even here, there are many signs of improvement from a democratic POV: look at Benin or Senegal.

Yes, for those people who really want to claim that sub-Saharan Africa is a hopeless basket case - either to salve their non-charitable conscience or to justify the chip on their shoulder because they've been ejected - you can always cite present human-caused disaster zones; I'll give you the 'Democratic Republic' of Congo, formerly Zaire, for one.

Personally I think the most corrupt country in the world is Switzerland. Who else is looking after the stolen money, and refuses to tell?

Africa will be the economic and agricultural breadbasket of the world by 2050. That's if we in the developed world do nothing. But if we decide to help, then Africa will be in a position to feed us all - as well as itself - by 2030. In other words, another generation since the 1990s. It is in our interests, in the West, to give those African countries that need it a hand up. Not a hand out.

How do we help? (1) International aid agencies do make an enormous difference on the ground. I have seen this for myself. Girls, as well as boys, get educated. Clean water, micro-business loans, transparent democracy, and above all else, knowledge has been improving millions of peoples' lives for many years now.

But their success stories don't get reported. If I go to my editor and say I want to do a story on a happy family in, say, Sierra Leone, who have enough food, are putting all their children through secondary school, and have just successfully voted for a change in Government, I'll be told ... well, what do you think I'll be told?

Only the bad news gets into our newspapers. Hence the recurrent belief in this part of the world that "Africa is a failure".

How do we help? (2) Sort out the international trade rules. It is an utter disgrace that Ghanaian farmers cannot sell their tomatoes in their home markets because they're being undersold by imported and subsidised European tomatoes. What's more, their democratically elected Government is forced by world trade rules to drop their import tarrifs and allow the artificially underpriced produce in. Likewise Sierra Leone rice farmers trying to compete against imported American rice, which again is subsidised by the US government.



I think I may have said enough.
Goodnight!

[Roboramma]

Originally Posted by Hubert Cumberdale

Odd logic. If you have been trying the same thing to combat a problem for 40 years and its actually got worse in that time, maybe its at least time to take a step back and ask why.

I'm all for stepping back and asking why. But the fact that the situation has gotten worse in 40 years doesn't suggest that it wouldn't be even worse if aid hadn't existed at all.

If a doctor finds his patient is getting worse, that doesn't suggest he should stop treatment entirely, though certainly he might look more carefully at what treatment he is given, and reassess his initial diagnosis.

Quote:

Everyone who has never lived there thinks they have all the answers. Throw a bit of money at this, build a road here, a well there, a school for this village and an ambulance for that hospital.

Actually I think we need a much more well thought out and thorough plan than that.

Quote:

It never works though. In ten years the road is pot-holed, the well dry, the school's windows broken, teachers unpaid, books lost or burnt and the ambulance up on bricks with a seized engine.

Which is fine, but doesn't suggest that during those ten years no good came of those things.

Quote:

Africa, or more correctly, African leaders need to start building their own countries and looking after their own people. Aid money simply gives them the finances to live the life of, well of an African leader, without having to take care of, or answer to their own people.

Aid makes it worse. Not better. Stop trying to teach them to fish, it doesnt work. Let them learn how to fish by themselves, stand on their own feet by themselves.

I see no reason to believe that aid is useless. The fact that the situation is bad, and thus not amenable to easy solutions, doesn't suggest that what is being done doesn't help at all.

[plumjam]

Good post, The Drain.
Nice to get a truly informed opinion.

[MattusMaximus]

Originally Posted by The Drain

I think I may have said enough.
Goodnight!

And I think you said it well. Thank you for sharing - I learned a few things reading your post.

[Wolfman]

Originally Posted by The Drain

As for those who've met African leaders overseas at diplomatic parties, of course they object to international charities working in their countries - they're embarrassed by them!

I'm curious...did you dismiss me entirely simply for the hell of it? First, I don't know anyone other than myself who says that they met African leaders at diplomatic receptions (and it wasn't the leaders of the countries, it was ambassadors, diplomatic staff, and businessmen), so I have to assume this is directed at me. So allow me again to quote what I said about this:

Quote:

In Beijing, I had the opportunity to attend various embassy functions hosted by different African nations, and to discuss these issues with diplomats and leaders from those countries. And almost all of them expressed the sentiment that while they greatly appreciated efforts to help, and certainly wouldn't say they'd prefer for children to starve to death for lack of food, that nothing much had been done about improving the overall situation.

Contrary to your claims, almost none of them objected to international charities working in their countries. As I clearly stated in my original comments, they were grateful for their help!

Their objection wasn't to receiving international aid. Their objection was to international aid that had little or no real effect on the overall situation; as one leader I met put it (paraphrasing), "I feel like a lot of these projects are simply cheap ways for developed nations to assuage their consciences. Give $5.00 a month to help a student, and you've done your bit to help Africa. Meanwhile, when that child grows up, he can't find a job, or he's forced into a paramilitary group, or he's dying of AIDS."

Yeah, of course there are some situations where such aid has helped out. But there are many more situations where it has done little or no good overall. And quite frankly, far too often it is done without any real understanding of the overall situation -- and those who are involved don't even seem to want to take the time to learn and understand. Go in and give money for kids to go to school, pass around a little food, and leave. Honestly -- how much do you need to understand about a country to do that?

