The Downward Spiral of Africa

[Der Übermensch]

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/africa-is-giving-nothing-to-anyone—apart-from-aids-1430428.html

No. It will not do. Even as we see African states refusing to take action to restore something resembling civilisation in Zimbabwe, the begging bowl for Ethiopia is being passed around to us, yet again. It is nearly 25 years since Ethiopia's (and Bob Geldof's) famous Feed The World campaign, and in that time Ethiopia's population has grown from 33.5 million to 78 million today.

So why on earth should I do anything to encourage further catastrophic demographic growth in that country? Where is the logic? There is none. To be sure, there are two things saying that logic doesn't count.

One is my conscience, and the other is the picture, yet again, of another wide-eyed child, yet again, gazing, yet again, at the camera, which yet again, captures the tragedy of . . .

Sorry. My conscience has toured this territory on foot and financially. Unlike most of you, I have been to Ethiopia; like most of you, I have stumped up the loot to charities to stop starvation there. The wide-eyed boy-child we saved, 20 years or so ago, is now a priapic, Kalashnikov-bearing hearty, siring children whenever the whim takes him.

There is, no doubt a good argument why we should prolong this predatory and dysfunctional economic, social and sexual system; but I do not know what it is. There is, on the other hand, every reason not to write a column like this.

It will win no friends, 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. It will also probably enrage some of the finest men in Irish life, like John O'Shea, of Goal; and the Finucane brothers, men whom I admire enormously. So be it.

But, please, please, you self-righteously wrathful, spare me mention of our own Famine, with this or that lazy analogy. There is no comparison. Within 20 years of the Famine, the Irish population was down by 30pc. Over the equivalent period, thanks to western food, the Mercedes 10-wheel truck and the Lockheed Hercules, Ethiopia's has more than doubled.

Alas, that wretched country is not alone in its madness. Somewhere, over the rainbow, lies Somalia, another fine land of violent, Kalashnikov-toting, khat-chewing, girl-circumcising, permanently tumescent layabouts.

Indeed, we now have almost an entire continent of sexually

hyperactive indigents, with tens of millions of people who only survive because of help from the outside world.

This dependency has not stimulated political prudence or commonsense. Indeed, voodoo idiocy seems to be in the ascendant, with the next president of South Africa being a firm believer in the efficacy of a little tap water on the post-coital penis as a sure preventative against infection. Needless to say, poverty, hunger and societal meltdown have not prevented idiotic wars involving Tigre, Uganda, Congo, Sudan, Somalia, Eritrea etcetera.

Broad brush-strokes, to be sure. But broad brush-strokes are often the way that history paints its gaudier, if more decisive, chapters. 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.

They are now -- one way or another -- virtually all giving aid to or investing in Africa, whereas Africa, with its vast savannahs and its lush pastures, is giving almost nothing to anyone, apart from AIDS.

Meanwhile, Africa's peoples are outstripping their resources, and causing catastrophic ecological degradation. By 2050, the population of Ethiopia will be 177 million: The equivalent of France, Germany and Benelux today, but located on the parched and increasingly protein-free wastelands of the Great Rift Valley.

So, how much sense does it make for us actively to increase the adult population of what is already a vastly over-populated, environmentally devastated and economically dependent country?

How much morality is there in saving an Ethiopian child from starvation today, for it to survive to a life of brutal circumcision, poverty, hunger, violence and sexual abuse, resulting in another half-dozen such wide-eyed children, with comparably jolly little lives ahead of them? Of course, it might make you feel better, which is a prime reason for so much charity. But that is not good enough.

For self-serving generosity has been one of the curses of Africa. It has sustained political systems which would otherwise have collapsed.

It prolonged the Eritrean-Ethiopian war by nearly a decade. 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.

If his programme is successful, tens of millions of children who would otherwise have died in infancy will survive to adulthood, he boasts. Oh good: then what?I know. Let them all come here. Yes, that's an idea.

