• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why Foreign Aid Is Hurting Africa

That's bald, but it's real. Now, I'm not talking the rank and file worker who actually meets the starving, I'm talking about the non-profit CEO who would have to find a new job if he finishes that one. He's got no incentive to finish that problem and move one to the next one.

Umm who the hell joins a non-profit organization for the money? If the CEO just wanted the salary and didn't actually care about the cause, he could almost certainly get a much bigger paycheck in the for-profit sector.
 
Umm who the hell joins a non-profit organization for the money? If the CEO just wanted the salary and didn't actually care about the cause, he could almost certainly get a much bigger paycheck in the for-profit sector.

I was thinking about what It would take to make it a full time job and be a real positive benefit to a people in need of skills.

I mean even if it is a non profit, the ceo/owner/whatever still needs to earn a living.
 
There is quite a bit of both. You can't establish capital markets if your workers are dying like flies from easily preventable diseases, and you can't establish a true democracy if your citizens don't know how to read and have no reliable communication outside of their villages.

And there's nothing we can do to change any of that short of invading and occupying Africa. Government corruption and tribal conflict cannot be side-stepped with good intentions. People always have great ideas about how to fix Africa but they never seem any closer to achieving their goal, indeed, it appears as if the country is actually moving backwards. It's time to accept reality and stop worrying about things which don't directly involve our country.

It seems, however, that making the sobering yet prudent choice is never an option in today's political dialogue. I mean, it wouldn't be "nice" to suggest that perhaps Africa is impervious to our compassion because it’s a giant mess of ignorance and corruption. Maybe the reason we have trouble finding solutions to our problems is because we automatically rule out things that sound harsh or unfair. Most often, and forgive the cliché, the truth is harsh and life is not fair. Only Africa can fix Africa. Time to cut the knot and look to our own shores.

Establishing a functioning economy is indeed essential...but that's going to require massive infusions of cash aimed at solving other problems as well.

You'd think that after decades of failure a certain solution would get ruled out.

I think it's more accurate to say that Africa needs functional capitalism than "Western ideals." The Chinese model will suffice for many parts of Africa; in fact, it may work better in some places.

No, Western ideals are precisely what they require. A functional form of Capitalism cannot be established without a measure of Western foundation. The Chinese and Indian models didn't start experiencing exponential growth until they recognized private property rights to some extent; we figured that one out in the 1600's. Even implementing some fundamental Western concepts can cause growth and development. Africa doesn't need Benjamin Franklin's portrait, they need his autobiography.

But regardless, just saying "they need to adopt Western ideals" is meaningless, because it doesn't address HOW they get from here to there.

How they get there or if they get there is none of my concern, nor should you make it my concern via government proxy. You want to save Africa? Be my guest and donate as much time and money as your heart desires, but please don't oblige the government to waste my money and time on fruitless endeavors.
 
Umm who the hell joins a non-profit organization for the money? If the CEO just wanted the salary and didn't actually care about the cause, he could almost certainly get a much bigger paycheck in the for-profit sector.

Who the hell thinks those people are working for free?

Ya don't remember stink about the UNICEF chief with the fat paycheck?

Get real, dude.

Here's a more important consideration:

The US economy is in shambles. Our government should stop wasting tax dollars on luxuries, and foreign aid is a luxury we can no longer afford. It makes absolutely no sense to have a permanent budget deficit and continue to throw money away on other nations.
 
Last edited:
Well....you see...most of Africa HAS adopted "Western ideals". Socialism is a product of the West, one of our culture's most disastrous exports ever, even worse than smallpox, perhaps.

What those countries need to do is regain their self-sufficiency so they can estabish rational trade policies. They can't do that with a trillion dollars of goods and services flooding their markets and swamping domestic capabilities. Their biggest question has to be "how do I get this OPM needle out of my aorta before it kills me?"

Good point, although I meant "Western" in the Cold War sense; i.e., the ideas that worked.
 
Good point, although I meant "Western" in the Cold War sense; i.e., the ideas that worked.

Heck, we don't follow "western" ideas any more, if that's your criteria.

What the hell's wrong with you, demanding those people stick to programs that are known to work, instead of letting them copy us as we wander aimlessly down the road to serfdom ourselves?
 
And there's nothing we can do to change any of that short of invading and occupying Africa.

Sure we can: We can spend money on charities that do important work in countries which are reasonably well-governed and allow charities to operate freely. $10 can prevent a case of malaria in Mozambique. $20 can prevent a death from starvation in Mali. $50 can prevent a case of HIV in Botswana.

Ethereal said:
Government corruption and tribal conflict cannot be side-stepped with good intentions. People always have great ideas about how to fix Africa but they never seem any closer to achieving their goal, indeed, it appears as if the country is actually moving backwards.

