Why is the world blind to the tragedy in Africa.

Reply Sat 3 Apr, 2004 06:15 pm
joe harris

I will answer you with another question,"How much oil does Africa have that we (World) can take from her.??????

I understand the African continent has large deposits of oil and gas that have yet to be developed. I should note that the oil producing nations do not have it taken from them they sell it. Saudi Arabia,Iran,The United Emerates ,Kuwait and etc. do pretty well living off those assets.
0 Replies
Reply Sat 3 Apr, 2004 08:03 pm
Many regions of Africa are very "tribal" in nature, without any strong democratic traditions. They were economically prosperous under colonial rule because these very factors were suppressed. Once the colonial rule was removed, they reverted right back to an autocratic and heavily segmented society.

Now, I'm not saying that colonization is necessarily a good thing, because it offends the dignity of a people and their basic right to have power over domestic affairs.

But I think Africans need to realize that unless they change their old ways, nothing will ever improve. Perhaps slaughtering neighbouring tribes and deferring all decision making to unelected representatives might have worked several hundred years ago. In the 21st century, it's a formula for poverty.

That being said, one of the biggest problems is a lack of education. I mean, Europeans were slaughtering each other and living under monarchs not too long ago. The change to more liberal ideas only came about through widespread literacy and social awareness.

Sometimes people are too quick to blame the West for keeping African nations in poverty and starvation, without looking at the domestic corruption and militarization that prevents a country from taking advantage of its natural resources and developing a strong economy.
0 Replies
Reply Sat 3 Apr, 2004 09:53 pm
au1929 wrote:
It is not up to a single nation to take action. It is the responsibility of all the nations of the so called free world to take action. Hopefully the action would come in the form of diplomacy and economics. There is a UN and I can't think of a better use for it than being in the forefront. Military action on the other hand should last option and only used for peacekeeping. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

Then if a single nation acted to help in one of these African nations that you believe need intervention, you would decry them for doing what you think needs to be done when others would not?
0 Replies
Reply Sat 3 Apr, 2004 09:54 pm
georgeob1 wrote:
Scrat opened a hornet's nest by noting the hypocrisy of some who decry intervention in any form (in Iraq) and who here imply the lack of it in Africa is somehow immoral. Not much benefit to anyone in pursuing that question further.

Unless rationality and consistency in one's positions are desirable. :wink:
0 Replies

Related Topics

Africa is a dying continent - Discussion by Pharon
Congo: The World Capital of Killing - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Notes from Africa - Discussion by dagmaraka
Tunisia From October 5 to 18, 2007 - Discussion by cicerone imposter
I hope this works out for Darfur... - Discussion by ossobuco
Let's see how well you know Africa - Discussion by gustavratzenhofer
Anyone know a lot about Sierra Leone? - Discussion by dlowan
Sudanese find peace? - Discussion by littlek
Copyright © 2023 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 03/29/2023 at 11:26:47