Now, for starters, I don't agree completely with this article, but am posting it more because I found it of great interest.
That being said, the author brings up a perfectly good point. How are we (the industrialized world) helping the Third World (Africa being singled out) by sustaining their population growth rate without effecting significant change in their infrastructure? He is spot on in the one fact at least that this is hurting Africa rather then helping it. When 100,000's of people are dying of starvation in Ethiopia, sure, it feels good to help out by sending food, but isn't that a short term stop gap? Wouldn't the money spent on that be MUCH better used to help develop sustainable farming in the region to they would cease to be as dependent on foreign aid?
In the past 2 decades, Ethiopia's population has doubled, yet it is one of the most impoverished and destitute nations on earth. That growth has only been possible due to outside assistance, as it's infrastructure alone can support nowhere near that, nor will it be able to in the foreseeable future.
Now again, the author here goes a bit further then I would begin to agree with, but the sum of it is that much of Africa long ago entered a Malthusian catastrophe, yet we continue to prop up the population growth so that the full effects of this have not been felt. Malthus is turning in his grave right now. Is it really so bad to say that we should concentrate on the overall future and stability of such regions rather then just perpetuate their miserable dependence?

[McP3000]

completely agree Der Ubermensch. However, i dont really know much about the African situation other than rather common knowledge, and the absurd amount of hollywood fundraisers

[Permanent Solution]

The problem with long term solutions is that in the mean time people would still suffer and die, and as that's what drives the compassion leading people to donate, I imagine that they'd be mad if they were donating money and saw no direct results, and unfortunately we're an instant-gratification sort of people nowadays.

[Charlie Daniels]

I agree completely. Africans seem to be completely incapable of managing themselves. Most of their problems have been self inflicted and giving them food and money is just prolonging the problem.

[McP3000]

The problem with long term solutions is that in the mean time people would still suffer and die, and as that's what drives the compassion leading people to donate, I imagine that they'd be mad if they were donating money and saw no direct results, and unfortunately we're an instant-gratification sort of people nowadays.
thats because hollywood is stupid.

we need to destroy it

[Der Übermensch]

So... blame Don Cheadle?

The problem with long term solutions is that in the mean time people would still suffer and die, and as that's what drives the compassion leading people to donate, I imagine that they'd be mad if they were donating money and saw no direct results, and unfortunately we're an instant-gratification sort of people nowadays.

I'm heartless enough to let a lot of people die now if it ensures the long term survival of the nation as a whole. Sooner or later they are just going to reach a Malthus equilibrium... and not a real one either, but rather the one of how much population can be supported with foreign aid... at that point it is going to be to late to do anything for them...

[Reaganista]

yeah they should follow the paths of normal countries instead by becoming incredibly modern and developed while keeping their population as low as possible and then only have population growth after theyve become completely modern that makes sense

[CLM_guitarist]

why don't we just consider conquering and colonizing the whole continent for resources if they're not up to a certain level by a deadline.

[Permanent Solution]

I'm heartless enough to let a lot of people die now if it ensures the long term survival of the nation as a whole. Sooner or later they are just going to reach a Malthus equilibrium... and not a real one either, but rather the one of how much population can be supported with foreign aid... at that point it is going to be to late to do anything for them...
I am too, but is the general populous, driven by media coverage, that heartless? I doubt it.

[Der Übermensch]

why don't we just consider conquering and colonizing the whole continent for resources if they're not up to a certain level by a deadline.

Well, thats what we did before, and it kind of didn't work out very well for them that time...

I am too, but is the general populous, driven by media coverage, that heartless? I doubt it.
Well, once Bono and the guy from the Boomtown Rats die, it'll be a lot easier.

[Reaganista]

i hope everyone in this thread is parodying something and im just not getting it

[CLM_guitarist]

Well, thats what we did before, and it kind of didn't work out very well for them that time...


Well it's gotten bad enough that it should not be africa any more it'll b a continent with like 1/8 U.S. 1/8 China 1/8 England and so on. Totally industrialize and cyberize

[Charlie Daniels]

But seriously, why is you that you always turn my threads about problems that incidentally effect black people into threads about black people themselves?
How is this just incidentally affecting black people?

