|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
 Posted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 8:30 am Post subject: Haiti, Sudan, C�te d'Ivoire: Who Cares? |
 |
|
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703779704576073593183855836.html
| Quote: |
...
It means that we've come full circle. It means that colonialism, for which the West has spent the past five decades in nonstop atonement, was far from the worst thing to befall much of the colonized world. It means, also, that some new version of colonialism may be the best thing that could happen to at least some countries in the postcolonial world.
Take Haiti. Haiti is no longer a colony of the West, but it has long been a ward of it. Even before the earthquake, remittances and foreign aid accounted for nearly 30% of its GDP. The country is known as the "Republic of NGOs," since some 3,000 operate in it. What good they've done, considering the state the country has been in for decades, is an open question. Security, to the extent there is any, is provided by some 12,000 U.N. peacekeepers.
Should more responsibility be handed over to Haitians themselves? I used to think so, and debate on this subject rages among development experts. A new consensus holds that the long-term presence of foreign aid workers is ultimately ruinous to what's known in the jargon as "local capacity." Probably true. Prosperity has never been built on a foundation of handouts.
But last year's fraudulent elections are a reminder that Haitians have been as ill-served by their democracy as by their periodic dictatorships. When "Baby Doc" Duvalier was overthrown in 1986, per capita GDP was $768. In 2009, on the eve of the quake, it was $519. Nor do the troubles end there: Criminality is rampant, and Haiti ranked 177th out of 179 on Transparency International's 2008 corruption index. These are not the depredations of greedy foreign interlopers. This is the depravity of the locals.
Put simply, Haiti has run out of excuses for its failures at the very moment the "international community" has run out of ideas about how to help.
Maybe the U.N. should be called in to take charge. But events in C�te d'Ivoire suggest otherwise.
C�te d'Ivoire used to be one of those promising African states bucking the usual trends of the continent. But then per capita GDP plummeted by about 40% in the past 40 years. More recently, the country has seen a civil war between north and south and military intervention by French troops. Now its president, Laurent Gbagbo, refuses to concede an election the U.N. insists he lost to challenger Alassane Ouattara, a former International Monetary Fund official.
Mr. Gbagbo seems in no mood to go anywhere. U.N. peacekeepers aren't going to force him out. The State Department's brainstorm is to entice the president to leave by offering him a high-paying job at an international organization, perhaps the U.N. itself. So here you have an administration that professes to believe in the U.N. prepared to see a senior job in that organization filled by a Third World would-be tyrant. There's the U.N. and all its failures explained in a nutshell.
So if the U.N. can't do the job, who will? In 1986, the Reagan administration effectively forced Baby Doc out and flew him to France, where he has lived ever since in the comfort of his ill-gotten gains. Perhaps something similar could be arranged for Mr. Gbagbo, and the people of C�te d'Ivoire will live happily ever after under governments of their own choosing.
That would be nice. But if history is any guide, it won't happen. Postcolonial Africa has seen the future. As often as not, it looks like Zimbabwe.
The West professes to "care" about countries like Haiti, C�te d'Ivoire and�at least for as long as George Clooney is in the area�south Sudan. But "care" at the level of simple emotion is little more than a cheap vanity. The colonialists of yore may often have been bigots, but they were also, just as often, doers. Their colonies were better places than the shipwrecked countries we have today.
One day, some latter-day King Acqua will come to the West with a similar plea. If we aren't prepared to shoulder the full burden entailed in the request, the least we can do is stop pretending we care. |
The burden returns?
Yes, these states are a disaster and also yes it has more to do with the locals than it does European colonialism (railways are useful things).
I would rather we stop caring and move on with a focus on us. Haiti will be a basket case. There is nothing we can do about it without conquering them again. That is unacceptable. Haiti et al should be left alone and allowed to sort itself out. The population with dramatically thin to a level that their culture is able support. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mithridates
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 9:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is not even close to my area of specialty so I could be wrong, but I've always thought foreign aid should proceed in this way: a minimum amount of aid to the most destitute countries, nothing special above that for a while, and then the most aid to countries that are quite stable and a step or two away from becoming developed countries - Armenia, Kazakhstan, Angola, etc. Basically to guarantee a certain minimum, then leave them alone to develop or not as they see fit, and then really step up the aid when they are just about ready to join the developed world. The minimum aid should be a standard amount that a nation knows it will get in the long term, instead of a short-term flurry of donations and activity and then a quick drying up.
But yeah, (to anyone out there that knows more about this) feel free to prove this idea wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
When you delve into the motivations of every "kind" act, you realize that egoism can never be extricated from it. People feel a sense of well-being whenever they help those in need and a sense of guilt when they don't. So-called altruists who travel the world doing voluntary work for the poor do so chiefly for the pleasure that results from doing good for others.