1. Africa is not a country. And while I'll assume that was a typo, that mentality is one of the biggest problems with the way people look at the foreign aid process. Why must we view all of Africa's disparate problems through a single prism? Why must we look at whether "Africa" is moving forward or backward, instead of looking at whether Mali, Senegal, Cameroon, Botswana, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Somalia, South Africa, Ethiopia, Congo, and Ghana are each individually moving forward or backward? And furthermore, what are each of them doing right or wrong?
2. Most of Africa is indeed developing...and very quickly. To the extent that some parts ARE backsliding, they are often due to the emergence of HIV rather than a failure of foreign assistance.
3. Every part of the world has a few countries that are moving backwards due to incompetent governments, and Africa is no exception (e.g. Zimbabwe, Somalia, Congo). But most of Africa is developing.

Ethereal said:
It's time to accept reality and stop worrying about things which don't directly involve our country.

Having reliable trade and investment partners on the most resource-rich continent on earth would directly involve our country. Stopping the spread of communicable diseases from the least sanitary continent on earth would directly involve our country.

Ethereal said:
It seems, however, that making the sobering yet prudent choice is never an option in today's political dialogue. I mean, it wouldn't be "nice" to suggest that perhaps Africa is impervious to our compassion because it’s a giant mess of ignorance and corruption.

Africa is NOT impervious to our help. Overall, it is developing quite well. And no one has denied that many places in Africa are giant messes of ignorance and corruption. But those problems don't automatically correct themselves without good reason.

Ethereal said:
Maybe the reason we have trouble finding solutions to our problems is because we automatically rule out things that sound harsh or unfair. Most often, and forgive the cliché, the truth is harsh and life is not fair. Only Africa can fix Africa. Time to cut the knot and look to our own shores.

Only Africa can establish capital markets and overthrow idiots like Mugabe. But outside nations and outside charities can play a big role in ending infectious diseases, purifying the water, and teaching people to read and do basic math.

Ethereal said:
You'd think that after decades of failure a certain solution would get ruled out.

Again, there have NOT been decades of failure. Most of Africa is developing well, and many parts are backsliding solely due to the spread of HIV and not to the failure of foreign assistance over the last few decades.

Ethereal said:
No, Western ideals are precisely what they require. A functional form of Capitalism cannot be established without a measure of Western foundation. The Chinese and Indian models didn't start experiencing exponential growth until they recognized private property rights to some extent; we figured that one out in the 1600's. Even implementing some fundamental Western concepts can cause growth and development.

Well, I guess we simply differ on what "Western ideals" entail then. I don't think private property rights are anything inherent to one region of the world, but we agree that the rule of law and private property are necessary to establish a growing economy.

Ethereal said:
Africa doesn't need Benjamin Franklin's portrait, they need his autobiography.

This is another problem I have with the way that many people view the foreign aid process. Africa is not the United States, and never will be the United States. Africa needs to develop its own way, and the United States certainly has a number of valuable lessons to teach Africa...as do Europe, Russia, China, Japan, India, Indonesia, Chile, and many other countries. The problems of Africa are not the same as the problems of the United States, and simply abolishing their diverse systems of government and establishing a US-clone would likely be ineffective.

Ethereal said:
How they get there or if they get there is none of my concern, nor should you make it my concern via government proxy. You want to save Africa? Be my guest and donate as much time and money as your heart desires, but please don't oblige the government to waste my money and time on fruitless endeavors.

I do donate plenty of time and money to charities for Africa. And I'll oblige the government to spend time and money as well, because the world's concerns ARE America's concerns to a certain degree. That doesn't mean we need to overthrow every crummy tinpot dictator in Africa, but foreign assistance (both from governments and from private charities) can play an important role if used correctly.
 
Last edited:
Well....you see...most of Africa HAS adopted "Western ideals". Socialism is a product of the West, one of our culture's most disastrous exports ever, even worse than smallpox, perhaps.

Incorrect - while there are some socialist governments spread around, most are still dictatorships or one party states where there is nothing socialist about the countries services, policy or taxation.
 
Do you EVER address the points that were actually made? Or do you not know how to respond without these infantile strawman attacks?

That was a response to the point made.

If someone is scamming United Way (I believe I wrongly said "UNICEF" above) for money, chances are really really good that the boy wasn't good enough to get a job with a for-profit company paying more legitimately.

Again....no one ever works to eliminate their own job. It's contrary to human nature and the #1 reason government NEVER gets smaller.

That you can't see past the surface isn't any reflection on my abilities, my methods, or my meanings.
 
Incorrect - while there are some socialist governments spread around, most are still dictatorships or one party states where there is nothing socialist about the countries services, policy or taxation.

Dictatorships?....OH! You mean socialism taken to it's logical and inevitable conclusion.

Don't worry, many of you still don't get it. Socialism is always a failure. The nations of Africa provide many many pieces of evidence to prove this. Zimbabwe alone is sufficient.
 
Sure we can: We can spend money on charities that do important work in countries which are reasonably well-governed and allow charities to operate freely. $10 can prevent a case of malaria in Mozambique. $20 can prevent a death from starvation in Mali. $50 can prevent a case of HIV in Botswana.

That's what private charities are for. There's no reason we should subsidize living costs in a foreign country.

I'm certainly not unsympathetic to the plight of Africans and I sincerely hope that personal compassion and individual effort can help them to overcome the many challenges they face, but the government has no place forcing people to subsidize the living costs of foreigners, or other Americans for that matter.