[Der Übermensch]

How is this just incidentally affecting black people?
Poor wording on my part perhaps. I'm just trying to get across that race isn't the issue here. More then anything it is simply location, and it has nothing to do with the problem that the location in question is inhabited by black people.
If Ethiopia was inhabited by white people, it would be just as much of a ****-hole and they would be just as bad off because of it. The people there aren't doing poorly because they are black, they are doing poorly because they live in Ethiopia.

Nothing racist at all about this. A little suspicious maybe.
The only thing suspicious is your constant attempts to brand it as a black problem, when really, the lowest common denominator here is actually white people being complete dicks.

[HomoDegerous]

The only thing suspicious is your constant attempts to brand it as a black problem, when really, the lowest common denominator here is actually white people being complete dicks.

It is kind of like the Muslims, everywhere they go they start trouble. The Middle East, Chechnya, France, Africa, everywhere they go they start wars and jihad and violence. Did you ever think it might be due to their extremist ideology? And with the blacks everywhere they go they want a handout, they want to be given something most people have to work for. There is a dichotomy between America and the African nations. It is not as commonly perceived the "haves" and "have nots" but rather those who "have" a work ethic and those who don't [have a work ethic]. We have worked for what we have and the Africans have been propped up by the tax dollar for long enough. If they want our help, instead of money, I suggest we teach them a lesson in American ingenuity and hard work and maybe they will be able to provide a future for little Muhammed.

[Der Übermensch]

American ingenuity and hard work? What does that have to do with it? The success of the west is rooted in Greeco-Roman culture and was cemented long before America was even discovered. (I'm not about racial superiority, but I am all for cultural superiority. We were just lucky enough to have a culture that started in a rocky poor agricultural area such as Greece that encouraged the growth of the small time farmer).
To say that black people lack a work ethic is absurd at the least, and more specifically horribly racist. They had different cultural values that failed them utterly when confronted with western superiority. They were doing just fine. Then we show up, enslave a lot of them and colonize the rest. To top it off we steal all their resources and then when we are all done we're like "See ya and good luck running the place." Their problems didn't start because we propped them up by the tax dollar, as you put it. That is us putting on band-aid on the 3 ft. gash we sliced in them over the past 5 centuries or so. Get your head out of your *** and recognize that they are in this condition because WE PUT THEM THERE, not because of the inherent weakness' of their race you so want to perceive.
The best thing we can do for Africa (that is to say, the idea of Africa as opposed to the people living there right now) is quarantine the place and let them have a natural development for the next 500 years instead of the forced juxtaposition of West and Africa that we maintain now.
Anyways, thats it in brief, I can explicate more if I have time tomorrow, as it is, I need to sleep.

[HomoDegerous]

I can explicate more if I have time tomorrow

Indubitably.

[Charlie Daniels]

Poor wording on my part perhaps. I'm just trying to get across that race isn't the issue here. More then anything it is simply location, and it has nothing to do with the problem that the location in question is inhabited by black people.
If Ethiopia was inhabited by white people, it would be just as much of a ****-hole and they would be just as bad off because of it. The people there aren't doing poorly because they are black, they are doing poorly because they live in Ethiopia.


The only thing suspicious is your constant attempts to brand it as a black problem, when really, the lowest common denominator here is actually white people being complete dicks.

Not really, well it's not because there skin is black, but it's because of their lack of forward, lack of environmental management, increasing the population despite their being no food etc. etc.

It's more the africans culture is inflicting them with this.

The culture of white people is, on the whole, a lot better when it comes to ensuring the longetivity and survival of the cultural group.

They were doing just fine.
Well, depends on your definition of fine, but really their culture couldn't sustain itself. Their hunting and farming techniques were not sustainable, and regardless of whether they had contact with white people, sooner or later there would be having food shortage problems. The practice of decimating the environment to gain resources, then shifting location and decimating that and so forth only works if you've got a small population over a large area. But as they insist on doubling there population every decade really that practice just doesn't work.

