How In The Heck The Third World Screwed Up

[amadeus]

Can anyone honestly tell me how in the heck that the Third World remains the way it does?

The United States, United Kingdom, France, Britain, Italy, Japan, and other industrialized nations send them billions of dollars of aid. But the Third World only gets worse...

In stable nations, we have the "soup of the day" special, in the Third World, the "coup of the day". Power shifts from a right-wing regime to a left-wing regime, and vice-versa.

The United Nations supports terrorist states (Palestine, North Korea), despite the fact that the United States pays for most of it.

Africa contains 66% of the world's AIDS-infected population. That's what you get for years of unprotected sex with multiple partners in a grass hut somewhere.

My solution: stop all aid to the Third World. Goodbye Ethiopia, Sudan, Ghana, etc. -- you shouldn't be getting a damn penny until you tribes get your *&%$ together and don't cry to the United States every time you've got a problem.

 

[Magnus]

It all stems from colonialism, the Industrial West, dropped the political part of colonialism but the economic part has remained, in the form of economic exploitation. The Capitalists of the West realized it is far better to exploit a poor country than its own citizenry, for you see, capitalism can only work if SOMEBODY gets exploited.

So, next time you look at how good you have it in the wonderful little place you call home, remember that it is bought and paid on the backs of those who will forever be impoverished to afford you that lifestyle. So, instead of haughtily insulting them, maybe you should be thanking them instead.

 

[Fayadi]

People from Third world are mostly lazy people,they didnt work hard .Third world people also produces racist that promotes terrorism.Yeah when you keep on sending them aid they will get more lazy.
There are few reasons why some countries remained third world:Communism,Dictatorship ,lazy people .
Questions about some races are smarter than the other race are debatable.

Despite Soviet and Chinese people hard work they remained third world ,it shows Communism sucks in the modern era.They began to get better in 90's when getting the capitalist idea

 

[Cunobelin Of Hippo]

That's a fairly enormous question, even by off-topic standards 3rd world suffering is a big cycle-hunger, disease, poverty, ill-governance, ignorance- and breaking it would require such a colossal and potentially painful effort that we are content to continue sending in our aid dollars and looking the other way.

As Magnus said, the Colonialism-era if you will, played a major role in screwing over the 3rd world. There was no natural transfer from primitive >> modern society, because it was interrupted part way by a world that was far, far ahead of it. We gave them pollution, industrialization, slavery, and the like, and it ruined whatever natural progression would've occured had we not. They simply haven't had time to adapt properly to the changes we brought, and hence are ancient/modern hybrids stuck trying vainly to drop the first part of that equation.

 

[CornMaster]

Fayadi, to say they are all lazy....that's a pretty harsh statement. I can see them being weak from malnutrition...but not lazy. I'm sure these people don't ENJOY living like that.

The area lacks stability. Both Magnus and CoH are right. After colonial powers exploited them, they left them alone.....and didn't help them "get into the 20th century". And they have remained 19th century since then.

No one wants to change them from the outside because it's cheap labor/goods, and it's a huge undertaking. And no one can change them from the inside because their frame of mind is set, that this is the way it has to be. Plus they don't have the support. There are probably 5 or 6 people trying to change it....but they all have different visions...and probably only have about 10-12% support....thus nothing happens.

 

[Dell19]

An example of explotation is the fact that we have sold an African country (forgttan which one) a radar system which will increase their debt even more, yet they have very little requirement for on since their airforce has somethinglike 8 helicoptors.

It is wrong to say they are all lazy. Most will never see any of the money because it quickly disappears into the big cities and not in the countryside where the people are suffering the most.

They are still being exploited because several countries made agreements with them that they have to produce certain goods and then sell them to MEDCs. This creates a downward spiral because they sell us the raw materils, then we process them and sell new products back to thaem at a much higher price.

And finally there is the problem of once LEDCs become richer, big multinational companies will move in to take most of the money.

 

[CornMaster]

So with all that said...the question shouldn't be "How In The Heck The Third World Screwed Up", it should be "How In The Heck Is The Third World Getting Screwed Over."

I meant to say that in my first post....but Dell brought up a nice point.

 

[BlueMonday]

Originally posted by Fayadi
People from Third world are mostly lazy people,they didnt work hard .Third world people also produces racist that promotes terrorism.Yeah when you keep on sending them aid they will get more lazy.
There are few reasons why some countries remained third world:Communism,Dictatorship, lazy people.
Questions about some races are smarter than the other race are debatable.

That is the biggest pile of vicous bullsh!t and hard liner lies I have ever heard on these forums. I'm not even going to bother explaining why, anyone with any sense about them can see through the deciet of such a mammoth falacy.

As for the question, you've just asked one of the largest socio-economic questions ever thought of. You could travel to your local library and read hundreds of thousands of pages about this subject. In short, it's a incredibly intricate knot of economics, law, culture, religion, education, infrastructure, technology, inflation, debt, agriculture, manufacturing, strife, fanaticism, black markets, drugs, crime, violence, justice systems, corruption, police forces, military forces, social activism, environmental responsbility, family sizes, contraception, over-population, under-population, pollution, medical facilities, international relations, civil relations, and geography. (Pretty much everything that has to do a society and the way it functions.)