Instead of forcibly allocating tax dollars towards foreign countries the government should just concentrate on raising awareness and encouraging more personal involvement from its citizens. This can be accomplished with strong and principled leadership; something which is severly lacking in Washington.

1. Africa is not a country.

A grievous intellectual fumbling. I'm embarrassed.

And while I'll assume that was a typo

Yes, please do.

that mentality is one of the biggest problems with the way people look at the foreign aid process. Why must we view all of Africa's disparate problems through a single prism? Why must we look at whether "Africa" is moving forward or backward, instead of looking at whether Mali, Senegal, Cameroon, Botswana, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Somalia, South Africa, Ethiopia, Congo, and Ghana are each individually moving forward or backward? And furthermore, what are each of them doing right or wrong?

Alright, point taken, and I agree. I think the reason so many people view the problems of Africa in the manner you specified is because that's how its presented to the American public, but I digress...

The real issue here is whether or not the American government ought to force its citizens to subsidize the living costs of people in Mali or Senegal or Cameroon or wherever. I'm all for establishing trade when economically feasible and maintaining a frequent dialogue with the world, but neither of those possibilities is contingent upon giving or receiving foreign aid.

2. Most of Africa is indeed developing...and very quickly. To the extent that some parts ARE backsliding, they are often due to the emergence of HIV rather than a failure of foreign assistance.
3. Every part of the world has a few countries that are moving backwards due to incompetent governments, and Africa is no exception (e.g. Zimbabwe, Somalia, Congo). But most of Africa is developing.

So, let us use diplomacy and individual compassion to facilitate Africa's development.

Having reliable trade and investment partners on the most resource-rich continent on earth would directly involve our country.

Certainly. However, establishing trade with other countries is not contingent upon giving or receiving foreign aid. I'm all for greasing the wheels a little bit; after all, doing business costs money, but this does not necessitate spending many millions of dollars.

Stopping the spread of communicable diseases from the least sanitary continent on earth would directly involve our country.

I believe we have a tangential interest in this. Obviously, we want to stop these diseases from spreading to our country but this does not necessitate that we attempt to cure Africa.

Africa is NOT impervious to our help. Overall, it is developing quite well. And no one has denied that many places in Africa are giant messes of ignorance and corruption. But those problems don't automatically correct themselves without good reason.

I'll concede that Africa is not a monolith and that certain countries are receptive to our aid, but this does not change two fundamental things: the government should not force American citizens to subsidize the living costs of other countries, and those countries which ARE giant messes of ignorance and corruption are virtually dead to us. Unless we occupy these countries and force them to accept certain ideals of governance and law, they will be impervious to American tax dollars, indeed, money might even make things worse when it ends up in the wrong hands.

Only Africa can establish capital markets and overthrow idiots like Mugabe. But outside nations and outside charities can play a big role in ending infectious diseases, purifying the water, and teaching people to read and do basic math.

Play a role? Absolutely. Subsidize living costs? No.

Again, there have NOT been decades of failure. Most of Africa is developing well, and many parts are backsliding solely due to the spread of HIV and not to the failure of foreign assistance over the last few decades.

And why is HIV spreading so rapidly?

Well, I guess we simply differ on what "Western ideals" entail then. I don't think private property rights are anything inherent to one region of the world, but we agree that the rule of law and private property are necessary to establish a growing economy.

And how does this come about in Africa?

This is another problem I have with the way that many people view the foreign aid process. Africa is not the United States, and never will be the United States.

I agree, but that doesn't change the fact that they need to implement a measure of our ideals before they can become successful.

Africa needs to develop its own way

Now, this I completely agree with. Good point, Kandahar.

and the United States certainly has a number of valuable lessons to teach Africa...as do Europe, Russia, China, Japan, India, Indonesia, Chile, and many other countries. The problems of Africa are not the same as the problems of the United States, and simply abolishing their diverse systems of government and establishing a US-clone would likely be ineffective.

I'm not suggesting they abolish their diverse systems of government. I'm simply suggesting that in order for Africa to succeed they cannot heavily incorporate socialism, tribalism, sexism, racism, feudalism, or tyranny into their governments and societies.

I do donate plenty of time and money to charities for Africa.

That's good. Continue to do so and good luck in your endeavors.

And I'll oblige the government to spend time and money as well, because the world's concerns ARE America's concerns to a certain degree.

To a certain degree, yes.

That doesn't mean we need to overthrow every crummy tinpot dictator in Africa

Well, sure it does, after all, it's only a "degree" which separates your economic interests from a neo-con's military interests in another country. If the problems of the world do indeed necessitate direct involvement from the US then perhaps we should play for keeps. I mean, why shouldn't we invade Sudan? Can we really pretend that an imaginary line in the dirt absolves us of our responsibility for the genocide taking place there or that we could stand idly by while Saddam Hussein slaughtered his citizens and destabilized a region?

but foreign assistance (both from governments and from private charities) can play an important role if used correctly.

Maybe when our economy isn't on the brink of collapse we can worry about the ills of another nation.
 
Back
Top Bottom