[Smokey D]

Preliminary note: if people are trolling you as badly as VF, don't buy into it and respond. Smokey Says "Only you can stop trolling".

American ingenuity and hard work? What does that have to do with it? The success of the west is rooted in Greeco-Roman culture and was cemented long before America was even discovered. (I'm not about racial superiority, but I am all for cultural superiority. We were just lucky enough to have a culture that started in a rocky poor agricultural area such as Greece that encouraged the growth of the small time farmer).

I don't agree at all. The role of Greek culture in modern political culture is vastly over stated. First of all, the Greeks were a slave based society. Secondly, there was about 2000 years of non-typical Greek political culture in between the Roman conquest of Greece and the development of modern democracy etc. There is no clear historical link between the development of western democracy (which, more or less, developed out of Anglo-Norman traditions of an independent nobility and the shift in power to London merchants by the 16th century) and Greek democratic societies.

More fundamentally though there are much more persuasive reasons Africa didn't develop. I'm not a geographic determinist, but no doubt Jared Diamond's argument features somewhere (ie that Eurasia was better suited to the development of transregional civilizations and information networks). The climatatic diversity in Africa is a lot more hostile to crop diffusion (and consequently civilizational diffusion) than the same in most of Eurasia. The Sahara presents an incomparable barrier to transmission of ideas and the formation of transregional states. Most importantly, Europe was the beneficiary of a variety of geographic and commercial relationships, most notably the discovery of America and the relative availability of industrial precursor materials which enabled them to penetrate Africa and completely distort its development.

[Charlie Daniels]

Did posts dissappear in here? :-S

[Smokey D]

Yes.

[Charlie Daniels]

Why?

[Smokey D]

Because it was stpuid and irrelevant.

[Charlie Daniels]

From what I remember it was highly relevant and informative. He was pretty much saying what I was saying :-S

[Smokey D]

It had nothing to do with Africa.

[Charlie Daniels]

Maybe I remember it wrong but wasn't he talking about how the African soil is unable to sustain it's current population, so why are we encouraging them to increase there population?

[Aaron]

People should stop bitching about Africa and actually start doing something. The amount of times I hear people say things like, "It's so sad that people are starving and we're so well off.... Did I tell you I bought a new car?" Apathy and selfishness has caused the issues in Africa.

[Charlie Daniels]

How does giving the Africans money help them?

[Aaron]

Where did I mention giving money?

[YouGottaBeCrazy]

Maybe black people just aren't as smart as white people.

[Charlie Daniels]

People should stop bitching about Africa and actually start doing something. The amount of times I hear people say things like, "It's so sad that people are starving and we're so well off.... Did I tell you I bought a new car?" Apathy and selfishness has caused the issues in Africa.

So we should give them new cars? :-S

Sorry I'm not quite on the ball, can you elaborate?

[Der Übermensch]

I don't agree at all. The role of Greek culture in modern political culture is vastly over stated. First of all, the Greeks were a slave based society. Secondly, there was about 2000 years of non-typical Greek political culture in between the Roman conquest of Greece and the development of modern democracy etc. There is no clear historical link between the development of western democracy (which, more or less, developed out of Anglo-Norman traditions of an independent nobility and the shift in power to London merchants by the 16th century) and Greek democratic societies.
I wish I had more time to respond to this, cause I very much want to refute what you said, but I am leaving for school tomorrow, so am packing and just popped on quickly. Very quick summary here: Greece being a slave culture is a strawman. Looked at from the modern lens it makes them look backwards, but at the time they were extremely progressive in terms of citizen rights and duties. The anomalous culture of Greece was directly responsible for the rise of and encouragement of free enquiry (Philosophy).
But as you pointed out, Rome knocked out Greece. However they didn't destroy Greek culture but rather they subsumed it and took a lot of the best parts. Most important was the keeping of the greek philosophical tradition. All the rich Romans were sent to greek schools (or at least taught by greeks). Even with the fall of Western Rome this tradition was kept alive with Byzantium as well as, ironically, the Church who venerated Plato and Aristotle as virtuous pagans (to borrow Dante's term, although I think Aquinas was the one who really started it).
Now, you are correct that the modern democratic tradition has more to do with the anglo-norman influence than from the greek democratic tradition, but it is entirely dependent on the greek philosophical tradition, which encouraged free enquiry (Good example being to compare Europe with China... China invented a lot of stuff, but due to the regimentation of society, never really advanced it well, while when Europe was given guns, they started mass producing them and arming every peasant who understood how to stand in line).
But yeah, sum of it is, you are right that Greek political culture didn't last long, but that wasn't what I was driving at, which was the philosophical one, whose start WAS dependent on the political, but could survive after it's fall.

