How to ease famine in Africa

The Little Way Association (Sacred Heart House, 119 Cedars Road, Clapham Common, London SW4 OPR) gives direct to missionaries, so that seems like a good way of avoiding corruption and cutting down on administration costs They mention in their ads that they forward donations without deduction.

It actually would change if the developed world stopped gorging itself on the food that these people need. The problem is simple: half of the world has too little and half has too much; the solution is equally obvious.

Agreed, a nonsense comment.  By the same ridiculous reasoning, one can ask why the West doesn’t stop spending billions on keeping its people living as long as posible and instead send the money to the dying children of Arica?  That would solve the problem overnight!

That would require a very different set of trading & economic arrangements – and people in the developed world would not stand for having a lowe standard of living. Besides, there is real poverty in Britain: we need to get our own ecionomy and siociety in order before “helping” (?) others. And no matter what we do, Africa is going  to be a corrupt, God-forsaken Hell-hole as long as its politicians are venal savages – IOW, there is, sad to say, not a hope in Hell of change for the better.

It would be better to for us wash our hands of Africa – let them solve their own own problems, just as they had to do for centuries before they encountered foreigners. We have more than enough problems of our own, without throwing away even more billions of pounds into a bottomless pit. Wasting gigantic amounts of money is what Labour does best – we need to break with that, ASAP, now. It’s not kind to waste billions  in “aid” – that merely enriches the obscenely wealthy, but it doesn’t help a soul.  Pouring away billions is an attempt by the developed countries to salve their unquiet consciences – nothing more. Of course, if its moral to prop up pondscum like  Mugabe & his kind, then by all means, let’s waste money on dirtbags like him. But is that moral ? It’s far better to seem like a heartless so-and-so, than to be foolish enough to waste money on “aid” that might actually do some good if we spent it putting our own house in order. Prolonging Africa’s agony by giving it more and more money for the means with which to blow its brains out is to be complicit in suicide, and that’s disagraceful.

6 out of the top 12 fastest growing economies are in Africa…thanks to their higher birthrates among other factors like trade linds with China. It is the West that is in decline…..and Westerners are in denial.  Especially North America and Europe…..where we seem to think that secular democracy…and nothing else…. is the magic key to a glorious prosperous future!  Not so I’m afraid to say.

I don’t agree that Africa is always going to be ” a corrupt, God-forsaken Hell-hole” and I would argue that Africa is on the way up whereas Europe is on its way down. In fact, although we don’t see it in the media, there are a whole lot of positives going on in Africa right now – almost none of it thanks to NGOs and foreign aid. Although your description of most politicians as venal savages is spot on.

You’re right that the U.K. and others ought to put their own society in order before “helping” others, however. Although I’ll be keen to point out that most of the “help” that Africa gets is not done in good faith. As Fr. AL-S has written several times, much of the aid doesn’t get where it helps people. I’m not sure this is an unintended consequence, however. I think it’s part of an elaborate strategy to deceive public opinion on both sides – the ignorant African population is deceived into thinking it is being helped and the ignorant Western population is deceived into thinking it is helping. All the while, the moneymen get richer, and poverty – both moral and financial – increases to the advantage of the large aid/NGO industry.

Africa’s problem is primarily a moral one and I’m not sure we can ever solve moral problems with money – especially when this is done in bad faith. Given the sort of (lack of) morality espoused by NGOs, it’s difficult to see how they could even be part of the solution.

So I’ll definitely second that “It would be better to for us wash our hands of Africa – let them solve
their own own problems, just as they had to do for centuries before they
encountered foreigners.”

A rather good article, Fr. AL-S. I have quite extensive knowledge of Kenya, and I’m glad you’ve lived there because you seem to exhibit a better understanding of the situation than (sadly) many of those who are actually given a position to influence things. That Kenyan politicians always seem to find money for vanity projects would be laughable if the consequences weren’t so dire (although European politicians are prone to the same vanities too, but the stakes are not often as high).

There are many roads being built – thanks in large part to the Chinese – and that will go some way towards economic improvement. Of course, there are (self-serving) political reasons why roads were not built for a long time in the fertile regions around Nairobi. I would take “unofficial guesstimates” with a large pinch of salt though, because these are made by people who have an often illegitimate interest in channelling money through their own NGOs instead – and we ought not to support foreign NGOs which weaken the role of the local governments unless we’re prepared to do so in Western countries also.

