By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 01 November 2011
Edit Thread
sad.man.loves.vgc said:
Kasz216 said:

I think this is just a plan by David Cameron to slash the foreign aid budget.

On the one hand, it sounds like a good idea to try and force gay rights.

Though on the other hand, i worry about the Anti-UK blowback in countries where people will suddenly begin starving combined with cultures that wouldn't even recognize gay rights if they weren't ruled by autocrats.

One could even argue that by having it forced by another government, actual acceptence of such a law would take even longer.

Complicated issue.


Does he need excuses to cut foreign aid? Isn't it natural for anyone to want the money for their people? who would blame them really? sincere questions because the way you phrased it implies that he HAS TO give foreign aid.

Bolded: I agree. It's an interesting idea for sure but I don't think it will work. I mean even if it does social acceptance for such rights will require decades and decades. I also agree with the fact that forcing changes may have an opposite result. People are extremely intolerant to the westren values and they will reject them more if they get imposed upon them.

Despite all that, I say cut us off. Corruption rate in Jordan is ridiculous and we are not getting most of that money anyway.

Kind of an off-topic question (also for you Kaz)... How come forign aids are never mentioned in our books, news, newspapers or in any form? Shouldn't they let the people know that the west is actually helping us in somehow?  maybe that will help in closing gaps and raising tolerance and acceptance for the west.

1) You'd be surprised.  It could be different in the UK, but in the US only Ron Paul type libretarians want to cut foreign aid.

Republic and Democratic politicians see it as their duty as a more advanced country...

While the average voter either sees it  as needed charity work (Even a lot of below the poverty line people often give to charity)

or

Proof of America's "superiority" for the pessimistic side.

People seem more willing to give money to a starving African, then to a starving american because in general the american is perceived as at least has/had a chance.  Oddly pretty much anyone would cut Welfare programs before they cut foreign aid.

2)  Yeah, i probably agree... on both fronts as far as whether it should be cut off and whether it should help.  Applying basic civil rights for people is way more complicated then it should be, then again what isn't.

3)  There could be three reasons.  The first is... shame really.   I mean, who wants to admit they're accepting handouts from another country? 

The Second is the corruption.  Why advertise something when your stealing 90% of it. (A common foreign aid problem.)

The third is dislike of america can be a powerful tool.  In general American hate has made a great scapegoat for all kinds of rulers and their problems.

It's why I'm actually against most economic sanctions... pretty much all of them except military based ones.

All sanctions do is hurt the poor people since the rich corrupt people are rich, and can then just use the sanctions as an excuse for why things are bad for the poor.