More fundamentally though there are much more persuasive reasons Africa didn't develop. I'm not a geographic determinist, but no doubt Jared Diamond's argument features somewhere (ie that Eurasia was better suited to the development of transregional civilizations and information networks). The climatatic diversity in Africa is a lot more hostile to crop diffusion (and consequently civilizational diffusion) than the same in most of Eurasia. The Sahara presents an incomparable barrier to transmission of ideas and the formation of transregional states. Most importantly, Europe was the beneficiary of a variety of geographic and commercial relationships, most notably the discovery of America and the relative availability of industrial precursor materials which enabled them to penetrate Africa and completely distort its development.
O yes, culture is certainly only one of the many reasons. I already wrote one mini-essay though and really don't have time for another (and maybe I should read Diamond before I respond anyways. :p It's sitting on my desk right now actually... This will possibly be my last post for a few days (unless I slack off in the packing again)... I don't think we have internet set up yet at my apartment...

People should stop bitching about Africa and actually start doing something.
Doing nothing would help them more.

[Aaron]

So we should give them new cars? :-S

Sorry I'm not quite on the ball, can you elaborate?
Education and training on a grass-roots level for farming and crafts. If you enable people to live on their own, to farm and feed themselves and then subsequently draw an income later on, then you don't have to throw money at the problem.

Doing nothing would help them more.I'm sure they'll thank you for your compassionate lack of action.

[beso negro]

apathy is a virtue

[Der Übermensch]

I'm sure they'll thank you for your compassionate lack of action.
They will once the population has regressed to the naturally sustainable equilibrium.

[YouGottaBeCrazy]

Education and training on a grass-roots level for farming and crafts. If you enable people to live on their own, to farm and feed themselves and then subsequently draw an income later on, then you don't have to throw money at the problem.

And why haven't they figured out how to do this already?

[mph4ever]

africa is lost, for now anyway.

african resources like land and minerals are more than capable of sustaining its population. there is just such massive corruption by chiefs who do not recognise the redrawing of its boundaries into countries that suited the western colonialists about 60 years ago. this corruption prevents modern industry and government from investing in africa. would you be willing to bet on africa as a future strategic territory for your corporations expansion?

until it becomes politically stable then no one other than st bob and his tribe of do-gooders will have any interest. pity they can't see the damage they are doing in preventing people from being hungry instead of allowing some people with hunger in their bellies to fight for the stability of their countries

there will be carnage before their will ever be peace and prosperity

[Smokey D]

I wish I had more time to respond to this, cause I very much want to refute what you said, but I am leaving for school tomorrow, so am packing and just popped on quickly. Very quick summary here: Greece being a slave culture is a strawman. Looked at from the modern lens it makes them look backwards, but at the time they were extremely progressive in terms of citizen rights and duties. The anomalous culture of Greece was directly responsible for the rise of and encouragement of free enquiry (Philosophy).

I wasn't saying they weren't advanced for their time. I was saying they were not the origin of democracy as we understand it and that western democracay didn't arise out of the Greek tradition of inquiry or if it did it was an extremely attenuated process. By the time the English became aware of Greek concepts, the origins of democracy had already been laid independently in Western Europe.

But as you pointed out, Rome knocked out Greece. However they didn't destroy Greek culture but rather they subsumed it and took a lot of the best parts. Most important was the keeping of the greek philosophical tradition. All the rich Romans were sent to greek schools (or at least taught by greeks). Even with the fall of Western Rome this tradition was kept alive with Byzantium as well as, ironically, the Church who venerated Plato and Aristotle as virtuous pagans (to borrow Dante's term, although I think Aquinas was the one who really started it).