The idea to bypass bureaucracy by having food vouchers is a most splendid one, however, and it’s surprising (yet symbolic) that it has not been done before. It both stimulates the local economy and simultaneously gives people a measure of control over their lives – and both can only be considered good things.

At the same time – as has been pointed out by others -, many of the fastest growing economies are in Africa. For that reason, if poverty is increasing simultaneously with growth, then at the very least we need to accept that much of that poverty is due to the moral poverty of both politicians and the electorate which elects them.

I did not mention the aid budget and you are right that the “foreign aid” of the West does not work at all. Equally, however, if you aren’t prepared to give up the kind of lifestyle of the West (which is growing more obscene by the day given the decline of Christendom even in places such as Spain and Ireland) to prevent a child in Africa from starvation and are simply content to leave them to starve then what makes you any better than the dictators or the obscenely rich of those countries? What I meant was the money being transferred by the Church to those who need it away from those of us who expect to have all that we want and regard it as a moral outrage and a violation of our human rights if we cannot have the latest mobile phone or apple’s latest creation. Given our lifestyles in which we expect everything and deny others even a small share of it I almost look forward to the day when the oil runs out; at least then we will have to learn that we cannot simply look to ourselves. Certainly we must also care for those in poverty here but that and more would be possible if some of our obscene businessmen and bankers were prepared to go without one year’s million pound profit; a little of that could mean a lot for the poor of both Europe and Africa.

First of all, the West doesn’t care about African lives, and it’s difficult from historical evidence to argue that it ever did. But even if it did, one would have to weigh up the benefits of sending billions abroad versus spending them at home. Plus, given the anti-human view expressed by the European political class, sending money to poorer countries might well leave the world with a bigger problem than it had to begin with.

The problem is that it’s difficult to not save lives at home (on people we know and see every day) – even if it costs obscene amounts – while sending money abroad (to people we don’t know and will probably never meet). Also, unless we have an unlimited budget, then it’s always problematic to draw the line on what should be treated and what shouldn’t be and neglecting the elderly to save lives elsewhere has its own moral implications.

Just a passing comment though….Many rich countries spends billions not just to keep people living, but in many cases just to keep them existing. Even there it’s difficult to know exactly where one should draw a moral line between keeping people alive for humanity’s benefit versus keeping them alive for statistical benefits (so the government can provide jobs and claim you have the best healthcare). Also, if we make that division, we leave ourselves vulnerable to a purely utilitarian view on life, and open to the possibility that those who are deemed unproductive or unwanted will not be looked after and might even be disposed of – whether it’s the elderly, those with disabilities, the unfortunate or the unborn.

So it’s a minefield of issues and the only thing we can be certain of is that, to quote ‘ms catholic state’, “It’s not people having children that causes drought.”

I was thinking all these helping organisations stop wasting money in sending food or water or other short term aids! I think if they invest in longterm aids it will be better. Constructing road which will eventually create jobs and help with the transport of food from the part of the country that has to the one that hasn’t. Rail ways or pipelines with water running across the country as the place is too dry. There should be a way of inventing things that could change the temperature; I think the developed countries can even create machines or a mechanism that can make the weather conditions in such countries more favorable. Instead of wasting money making research on how to create new gadgets(everyday), cars, building massive hotels and houses causing a fortune they could use that money to research on how to build water storage tanks, water pipelines, roads and railway routes. This will change those countries for good(slowly but surely). And no one can say it isnt possible because they have built pipelines in African countries for their petrol so i dont get why they cant do that with water.Claiming to send food all the time or donating is not a good investment( in my point of view)

They seem not to be capable of self-control. It’s beside the point whether to say this is PC or not; if they are not capable of self-control, then that should be said. To fail to say so, is to further an attractive & popular illusion; but illusions are a useless foundation for practical action. Unfortunately, it is all too human to prefer delightful fictions to unflattering truths. If they are less intelligent than Caucasians – as was suggested a little while ago IIRC  – that too should be said, without fear. “The Christian way of life” should not require the propagation of popular fictions about other ethnic groups – only the truth will do, popular or unpopular.

Infantilising them is indeed a rotten idea – & PC nonsense that forbids unpopular statements about them, infantilises everyone.