There's nothing noble or virtuous about foreign aid. The only purpose of foreign aid is to assuage the vicarious suffering of the West. They evidently don't know or care that their donations foster dependency amongst recipients. Nor are they concerned that their unthinking largesse drives local producers out of business - Africa still being mired in poverty despite receiving billions of dollars in foreign aid (but it certainly wasn't aid or charity that lifted millions out of poverty in Asia). Aid isn't an obligation - it is an indulgence. It's nothing more than a form of hedonism
Last edited by Sergio Stefanuto on Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:38 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| There's nothing noble or virtuous about providing for others. The only purpose of foreign aid is to assuage the vicarious suffering of the West. |
I agree that the current regime of aid is largely a post-colonial thing.
I am not opposed to aid in itself. I can see that the failure of aid will lead to calls for more direct control of the governments receiving aid because of the assumptions underneath the aid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
| (but it certainly wasn't aid or charity that lifted millions out of poverty in Asia). |
Ha! Korea received so much money from Washington in the late 50s and early 60s that it amounted to $600/person.
Source
| Quote: |
| From 1953 to 1974, when grant assistance dwindled to a negligible amount, the nation received some US$4 billion of grant aid. About US$3 billion was received before 1968, forming an average of 60 percent of all investment in South Korea. |
Post-war aid to Japan was substantial as well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
recessiontime
Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
| (but it certainly wasn't aid or charity that lifted millions out of poverty in Asia). |
Ha! Korea received so much money from Washington in the late 50s and early 60s that it amounted to $600/person.
Source
| Quote: |
| From 1953 to 1974, when grant assistance dwindled to a negligible amount, the nation received some US$4 billion of grant aid. About US$3 billion was received before 1968, forming an average of 60 percent of all investment in South Korea. |
Post-war aid to Japan was substantial as well. |
correct me if I'm wrong but that 'aid' to Japan was more like a loan that was paid back. The US loved giving loans out to Japan and eventually Japan declined further loans because it was not free money, there was a cost to receiving it |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
northway
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 4:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
| (but it certainly wasn't aid or charity that lifted millions out of poverty in Asia). |
Ha! Korea received so much money from Washington in the late 50s and early 60s that it amounted to $600/person. |
I'm pretty sure that Korea was the second largest recipient of aid behind Israel in the post-war years. At some point Egypt may have passed it in total dollars granted, but I'm not sure when that point was. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Korea has been colonized repeatedly throughout history (and, as Kuros points out, has been given aid), and is none the less doing fairly well by modern standards.
Saying the problem in Africa is aid is like saying the problem in Africa is the result of colonialism. I think to really understand Africa, we need to stop talking about us and start focusing on them. Africa was a tribal hell hole before colonialism. Africa, despite being dolled up with Western political ideas and foreign technology, is still a tribal hell hole. The African people are culturally -- and perhaps even to some extent biologically -- inclined towards a mode of life different than our own. Changing their culture to make it compatible with the modern world isn't something we can do for them. They'll have to do it themselves over time, and the meanwhile is going to be painful. That's life, unfortunately.
I suppose mark me down as an "I don't care," because although I do care, I think the real problems aren't ones we as non-members of their societies can solve.
Last edited by Fox on Thu Jan 13, 2011 4:25 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jvalmer
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| recessiontime wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
| (but it certainly wasn't aid or charity that lifted millions out of poverty in Asia). |
Ha! Korea received so much money from Washington in the late 50s and early 60s that it amounted to $600/person.
Source
| Quote: |
| From 1953 to 1974, when grant assistance dwindled to a negligible amount, the nation received some US$4 billion of grant aid. About US$3 billion was received before 1968, forming an average of 60 percent of all investment in South Korea. |
Post-war aid to Japan was substantial as well. |
correct me if I'm wrong but that 'aid' to Japan was more like a loan that was paid back. The US loved giving loans out to Japan and eventually Japan declined further loans because it was not free money, there was a cost to receiving it |
Luckily, Japan and S Korea has utilized their aid money in a much more efficiently way than the mansions and statues that African leaders tend to spend their aid money on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Privateer
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Location: Easy Street.
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 5:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| There's a lesson to be learned from South Korean and from Japanese history: countries that have been able to protect their domestic economies have succeeded in developing; countries that have not been able so to do have not developed. From colonial times right up until the present, Haiti has been forced to let foreign companies come in, take possession of its resources, and do what they like, while a brutal allegedly democratic regime, - uncensured, indeed supported, by the U.S. - terrorizes the population. What the West can and should do for third world countries is support democratic movements, stop supporting repressive regimes, and stop forcing on them economic policies that they don't want. Then they'll at least have a chance to begin the task of dealing with their internal problems. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Privateer
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Location: Easy Street.
