Maciamo
18-02-05, 15:58
Please take a look at this article from the Japan Times : A laggard plan to end African poverty (http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/geted.pl5?eo20050213a1.htm)
Do you think that the creation of an International Finance Facility ("Marshal Plan for Africa") could solve anything ?
I tend to agree with the reporter. Corruption is so high in about all African countries that aid funds are always diverted by the leaders. After the European powers granted independence to African countries betwen the 1950's and 70's, these countries had an efficeint, democratic, Western-style political organization, a relatvely good education system, railways, mines, and quite a lot of infrastructure. In just a few decades, the corruped and selfish dictators of most of these countries have managed to destroy all this, abuse and impoversih their citizens, while they were building palaces with hundreds of concubines and servants for themselves, and placing their money in Swiss banks.
I think that the problem of Africa is not a lack of resources (they have more than Europe, Japan, Singapore, etc.), not a problem of colonial past (Singapore, Hong Kong, etc. flourished on the system implemented by Britain), not really a matter of climate or environment (Singapore is as tropical as Congo, and Arizona or Nevada as dry as subsaharan regions), but a problem of mentality. People there are just too selfish. once someone take power, they only care about oppressing their people, not helping them build a nation and educate or give jobs to people, as they would do in Asia or South America.
We could claim that communication is also a problem, especially in Western African states like Nigera, Togo, Benin, Cote d'Ivoir or Sierra Leone, where there are hundreds of unrealted languages and ethnies cohabiting on a relatively small territory, which eventually causes wars and massacres. But there are over 800 languages in India and most people aren't much richer and live in a similar natural environment. However few countries in the world can claim to be as peaceful as India compared to the size of their population (I have stayed there for 5 months and felt safer than in some European cities, and certainly much safer than in the States). The difference is that Indian politicians are better educated (Oxford & Cambridge graduates for about all PM since the independene), and much more enlightened and caring about their own people. In fact, there is almost no hunger in India nowadays, despite that many people still live in slums with no jobs, and the density of population is hundreds of times higher than in most African countries.
When they became independent from the UK, countries like Kenya, Zambia, Liberia or Nigeria and India were left with a similar British system, and the people had the same chance to take their destiny in their own hands. Nowadays India has its own space program, its own "silicon valley", and manufactures its own cars and trains, although it has almost no natural resources. What African country can boast half as much ? South Africa ? Right, because it was and is still mostly governed by people of European descent. Any other candidate ? Probably not. I don't think there will much hope for Africa so long as the people don't change their attitude to each others and way of thinking. It might take many decades, if not centuries...
In other words, that means that "giving money for Africa" is pointless, as it will end in the pockets of some dictator or corruped officials. Better promote a way of changing people's minds.
Do you think that the creation of an International Finance Facility ("Marshal Plan for Africa") could solve anything ?
I tend to agree with the reporter. Corruption is so high in about all African countries that aid funds are always diverted by the leaders. After the European powers granted independence to African countries betwen the 1950's and 70's, these countries had an efficeint, democratic, Western-style political organization, a relatvely good education system, railways, mines, and quite a lot of infrastructure. In just a few decades, the corruped and selfish dictators of most of these countries have managed to destroy all this, abuse and impoversih their citizens, while they were building palaces with hundreds of concubines and servants for themselves, and placing their money in Swiss banks.
I think that the problem of Africa is not a lack of resources (they have more than Europe, Japan, Singapore, etc.), not a problem of colonial past (Singapore, Hong Kong, etc. flourished on the system implemented by Britain), not really a matter of climate or environment (Singapore is as tropical as Congo, and Arizona or Nevada as dry as subsaharan regions), but a problem of mentality. People there are just too selfish. once someone take power, they only care about oppressing their people, not helping them build a nation and educate or give jobs to people, as they would do in Asia or South America.
We could claim that communication is also a problem, especially in Western African states like Nigera, Togo, Benin, Cote d'Ivoir or Sierra Leone, where there are hundreds of unrealted languages and ethnies cohabiting on a relatively small territory, which eventually causes wars and massacres. But there are over 800 languages in India and most people aren't much richer and live in a similar natural environment. However few countries in the world can claim to be as peaceful as India compared to the size of their population (I have stayed there for 5 months and felt safer than in some European cities, and certainly much safer than in the States). The difference is that Indian politicians are better educated (Oxford & Cambridge graduates for about all PM since the independene), and much more enlightened and caring about their own people. In fact, there is almost no hunger in India nowadays, despite that many people still live in slums with no jobs, and the density of population is hundreds of times higher than in most African countries.
When they became independent from the UK, countries like Kenya, Zambia, Liberia or Nigeria and India were left with a similar British system, and the people had the same chance to take their destiny in their own hands. Nowadays India has its own space program, its own "silicon valley", and manufactures its own cars and trains, although it has almost no natural resources. What African country can boast half as much ? South Africa ? Right, because it was and is still mostly governed by people of European descent. Any other candidate ? Probably not. I don't think there will much hope for Africa so long as the people don't change their attitude to each others and way of thinking. It might take many decades, if not centuries...
In other words, that means that "giving money for Africa" is pointless, as it will end in the pockets of some dictator or corruped officials. Better promote a way of changing people's minds.