Should Developed Countries Give Aid to Developing Countries?

[Dumuzi]

Re: Should Developed Countries Give Aid to Developing Countries?

India was extremely powerful and extremely wealthy long before the British got there. That's why they wanted to rule it in the first place.

Isn't also true that India and Pakistan used to be one land/people before the British arrived?

[DanieMarie]

Re: Should Developed Countries Give Aid to Developing Countries?

Yes - and it was divided into small kingdoms in a near continuous state of warfare....

So was Europe

[Tylluan Penry]

Re: Should Developed Countries Give Aid to Developing Countries?

Yes - and it was divided into small kingdoms in a near continuous state of warfare....

Please understand - I am not suggesting the India was better off under, or even after, British rule. However, British rule did have an effect, and the effect was not entirely bad. That's all.

Yes I quite understand and you will even find this view amongst people from India. But the idea of small kingdoms in a near continuous state of warfare could equally be applied to 18th Century Europe - in over a hundred years, barely a year went by without some war or another being in progress.

- - - Updated - - -

Isn't also true that India and Pakistan used to be one land/people before the British arrived?

Yes. And Bangladesh too, I think.

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Should Developed Countries Give Aid to Developing Countries?

Yes I quite understand and you will even find this view amongst people from India. But the idea of small kingdoms in a near continuous state of warfare could equally be applied to 18th Century Europe - in over a hundred years, barely a year went by without some war or another being in progress.

Well, you got a point there.

I should know better than to argue history with you, Tylluan...

[Tylluan Penry]

Re: Should Developed Countries Give Aid to Developing Countries?

Well, you got a point there.

I should know better than to argue history with you, Tylluan...

Not at all, Corbin. The whole argument about giving foreign aid always throws up the arguments of colonialisation, which is a pity, because the whole thing is so much more complex than that. And I do feel though, that the west still won't accept the role it has played in impoverishing so much of the globe. And until it does, nothing will change.

It's not about subsidising others at the expense of ourselves. It's about putting things right for the poor everywhere.

[Maria de Luna]

Re: Should Developed Countries Give Aid to Developing Countries?

N
It's not about subsidising others at the expense of ourselves. It's about putting things right for the poor everywhere.

This here is exactly how I feel!

Not everyone wants to be fished out of being poor, some people have some pride, but some assistance or a hand here or there are often more welcome too. I think education is often underconsidered when talking about foreign aid. People need to eat, but they need to know how to feed themselves too. people have the same problem in this country. There is a food bank available if you need it, but not any way to farm or come up with ways to get your own healthier food. the systems all need to be revamped, they just don't work correctly.

[Dumuzi]

Re: Should Developed Countries Give Aid to Developing Countries?

It's not about subsidising others at the expense of ourselves. It's about putting things right for the poor everywhere.

Exactly. Tylluan Penry, if you run for president of earth I would vote for you.

[Tylluan Penry]

Re: Should Developed Countries Give Aid to Developing Countries?

Exactly. Tylluan Penry, if you run for president of earth I would vote for you.

Thank you!

[westwoden]

Re: Should Developed Countries Give Aid to Developing Countries?

Point taken.

I'm also waiting for someone to tell me off for calling westwoden a racist (in another thread) in a "even if he/she is, you shouldn't say so" way. I tend to call a spade a spade. I told you not to be dumb because I know you're not normally.

sure, I'll do the honours!

This is an official telling off: You are not to call Westwoden racist as he is actually a nice fluffy bunny. lol::

BTW: My girlfriend is of another race to me so I can't be racist anyway, right?

[Medusa]

Re: Should Developed Countries Give Aid to Developing Countries?

sure, I'll do the honours!



BTW: My girlfriend is of another race to me so I can't be racist anyway, right?

Oh hun. Have you learned nothing on the internet?
Every racist person who thinks they aren't racist says the same thing. My best friend is, my co-worker is, my mail man is.

Just stop while you are ahead!


*I don't know or care if you are racist or not so no sweat.

[westwoden]

Re: Should Developed Countries Give Aid to Developing Countries?

I was being ironic, and was originally going to say 'one of my friends is black' , lol:B):

[AL!CE]

Re: Should Developed Countries Give Aid to Developing Countries?

BTW: My girlfriend is of another race to me so I can't be racist anyway, right?

That would depend on what ethnicity you are and what ethnicity she is. I'm a different race to my girlfriend: I'm English, she's Scottish but we're both white with dirty-blonde hair.

Also let's say you're white and your girlfriend is south east asian (e.g. Japanese), you could still be racist towards black people or people from the Indian sub-continent...

[Tylluan Penry]

Re: Should Developed Countries Give Aid to Developing Countries?

Personally I believe the only way to 'prove' one isn't racist is.... not to be racist.

[darksyderainmaker]

Re: Should Developed Countries Give Aid to Developing Countries?

I realize this may be a bit of putting the cart before the horse, or building a cart before horses have been invented...or something. Basically, I think we should all leave well enough alone. Not because I don't believe in helping people, because I do. I think it's one of the purest forms of art we can achieve as the human species, and something that each and every one of us (with only a few exceptions) has the ability to do. I do agree that each country should be taking care of its own first, but come on. Who are we kidding? Until we can get out of the capitalist hierarchical systems that were built back when it seemed like a good idea to I don't know who, nothing will change, because the ultimate goal will be survival, and the only mostly-agreed-upon term to survival (in economic terms, anyway, which is all that matters in capitalist systems) is expansion. As long as that is the end goal, nothing else can thrive. Because everything else must become fuel for the end goal. And as our capacity to create the technology to mine the resources expands, so too does our population, making it necessary to have more resources, which of course are ever-dwindling. And when someone stands up and says 'Excuse me, but what about this planet/country/etc we're destroying? What are we going to do about it?', government officials and other people in places of power scream 'ANARCHY!' and run for the hills.

What does this all have to do with helping out developing countries, you might ask? Everything. I have heard it stated that 'they are in this mess because they brought it upon themselves'. And who can argue? Within reason, that's correct. Each country has its own agenda, its own wars to fight among itself, usually, like most countries, dictated upon it by the few who are so far removed from the situation at hand that it is more like a myth to them than any kind of reality. Making decisions, to these people, is like moving pieces on a gameboard. I know that politics is more nuanced than that, but it seems like so often the leaders of nations take the 'easy' way out (corruption, exploitation, getting into bed with sinister agendas) rather than tackle the root of the problem. And, really, what can change until this happens? Nothing. It's the old adage: you can vote out an ineffective leader, but as long as you are voting another one into the same system, nothing will change.

This is why I say that my opinion on the matter is to leave well enough alone. Especially since, while most 'developed' countries have no problem exploiting others for resources, manpower, and whatever else they see fit, they also have no problem invading said countries, striking areas of poverty, justifying crimes of tremendous proportions over those who have little or no means of defending themselves, and then claiming they do it for the well-being and protection of their own nations.

It would be nice to believe that we could set up organizations to help people in need, whether or not they are in our own countries or abroad. It would be nice to be able to just help people without, in turn, feeling like we somehow own them, or like they owe us something. Someone else earlier hit it on the head: we have all this money for wars and the like...and then nothing to support our own social assistance programs, our own healthcare programs, to say nothing of those of other countries. And the North American stance towards recipients of said programs seems to reflect the utter lack of concern about its own citizens. People in need are often viewed as 'weak', 'lazy', 'unwilling to work', the list goes on and on. How can we possibly help anyone until we can stop looking down on them?

(In addendum, I will note that this is not an attack on any one specific individual or group. It's merely my own thoughts, mostly based on my own experience on someone who lives in poverty in a 'developed' country.)