Posted on 12/15/2005 6:42:32 AM PST by BackInBlack
THERE are probably more annoying things than being hectored about African development by a wealthy Irish rock star in a cowboy hat, but I can't think of one at the moment. If Christmas, season of sob stories, has turned me into Scrooge, I recognize the Dickensian counterpart of Paul Hewson - who calls himself "Bono" - as Mrs. Jellyby in "Bleak House." Harping incessantly on her adopted village of Borrioboola-Gha "on the left bank of the River Niger," Mrs. Jellyby tries to save the Africans by financing them in coffee growing and encouraging schemes "to turn pianoforte legs and establish an export trade," all the while badgering people for money.
It seems to have been Africa's fate to become a theater of empty talk and public gestures. But the impression that Africa is fatally troubled and can be saved only by outside help - not to mention celebrities and charity concerts - is a destructive and misleading conceit. Those of us who committed ourselves to being Peace Corps teachers in rural Malawi more than 40 years ago are dismayed by what we see on our return visits and by all the news that has been reported recently from that unlucky, drought-stricken country. But we are more appalled by most of the proposed solutions.
I am not speaking of humanitarian aid, disaster relief, AIDS education or affordable drugs. Nor am I speaking of small-scale, closely watched efforts like the Malawi Children's Village. I am speaking of the "more money" platform: the notion that what Africa needs is more prestige projects, volunteer labor and debt relief. We should know better by now.
[snip]
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Rich, white rock stars are not going to solve Africa's problems, only the Africans themselves can.
Many parts of Africa had been developed and were doing well, unfortunately it was under white rule, so they took away the white rule, Now they are regressing.
Is it really better to starve and be under the foot of black leaders , than to eat and be under the foot of whites?
Because in actuality the people there arent free either way.
The problem in Africa now is largely a cultural one. The west exacerbates the problem, the same way they do in their own countries, by excusing lawlessness, turning a blind eye to corruption, and by funding programs which have litte to do with self sufficiency, and in fact do the opposite, create a cycle of dependency that is never broken. It is the triumph of "good intentions" over "good results". It is feel-good-ism, which is something the liberals are very good at. Debt relief is more like Guilt-relief, we can relieve all debt, and then give them billions of dollars for free, and that wouldn't fix a hair on a poor kid starving out in the grassy plains.
I would like one of these people like Bono to show me just one single African country that has been pulled out of poverty by international aid. Bet he can't name a single one.
"Is it really better to starve and be under the foot of black leaders , than to eat and be under the foot of whites?"
According to Africans, yes. Some parts of Africa benefited from colonialism (Kenya), other parts were nearly destroyed by it (Congo). But either way, the white man's day in the dark continent is over.
I agree its over, any whites staying in Africa are only asking for misery. They should get out while they have their lives . This doesnt mean Africa wont be looking for White money in the form of Aid.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.