No Foreign Aid to Developing Nations

[KarmaPolice]

The colonies normally paid for that themselves - and more - through not only taxation, but through the cut-rate exploitation of the natural resources by state-backed companies.

In most cases, it was nothing more than just enough 'modernisation' to maximise the income extraction from the colony for the homeland. Nothing more or less.

 

[Drizzt]

After decades of colonial exploitation and neglect they needed help, you're over simplifying

Yes, that's why South Korea is still a 3rd world country as well .
Face it, if the Legacy of Colonialism was really a onesizefitsall excuse, then South Korea shouldn't be doing much better than the average of Africa. Yet it does.

 

[oberdada]

1. this should probably be moved to chat, it already has to much political commentary.

2. ignoring that ( not that easy, fucking triggers) and trying to concentrate on a historical discussion:

I believe that the foreign aid concept at least partly directs from colonial "white mans burden" concept.
There are also Internationalism, cold war times ideological struggle, missionaries and many other issues.

Looking at Somaliland, that as a not diplomatic recognized country gets no official foreign aid and is doing surprisingly well supports the thesis.

On the other hand, Israel also got lots of foreign aid for decades and that helped the country a lot.


To properly discuss this there is also need to defone foreign aid. Direct payments are obvious, but there are also developing project and thing like export guatantees.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Yes, that's why South Korea is still a 3rd world country as well .
Face it, if the Legacy of Colonialism was really a onesizefitsall excuse, then South Korea shouldn't be doing much better than the average of Africa. Yet it does.

For South Korea had a combination of aid, domestic exploitation and foreign investment to build up a large stock of 'sunk capital' to the stage it's now exporting capital overseas. It's one of the very few nations which have managed to get 'advanced' status since 1945.

US aid to Korea amounted to some $11.6 billion [in todays cash] between 1946 and 1980, as well as another $2.4 billion from Japan. In comparison, the whole of Africa got $13.8 billion in the same period. Stats on the 'aid in kind' is harder to calculate, but it's estimated that Korea got another $3.6 billion from the US between 1945 and 1953 alone. Being under the US military umbrella has it's bonuses; the most obvious meaning that for a long time Seoul could cheese-pair their defences [freeing up more cash to development].

 

[marathag]

Being under the US military umbrella has it's bonuses; the most obvious meaning that for a long time Seoul could cheese-pair their defences [freeing up more cash to developmen

But that involved making a choice to stand with the US, than seek the glory of Independence as a pure Third World State, and when that failed, drive over to more Pro Soviet viewpoint, which will gain you few Western Dollars for development.

 

[Fletch]

Only a completely evil, probably racist bastard would cut all foreign aid.

Since 1990, the number of people, supported by foreign aid in extreme poverty has halved. Foreign aid has played a large part in this. Aid quite literally fed people in refugee camps. People would have literally died if not for aid.

It was a source of pride that the UK spent more on foreign aid that any other G7 country (until this year due to Boris). Lives have been saved due to aid.

Anyone who thinks aid should be stopped is literally backing children dying. They can get in the sea.

Edit: I can see that the poll has a majority backing all aid to be cut. If you voted this way, take a bloody good look at yourself in the mirror.

You just supported people dying. How does it feel?

 

[CalBear]

Chat subject. Can not move due to poll.

Locked.