| SamuelRSmith said: The only issue with Africa is that they don't get enough globalisation (which is what I assume you mean by "global economic system"). In 2000, only 0.6% of North America's imports came from the poorest countries (which will mainly be sub-Saharan Africa), 0.5% of Europe's, and 0.3% of Japan's. Indeed, of the total imports in 2000 of the richest countries (NA, Europe, and Japan), only a total of 0.5% came from the least developed countries. This is actually less than the 1980s, where the figure was 0.9%. And it's obvious why, Africa simply doesn't make much worth importing. They should be, however, the continent in rich in land, labour, and a whole range of minerals and fuels - but there isn't the investment to tap into it. Many often blame the situation of the poorest countries on the fact that the wealthiest exploit them, this isn't true. Multi-national corporations often get the blame, and yet, they simply don't exist in any meaningful way in these countries - the latest data for foreign direct investment in Africa that I can find is 1998, where FDI into the entire continent was a mere $8.3bn (down on 1997, btw, by 12%). This is pitiful, foreign direct invesment into just the UK in 2005 was $165bn. Simply put, it's not that the West exploits Africa, it's simply that the West doesn't interact with Africa. Aside from aid (which is wasted money), the West might aswell just not exist for modern Africa. But, can you blaim the multi-nationals? They want to invest in places where they can get high returns on their investments. Poor infrastructure, high crime rates, uneducated work forces, and corruption at every level prevents this. All of these are results of poor governance from the leaders of Africa itself, you can blame this on the colonial days of old Europe, but not on the modern global economic structure. |
Doesn't mean the West and China export a crap load of resources out of Africa into Europe/USA/China. Yes, aid is wasted money and corporations won't invest in Africa because of the many corrupt regimes that exist there, I never denied that. Many of the dictators in Africa were supported by the USA during the cold war might I add. Like Mobutu in Congo and the murder of Patrice Lumumba(joint effort of the Belgian and USA government basically, with the Belgian government taking the moral guilt)
I hope you do know that the West dumps its goods(food, etc) into Africa for very very cheap prices disrupting the local systems that exist there which as I said before is an important way for them to survive. People are driven into cities because of this dis-rupture. American second-hand clothes for example are the most important import good in Tanzania. Dumped there at extremely low prices. Pretty much unfair competition.
And as I said is Lake Victoria a good example of what I'm trying to say. They released the "nijlsbaars"(dutch word don't know the english word for it, sorry) in the Lake so industrial fisheries could make millions of dollars from them. The fish they released however started to eat other fishes disrupting the local communities around the Lake(local fishermen). They also disrupted the biodiversity in the Lake(ecological cost) They were forced to leave their land and test their luck in the city.
You can't deny that the West/China is importing all the resources and "exporting" all the social and ecological costs.
You can most certainly blame the modern global economic structure. Yes, people have different visions about this subject(which is shown in the international debate), but that doesn't mean only one vision is the truth and all others are false.