...but not laziness. The people in third world countries are no more lazy than we are.

 

[Knowltok 2]

So what we are left with is the question of what should be done. I would posit that we are never going to be willing to do the wealth redistribution or massive bailout to fix all of the third world at once, so how should we go about it. One way (Not neccessarily the best) would be to identify promising countries and focus on them. Then when they are set on a good path towards economic growth we move on to the next set on the list. Gets real muddy on who to help first, but in the long run it could be better than the piecemeal aid and support that the world does now.

The problem comes in that these nations may not have the democratic traditions required for succesful, sustained economic growth. When tribalism is a more valued concept than democracy and the rights of the individual, how can a third world nation prosper long term in the world community?

So I ask, realistically, how dow we go about pulling up the third world? You can increase the aid budget of the developed world, but only to a point. You also aren't likely to get a social revolution that is willing to send large chuncks of the nation's wealth to third world countries. Given these restraints, what should be done?

 

[Dell19]

I would go with sustained development. Instead of selling them expensive equipment that when it breaks down they cannot fix it, give them less technologically advanced tools. This has the benefits of being cheaper and easier to maintain. That way they can gradually increase their output in farming and not have huge debts hanging over their heads.

The most important thing that our countriesd could do, would be call off their debts and not lend them any more because somne countries have debts so big that the only way they continue is by loaning more money.

Finally the countries themselves need to distribute the aid into the poorer regions and not just invest into the big cities.

This is a very big topic to talk about. Mainly because it is hard to predict what the outcomes will be. The LEDCs could turn into slightly more urbanised countries like Brazil and Argentina, where they still have large areas that are undeveloped and still get massively exploted, like with beef ranches. Or They could become more like Japan, South Korea and other NICs (Newly Industrialised countries). Obviously for them the second option would be best but for us its questionable. What would happen if they became very urbanised, would we be overtaken and become the poor relations?

 

[BlueMonday]

Ayn Rand said in Atlas Shrugged: Do not think that [money] should have been distributed among you, loading the world with fifty parasites instead of one...

Dumping the third world with money is not the answer by any means. We've already done it, and the failure rate was astronomical. Take Argentina for example. Back in the seventies their economy was faultering; inflation was exploding, their money was growing less and less valuable, and nearly all Argentinian industries lost their credit. In order to curb this downward spiral the Argentinians pegged their Peso to the American Dollar; effectively stabilizing the currency in Argentina.

However, pegging the Peso to the dollar meant that the Peso followed the Dollar's every move. Getting more money in Argentina meant borrowing at the interest rate set forth by the Federal Reserve in America. It worked for a time, but the situation deteriorated by the nineties. By then the American Economy was just starting a new explosion which meant that the Federal Reserve was raising the interest rate. Unfortuneatly for Argentina, they were just heading into a recession when this happened. As the interest rate on federal money went up, Argentinian Industry couldn't afford to borrow since their profits were falling into a deep depression. Right now the whole country is screwed. Unemployment, poverty, and crime are exploding.

The only way for underdeveloped countries to get back in the race is for them to stabilize thier economies, thereby bringing in more money for them to spend on things like hospitals, schools, parks, roads...all manner of public works. Now here's the kick in the knickers: given the geography of most of these countries, stabilizing the industrial (and even agricultural) economies is a pipe dream.

The basis of any economy begins with the raw material available to it. The real reason Western Cultures have boomed in the last five centuries is not their technological might, nor their military might, nor their aggressive expansion -it's the land they live on. Look at North America; we have every resource imaginable under our noses: every mineral from aluminum to zinc, every fossil fuel, forests that stretch far beyond the horizon, and more farmland than some continents have of any type of land. When it comes to the basis of our economy, North America and Europe have it all. In third world countries, however, you've barely got diddle squat. Most third world African countries are covered by dry land, and most third world Asian and South American countries are covered by either mountains or jungles. Unfortuneatly, such terrian is barely able to sustian those inhabiting it; and less so able to support the industry of a modern economy. Even the jungles can't be turned to farmland. When exposed to the elements rainforest floor turns into a rock called laterite. In Brazil, tens of thousands of acres which were cleared five years ago have turned to stone, as though God had bulldozed the country to make a parking lot.

 

[CornMaster]

You guys are right. Money isn't the answer. It's a restructuring from the ground up. If you ask me, most 3rd World Countries have poor leadership and poor infrasturcture.

I think (and this is controsovirsial- and no it's not Communism. ) that the best thing for the 3rd world would have been prolonged colony-type rule. Although Colonies are usually abused by the motherland, they nevertheless get developed, and are lead fairly well. What happened in Africa (and I just use this as an example) is that they forced 1st world countries out, effectively cutting off their noses. They didn't have the know-how to get industry going, the leadership to get them into the 20th century, infrastructure or education to keep what they had going.

