10 Ways to Change Africa

tybird

sourdough wrote:

I do see his points though I may not agree with all of them. The problem with Africa has not been corporations or imperialists but largely has to do with their own crooked leaders and an overly compliant population. The "charity" model has failed of providing and sending aid. I'm not saying that we shouldn't help, but I think there needs to be a fundamental shift in looking at development by removing underlying causes which are largely because presidents and other officials are stealing any aid that comes into their country and leaving the population to starve.

I call this the "Theory of it's my turn to steal all of the pie." It seems to happen when a group who was formerly left out of the political activity of their environment gains control over the body politic. They want to carry on just like their former oppressors. Sort of like "Same shit, different asshole."

sourdough

tybird wrote:

I call this the "Theory of it's my turn to steal all of the pie." It seems to happen when a group who was formerly left out of the political activity of their environment gains control over the body politic. They want to carry on just like their former oppressors. Sort of like "Same shit, different asshole."

Very strange phenomenon eh? After the end of slavery in the states, a "great" idea was thought of to release some slaves back in Liberia. The released slaves then created a very distinctive caste system of "Amercian-Africans" and native Liberians who were essentially enslaved by the formers slaves.

I think part of it is that Africa is still quite tribal in that they take care of their clans, families and tribal groups first. Colonialism and arbitrary border drawing has some to do with it but also the unwillingness to create a broader vision for Africa. There are few visionaries that I can think of, or maybe the visionaries just are prevented from gaining power. It is hard to say.

pickupyourwill

....

tybird

sourdough wrote:

Very strange phenomenon eh? After the end of slavery in the states, a "great" idea was thought of to release some slaves back in Liberia. The released slaves then created a very distinctive caste system of "Amercian-Africans" and native Liberians who were essentially enslaved by the formers slaves.

I think part of it is that Africa is still quite tribal in that they take care of their clans, families and tribal groups first. Colonialism and arbitrary border drawing has some to do with it but also the unwillingness to create a broader vision for Africa. There are few visionaries that I can think of, or maybe the visionaries just are prevented from gaining power. It is hard to say.

Wasn't Liberia formed before the 1860's.......I thought it was done in the 1820s-1830s.

baraka

farfromglorified wrote:

The negative effects of DDT were largely overstated. While it's certainly not compeltely harmless, the effective ban on DDT has contributed to tens of millions of deaths over the last 40 years. Compare Africa to areas in SE Asia where DDT was used to basically eradicate malaria without even a single obvious link to a cancer or health crisis and it makes the DDT alarmists of the 70s look not only stupid, but absolutely evil.

While I applaud most of your points and definitely your interest and knowledge on the subject of Africa, I urge you to do a bit more research on this point. I know what your point is here, alarmists banning something that could potentially save millions of lives and I'm with you on that point. But the DDT issue is a bit more complex than it affecting a few avian species.

DDT works its way through the entire food chain, affecting aquatic species and birds the worst. And, the effects are persistent. DDT was banned in the US in 1972, and there are still residual effects now, 30 years later. So, we're not talking about a compound that can be used for a few years and then rapidly breaks down when it stops being used. It seems highly unethical to me to promote a chemical to use in another country when we wouldn't be willing to use it in our own country.

And then there is the idea of eventual mosquito resistance. I found this Time article from 1977 http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,915451,00.html?internalid=related

'Resistant mosquitoes are defying DDT and infecting millions"We are in a strategic withdrawal. The days of euphoria are over." With those words, a World Health Organization official last week gloomily characterized the current state of man's long battle against an ancient scourge: malaria.'

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDT

'In the period from 1934-1955 there were 1.5 million cases of malaria in Sri Lanka resulting in 80,000 deaths. After an extensive anti-mosquito program with DDT there were only 17 cases reported in 1963 and the program was halted. Malaria later rebounded to 600,000 cases in 1968 and the first quarter of 1969. Some proponents of DDT consider this an example of environmentalism trumping public well-being even though the use of DDT was ended more due to the lack of continuing need than due to environmental concerns. Spraying with DDT was resumed but many of the local mosquitoes had acquired resistance to DDT in the interim, presumably because of the continued use of DDT for crop protection, and so it was not nearly as effective as it had been previously. Switching to the more-expensive malathion in 1977 reduced the malaria infection rate to 3,000 by 2004. A recent study notes, "DDT and Malathion are no longer recommended since An. culicifacies and An. subpictus has been found resistant." (Malaria Journal 2005 4:8[5])'


Personally, I'm interested in progress in potential vaccinations.

sourdough

pickupyourwill wrote:

Hey where's the one on teaching them how to not reproduce like rabbits to the point of poverty and starvation? You know the one about smacking some of them in the face with some cold hard reality that they have to comfortably provide for their families themselves----even if that means NOT having anymore kids. They should know that one kid is okay to have.

The situation is much more complex that this. Firstly, it is a continent of largely uneducated and desperate people. So how do you plan on spreading "cold hard reality" to them in a practical way??? Secondly they see many people die all of the time including MANY children and WE are supposed to tell them about the reality of population? Don't you think that they would have a much better idea of the problem?

There are many reasons why there are large families.
1) Infant death rates either in their first few years or at childbirth are quite high so having many children is a way to ensure that there will be offspring who survive.

2) In agricultural areas, children = workers and are needed to produce crops etc.

3) There is no pension plan, bank accounts or retirement savings. Children are depended on to support their parents once they get old or if they get sick. To not have any children means that there is no support for you.

4) In many African cultures it is assumed you have a wife or wives and children. Those who choose not to are assumed to have a "problem".

5) Lack of family planning, counselling or contraceptives. There are no condoms and birth control in many places nor a lot of sex ed services so just tell people to not have sex? that would work I bet.