The typical form of Roman political economy, especially by the late Empire, was not the lone homestead and hearty farmer against the world. It was a powerful urban aristocracy and, increasingly, a powerful latifundia estate system in the countryside. The latter survived the transition from empire to medieval Europe and was reinforced by the development of feudalism. Both of these are incompatible with the idea that Greek democracy was the origin of liberal democracy in north west Europe. But note, that in itself is not incompatible with the idea that European culture in general originated in the Greco-Roman tradition.

Now, you are correct that the modern democratic tradition has more to do with the anglo-norman influence than from the greek democratic tradition, but it is entirely dependent on the greek philosophical tradition, which encouraged free enquiry (Good example being to compare Europe with China... China invented a lot of stuff, but due to the regimentation of society, never really advanced it well, while when Europe was given guns, they started mass producing them and arming every peasant who understood how to stand in line).

I disagree. Democracy in Britain (and proto democracy in eastern Europe before the development of powerful monarchies) was purely an expression of political opposition to the royal government and exploiting the position of a weak king.

But yeah, sum of it is, you are right that Greek political culture didn't last long, but that wasn't what I was driving at, which was the philosophical one, whose start WAS dependent on the political, but could survive after it's fall.

Sure Greek traditions continued to be important. But in themselves they didn't produce democracy. For example, the Arab world had far more continuous exposure to Greek philosophy but democracy never sprouted there.


O yes, culture is certainly only one of the many reasons. I already wrote one mini-essay though and really don't have time for another (and maybe I should read Diamond before I respond anyways. :p It's sitting on my desk right now actually... This will possibly be my last post for a few days (unless I slack off in the packing again)... I don't think we have internet set up yet at my apartment...


Diamond over emphasises the role of geography and he talks more about continents than specific civilizations, but it's still a pretty good argument.

[Reaganista]

stop talking about natural population equilibrium wtf
also
yeah they should follow the paths of normal countries instead by becoming incredibly modern and developed while keeping their population as low as possible and then only have population growth after theyve become completely modern that makes sense

I'm not about racial superiority, but I am all for cultural superiority. We were just lucky enough to have a culture that started in a rocky poor agricultural area such as Greece that encouraged the growth of the small time farmer
umm our cultural superiority comes from the first amendment and the tradition that led to it not from greek farmers

[Smokey D]

Who mentioned a population equilibrium?

Although population stress is part of the reason Africa remains poor, and this has to be addressed.

[Reaganista]

nofx freak mentioned it specifically i think and others have been implying it

i dont see how intentionally lowering populations if going to do anyone any good especially all the starvation victims

[Aaron]

Yeah. It's not like there's going to be a magical bubble around a certain amount of people [those who'll survive]. If some are starving, the others are really hungry. There will be no happy survivors, just underfed and sick ones... hardly productive in the long term.

And why haven't they figured out how to do this already?You do realise that Africa wasn't always this bad socially? There was infrastructure, but it wasn't maintained due to corruption. There is still a skill-base among people, but it's not orientated towards subsistance living, and it's disappearing because there's families that are in the third and fourth generation of unemployment, never having worked there's no skills to be passed down.

[VomitStainedCretin]

A lot of Africa's problems today descend from a lack of imput by the colonial powers into preparing the continent for independence, e.g. through education of the indigenous population, gradually drafting native intellectuals and leaders into administration; Belgium and Portugal were particularly guilty of this and it is little wonder therefore that the DR of Congo, Rwanda, Angola and Mozambique have suffered misrule and civil war in the post-independence era.

Also particularly dangerous was the deliberate 'divide & rule' strategy of the colonial powers, which actively encouraged inter-tribal divisions and animosity. The introduction of concepts of nationalism and ethnicity to a continent with such a diverse population has further brought the pot to the boil, as tribes manouvre, often though violence, for ascendency, despots attempt to impose an idea of 'nation' on states with dozens if not hundreds of linguistic, religious and cultural groups and ethnic groups desiring unity when splintered by colonial 'lines on the map' cause tension between neighbouring states.