I freely admit that I've never been to Africa. But one of my best friends in China was from Somalia. For more than 20 years, he was stranded in China, unable to return to China, because he and his family belonged to a tribe that was an enemy of one of the ruling warlords, and he would have been executed upon setting foot there. Now, with the Muslim contingent taking over, he was able to return...but as soon as he arrived, he was informed that he had to become a soldier, and help capture/kill those who opposed their leadership. He left Somalia again, and again is stranded in China.

Who, without a very strong understanding of the very complicated dynamics there, is going to be able to accomplish anything of lasting value, or real worth?

I'm not saying don't get involved, don't help African nations. But I go back to the conclusion I made previously -- focus our relief dollars on those nations whose governments demonstrate forward movement, where we're investing in long-term development...not in short-term bandaid solutions.

Right now, we are penalizing nations who do a good job, because we give them less money...and rewarding those nations that do the worst. It doesn't take a genius to figure out the problems with that scheme.

[The Atheist]

Originally Posted by The Drain

Yes, for those people who really want to claim that sub-Saharan Africa is a hopeless basket case - either to salve their non-charitable conscience or to justify the chip on their shoulder because they've been ejected - you can always cite present human-caused disaster zones; I'll give you the 'Democratic Republic' of Congo, formerly Zaire, for one.

One? Methinks you could probably find a few more without looking too hard.

Let me give you a tip on Kenya. We're 50 years down the track and thinking things are dandy in Kenya would be an awful mistake. Even after that 50 years, we're no closer to tribal harmony than we were under British rule.

How current is your opinion on the state of affairs there?

You've written a lovely precis of how things might be, but I have little confidence that they will be that way.

Oh, and don't make the mistake of including me in those disagreeing with you to protect my lack of charity, because I'll lay very good odds that I give a far higher percentage of my incolme than you to African charities. Just thought I'd clear that up, because I certainly don't have any chips on my shoulders and you seem to think people opposing your view will fall into one of those two camps.

Originally Posted by The Drain

Personally I think the most corrupt country in the world is Switzerland. Who else is looking after the stolen money, and refuses to tell?

And you have no agenda yourself, of course.

Originally Posted by The Drain

Africa will be the economic and agricultural breadbasket of the world by 2050. That's if we in the developed world do nothing. But if we decide to help, then Africa will be in a position to feed us all - as well as itself - by 2030. In other words, another generation since the 1990s.

Jeez, I'd love to have a fiver on that. I cannot see it. 2130? Maybe.

Originally Posted by The Drain

It is in our interests, in the West, to give those African countries that need it a hand up. Not a hand out.

Probably be a lot better if we gave them condoms.

Originally Posted by The Drain

How do we help? (1) International aid agencies do make an enormous difference on the ground. I have seen this for myself. Girls, as well as boys, get educated. Clean water, micro-business loans, transparent democracy, and above all else, knowledge has been improving millions of peoples' lives for many years now.

Yes, and the truly scary part of that is that despite the numbers of people you're talking about and the time they've been doing it is that we ought to be seeing more democracy, less tribalism, rather than the more we're seeing lately.

It seems to me that aid efforts do indeed aid a few, but it's just farting in the face of a thunderstorm.

Originally Posted by The Drain

But their success stories don't get reported. If I go to my editor and say I want to do a story on a happy family in, say, Sierra Leone, who have enough food, are putting all their children through secondary school, and have just successfully voted for a change in Government, I'll be told ... well, what do you think I'll be told?

Dunno. Instead of second-guessing what your editor might think, why don't you ask him? Could be that in the face of Mugabe's genocidal program that a feel-good story on Africa might be a seller.

Let us know what he says.

Originally Posted by The Drain

Only the bad news gets into our newspapers. Hence the recurrent belief in this part of the world that "Africa is a failure".

Unfortunately, that is demonstrably untrue.

Have a look here. I'd venture that if New York had a murder rate of 6000 a year - to match the Jo'burg rate - there would be a lot more recent articles than there are here.

When was the last time you saw an item on television news about famine and starvation in Africa? These things turn the public off so badly that they hardly ever make news items. If anything, I think you'd have a better chance of selling a good news item on Africa than a bad news one.

Originally Posted by The Drain

How do we help? (2) Sort out the international trade rules. It is an utter disgrace that Ghanaian farmers cannot sell their tomatoes in their home markets because they're being undersold by imported and subsidised European tomatoes. What's more, their democratically elected Government is forced by world trade rules to drop their import tarrifs and allow the artificially underpriced produce in.

I'm not sure I accept this argument at all. New Zealand and Australia are two classic examples of being able to compete against subsidised food. If they are unable to compete in tomatoes, then they clearly shouldn't be growing tomatoes.

Originally Posted by The Drain

Likewise Sierra Leone rice farmers trying to compete against imported American rice, which again is subsidised by the US government.

Hell! Can you please advise the FAO.

Originally Posted by FAO

Domestic rice production has stagnated, and Sierra Leone now meets only 70% of its total requirements. As the country recovers from civil strife, sustainable rice production will depend on greater support for input supply and output marketing, and development of lowland rice production.

[gumboot]

I can't say I buy the "Africa will be the world's breadbasket" claim. Africa's ecological capacity is 28% lower than the world average, and while their ecological footprint is currently under their biological capacity, that's only because their footprint is so low. As the countries develop, that footprint will increase, and Africa will exceed it's ecological capacity, making it impossible for it to feed itself, let alone anyone else.

Of course, the same is true of many regions of the world, so it's not a problem unique to Africa. I am just thankful I live in a country with an ecological surplus.