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 5:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Korea has been colonized repeatedly throughout history (and, as Kuros points out, has been given aid), and is none the less doing fairly well by modern standards. |
Odd statement. Korea has been colonized once, by Japan, in modern times. Unless you are referring to the Mongol invasion and subsequent tributary relations with China? That still doesn't really qualify as something that happened 'repeatedly'. We have to recognize, however, that Japan, although brutally authoritarian, did develop Korea; and then Korea received a lot of aid initially. And South Korea was able to pursue highly protectionist economic policies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 6:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Privateer wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Korea has been colonized repeatedly throughout history (and, as Kuros points out, has been given aid), and is none the less doing fairly well by modern standards. |
Odd statement. Korea has been colonized once, by Japan, in modern times. Unless you are referring to the Mongol invasion and subsequent tributary relations with China? That still doesn't really qualify as something that happened 'repeatedly'. |
Yes it does, but I'm not really interested in arguing the sematics of the word.
| Privateer wrote: |
| We have to recognize, however, that Japan, although brutally authoritarian, did develop Korea; and then Korea received a lot of aid initially. |
Africa has received plenty of aid, and the only reason Africa has even the level of technological and industrial development it has is because of western involvement. Africa is dysfunctional by our standards because of the people that live there, not because of the big bad West. There's zero reason for guilt. Zero. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Charon
Joined: 14 Dec 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
Saying the problem in Africa is aid is like saying the problem in Africa is the result of colonialism. I think to really understand Africa, we need to stop talking about us and start focusing on them. Africa was a tribal hell hole before colonialism. Africa, despite being dolled up with Western political ideas and foreign technology, is still a tribal hell hole. The African people are culturally -- and perhaps even to some extent biologically -- inclined towards a mode of life different than our own. Changing their culture to make it compatible with the modern world isn't something we can do for them. They'll have to do it themselves over time, and the meanwhile is going to be painful. That's life, unfortunately.
|
I can understand your sentiments, Fox. Unfortunately in this day and age, folks who might voice sentiments like these run the risk of professional crucifixion.
Thoughts or beliefs like these ... and especially the public expression of thoughts and beliefs like these... can get one poleaxed professionally in today's political, social, and cultural climes.
Think folks STILL don't get burned at the stake for "heresy" these days? Think again...
Sometimes TRUTH can be dangerous, my friend.
Africa was a mess. Africa IS a mess. Africa WILL ALWAYS BE a mess. Same with Haiti. Folks might have some inkling of the reason� or might KNOW or SUSPECT the reason why these places, just � doggone it, for some strange, truly bizarre, unfathomable and mysterious reason that no one can quite figure out or put their finger on� seem to always have those darned ongoing and unending problems, but they will never, never admit THIS reason.
No, instead of acknowledging the clear reason why these places are a mess, they will shovel a few billion more "feel-good" dollars in "Aid" into the stove and watch it go up in smoke in order to make themselves "feel good."
But will it solve the problem? Has any of the BILLIONS of dollars already shoveled into the stove of these places by the "feel goods" even made so much as a dent in any of the problems there? No, and a thousands times no.
And so on and on and on and on it goes� where it stops, nobody knows. Ad infinitum� unto eternity. And meanwhile, everyone keeps on footing the bill and footing the bill and passing the buck and passing the plate around for even more �guilt shakedown money� for these poor, helpless, powerless, victimized people, and� knowingly or unknowingly � continues to pay the price in terms of quality of life, quality of education, quality of society, quality of culture, and quality of thought, because the alternative is too shocking to even consider.
Just my thoughts on it...
Peace, Brothers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jvalmer
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 6:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Privateer wrote: |
| What the West can and should do for third world countries is support democratic movements, stop supporting repressive regimes, and stop forcing on them economic policies that they don't want. |
Democracy does more to hurt a developing economy, in it's early stages at least, than help it. Asia's most successful economies weren't democratic when developing like Singapore, S. Korea, Hong Kong and Taiwan. And most of these nations also had pretty repressive governments. Also, Japan until last year was ruled by the same party since the US post-war administration handed over power, democratic in name only.
However, the biggest factor is leadership. If leadership is weak, then any money spent on many third-world countries is just wasted. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
young_clinton
Joined: 09 Sep 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Korea is what it is today because of Western loans period. Also what about Plumpynut for the starving children and anti-malarial drugs. There should be more not less. I believe in foreign aid because its a moral imperative. Anybody that does not believe in moral imperatives (Helping the weak and the helpless) should not be an educator. For instance how would you feel if you were starving and your children were dying from malaria.
They should start using DDT again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