[Avalanche.]

Yeah. It's not like there's going to be a magical bubble around a certain amount of people [those who'll survive]. If some are starving, the others are really hungry. There will be no happy survivors, just underfed and sick ones... hardly productive in the long term.

You do realise that Africa wasn't always this bad socially? There was infrastructure, but it wasn't maintained due to corruption. There is still a skill-base among people, but it's not orientated towards subsistance living, and it's disappearing because there's families that are in the third and fourth generation of unemployment, never having worked there's no skills to be passed down.

How would you go about fixing the problems mentioned in this thread that face Africa?

[Aaron]

I've outlined that. Ignoring what VSC outlined [although it is the cause and it's good he mentioned it to put things in perspective], on a fundamental level it comes down to a skill shortage which in turn results in a low feeling of self-worth. Enable people to work and support themselves with skills [income], gradually they'll sort themselves out as a whole country. You need to be hollistic in your approach, starting at the bottom, and not be reactionary to cause long-term change.

[Dave de Sylvia]

The only thing suspicious is your constant attempts to brand it as a black problem, when really, the lowest common denominator here is actually white people being complete dicks.
It would be remiss of me if I didn't point out that Ethiopian people aren't black.

As for the article, Kevin Myers is a douchebag. There's no such thing as a "population equilibrium" or anything like it, and he doesn't really explain how offering no help is a better alternative to offering ineffective help. The efforts of famine relief organisations barely makes a dent in the suffering of people in the Third World, and for him to argue that such help is not warranted is exactly the sort of narcissistic bullshit that's made him the laughing stock he is.

[RG560M]

South Africa is doing pretty well in comparison with the rest of the continent.

Let's just try installing a white upper class in every African nation and see how it goes.

[Avalanche.]

South Africa is doing pretty well in comparison with the rest of the continent.

Let's just try installing a white upper class in ever African nation and see how it goes.

i like the cut of your jib

[RG560M]

I like the jib of my cut.

But I'm serious, for a continent filled full of war and poverty, South Africa is progressing moderately well.

[VomitStainedCretin]

South Africa's upper/middle class is becoming progressively more black since a good deal of whites with money are packing up since crime levels are obscene (only surpassed by Columbia in levels of gun homicide). Plus the black upper class all the real political power now.

[mph4ever]

genetically modified crops, real investment by the corporations over the next 20 years to improve the crop yield of rice, wheat and maize in light of the natural challenges food production faces in africa might go a long way to helping solve africas food shortage and then also allow people to think about developing their society. investment in infrastructure would also help, food exchange markets, roads/railway for transportation

the world has to realise that africa actually presents an opportunity for us to avoid the malthusian catastrophe since most other places are at peak yield already based on current technology

[Smokey D]

Er, we've been at peak yield for thousands of years based on current technology. WE just develop new technology.

[Iskandar]

It would be remiss of me if I didn't point out that Ethiopian people aren't black.They're not white either!

[RG560M]

South Africa's upper/middle class is becoming progressively more black since a good deal of whites with money are packing up since crime levels are obscene (only surpassed by Columbia in levels of gun homicide). Plus the black upper class all the real political power now.

Still better off than a place like Sudan.

So installed white upper class it is!

[mph4ever]

Er, we've been at peak yield for thousands of years based on current technology. WE just develop new technology.

trials have shown that the yield per hectare in some african countries on land farmed by africans is far lower than than the yield achieved on the same land with the same conditions but carried out by food agencies. some of this is attributable to the lack of effort by farmers since they know the charities will probably bail them out but some is due ot them not using the right "technological" advanaces to maximise their yield

also, technology like commodity market trading where the demand and distribution is managed centrally and there is price agreement and payment guarantee before anything is moved. etheopia is trialing this presently and it has proved a great success and seriously cut down on the challenges to the farmers in trying to get their produce to the consumer