Sure...it's great to be independant........but how great is it when you have no industry, infrasturcture, and little hope to get them going.

Lets take the US for example.

Settlement started in 15?? as a colony. It wasn't until over 200 years later that the US came to be. Canada was even longer....from 162? (Quebec (Mainland Canada) Newfoundland was earlier, but last province to join) to 1867 (of which Newfoundland remained independent until 1933 and joined Canada in 1949). But here you see large European Investment, and no less then 200 years after a country was formed.

Now....as far as I know (and correct me if I'm wrong because it probably voids this whole point. ) but large scale colonization of Africa (middle to southern) didn't begin until 1800's? Where most countries became independent around the 1950's. That's about 100 years (1855 is the date I have in mind) Far less then North America...and is probably one of the main reasons they are so poor off today. (And the minimal resources)

 

[Fayadi]

Originally posted by BlueMonday


That is the biggest pile of vicous bullsh!t and hard liner lies I have ever heard on these forums. I'm not even going to bother explaining why, anyone with any sense about them can see through the deciet of such a mammoth falacy.

As for the question, you've just asked one of the largest socio-economic questions ever thought of. You could travel to your local library and read hundreds of thousands of pages about this subject. In short, it's a incredibly intricate knot of economics, law, culture, religion, education, infrastructure, technology, inflation, debt, agriculture, manufacturing, strife, fanaticism, black markets, drugs, crime, violence, justice systems, corruption, police forces, military forces, social activism, environmental responsbility, family sizes, contraception, over-population, under-population, pollution, medical facilities, international relations, civil relations, and geography. (Pretty much everything that has to do a society and the way it functions.)

...but not laziness. The people in third world countries are no more lazy than we are.

I said it was one of the reasons.People in developed nation and third world nation works differently and think/plan differently.Thats one of the strongest reason
Government plays the biggest role i think .Smart people produces smart gov

 

[Dell19]

Originally posted by BlueMonday

The basis of any economy begins with the raw material available to it. The real reason Western Cultures have boomed in the last five centuries is not their technological might, nor their military might, nor their aggressive expansion -it's the land they live on. Look at North America; we have every resource imaginable under our noses: every mineral from aluminum to zinc, every fossil fuel, forests that stretch far beyond the horizon, and more farmland than some continents have of any type of land.

The part about Argentina brings up some good points but there is at least opne exception to the above. Japan, since it has very little of raw materials such as coal and oil and since it is a mountainous country, there is little room for expansion. Also Australia has some pretty poor land yet it was a formor colony so it had backing and money to help it become established. I feel that if the backing is behind a country they could succeed but they need to be helped with everything and not just pour money into them.

Smart governments only can come into power if they have the cance and that is had when there sis a dictator in power or only 10% of the population gets to vote and they are the ones that benefit the most etc.

 

[amadeus]

Originally posted by Magnus
It all stems from colonialism, the Industrial West, dropped the political part of colonialism but the economic part has remained, in the form of economic exploitation. The Capitalists of the West realized it is far better to exploit a poor country than its own citizenry, for you see, capitalism can only work if SOMEBODY gets exploited.

So, next time you look at how good you have it in the wonderful little place you call home, remember that it is bought and paid on the backs of those who will forever be impoverished to afford you that lifestyle. So, instead of haughtily insulting them, maybe you should be thanking them instead.

Talk about a bunch of crap...colonialization by the West was the best thing that ever happened to Africa.

Let's look at Egypt, for example. What was Egypt before British colonization? A desert and some pyramids. Today, it's the most industrialized nation in Africa with some very beautiful (and safe) cities.

Let's compare that with Chad. Chad has produced absolutely nothing of value, and nobody has anything valuable in the first place.

 

[Magnus]

Why don't you ask some Africans what THEY think about colonial rule and how it made their lives so WONDERFUL, oh, wait you are a xenophobic conservative, nevermind...

 

[amadeus]

How about asking some Egyptians whether they want to live in a society of cars, electricity, and political freedom?

 

[Maj]

Talk about a bunch of crap...colonialization by the West was the best thing that ever happened to Africa.

Would you mind tossing me your address so I could swing by your pad? Maybe while I'm there I'll enslave a few of your family members, ridicule your "pathetic" decor and cultural tastes, infect you with exotic diseases, introduce you to unfamiliar and dangerous foods and tap your backyard for oil and other precious resources. I'll probably leave a lot of trash lying around including a few corrupt in-laws to keep things in check while I head back to my cozy apartment. Seeing how much you love progress and your definition for it, I'm certain you won't mind.

-Maj

 

[Fayadi]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Talk about a bunch of crap...colonialization by the West was the best thing that ever happened to Africa.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Well.....How about the Slave Trading,their pride was never so low before in a history till the West colonize them!

 

[DinoDoc]

Well.....How about the Slave Trading

What about it? Who do you think captured and sold the slaves to the West?