8 ms·

There was an interesting Danish documentary on foreign investments in Ethiopia titled "Dead donkeys fear no hyena's" [1]. It came down that economic investments

There was an interesting Danish documentary on foreign investments in Ethiopia titled "Dead donkeys fear no hyena's" [1]. It came down that economic investments (including from the World Bank) are used to drive indigenous people from their lands, that land is sold (outside of the public eye) to anonymous foreign agricultural corporations to start industrialized agriculture. However, those corporations will just export everything abroad, leaving the local people with little return, and, most importantly, without food. Promises of compensation, relocation and education are, of course, neglected, and people who dare to protest are met with arms. 1. http://www.deaddonkeysfearnohyenas.com/ http://www.deaddonkeysfearnohyenas.com/

pjc50 8y ago
> "Dead Donkeys Fear No Hyenas was triggered by a seemingly trivial scene at the airport in Addis Ababa, six years back. Waiting for my flight late at night, I happened to see some tired workers at the tarmac who were loading food products on an airplane destined for Europe. At the same time, another team was busy unloading sacks with food aid from a second plane. It took some time to realize the real meaning of it – that this famine struck country, where millions are dependent on food aid, is actually exporting food to us." This is straight out of the Potato Famine. :(
- sitkack 8y ago
  There is value in learning history, makes an excellent crib sheet.
- chocolatebunny 8y ago
  Or the famines of British India.
- Barrin92 8y ago
  >food products on an airplane destined for Europe. At the same time, another team was busy unloading sacks with food aid from a second plane. while everyone should acknowledge the degree of poverty that is still rampant in countries like Ethiopia, that image is not particularly well suited to make a point. It can be true that at the same time that Ethiopian farmers sell produce to Europe, while people from somewhere else try to alleviate poverty in the country. It would not make sense for farmers in Ethiopia to stop trading food with the world at large just because people in the country are hungry. In fact, depending on whatever economic transaction is going on, the food coming in might be significantly cheaper than the food going out. Trade and reducing poverty or hunger are not at odds. The goal should be to generate better incomes and social services for poor Ethiopians, not stopping businesses from trading with Ethiopia globally.
  - ballenarosada 8y ago
    On the contrary, the image itself is uncomfortably well suited to make a point. This comment is a classic example of defending an obvious absurdity of capitalism by appealing to the overall system. It's true that individuals are all acting rationally, and that imposing limits on exports would not be a panacea. However, at the most basic level, it is monstrous that food exports are happening in the context of local starvation. The rationality of the outcome within capitalism shouldn't blind us to the absurdity of the outcome itself.
    - Barrin92 8y ago
      There's really nothing absurd about this. A country like Ethiopia consists of independent actors. Someone might sell food abroad to Europe, someone in Europe might decide to send food to Ethiopia. There's really no way to stop this other than to outlaw all exports of food while starting to centrally distribute food in Ethiopia. This is neither productive nor would it reduce the amount of starving people in Ethiopia. In fact, it would increase the amount of poverty. There are certainly poor people who have trouble affording basic goods in California. Still the solution is not to stop all exports of goods from California to Washington and vice versa. This would just make everybody worse off.
      - ryandrake 8y ago
        A thing could be both morally/ethically absurd and, when viewed through the tinted lens of capitalism, totally logical, rational, and expected.
      - RobertoG 8y ago
        Any country that pretend to develop and keep some independence need to prioritize a minimum of food production. That's a strategic need. Europe is a good example of that, where food production is strongly protected. I bet is the same in the States. The point of the original post is that those "independent actors" are not "independents", not from Ethiopia.
        8y ago
- opinionator1 8y ago
  A lot of things don't make sense to people who don't understand economics.
- skybrian 8y ago
  It's striking, but trading a small amount of high-priced food for a much larger amount of low-priced food might be a good trade, provided that the imported food somehow gets to the people who need it. To get some real insight into this we'd need to find out what goes wrong when that last step doesn't happen.
  - javier2 8y ago
    This might go terribly wrong in the case where profits from this trade goes to foreign held companies, who pay the farmers next to nothing for their work, taking advantage of the situation where people are literally dying of starvation.
  - sunir 8y ago
    It is the same thing that allowed someone to decide to grow high priced export crops instead of feeding their neighbours. And the same thing that allows them to trade their crops for money. The country of Ethiopia is not one collective organization but made up of individuals. The enclosure of resources for individuals allow independent trade and returns, meaning that gains are not distributed across society but held by the individual. It is the same system everywhere. Why are schools underfunded? Why are homeless shelters underfunded? Why are food banks underfunded? Productivity is best held in individual hands. Taxation is the best mechanism to distribute wealth. However the taxes go through political hands and is thus corruptible.
    - Can_Not 8y ago
      > However the taxes go through political hands and is thus corruptible. Seems like an individual with too much money is just as corruptable.
- martinald 8y ago
  They are airfreighting food aid in?
erikpukinskis 8y ago
I’m generally loathe to make blanket statements about organizations, because they are made up of many people with many motives... But I’m pretty sure this is the entire purpose of the World Bank. Scam weak nations out of their resources and give them to extranational corporations. I think they have a “do good” arm but the “extricate resources” arm has final say. If the do good arm ever, say, started returning large amounts of productive land to indigenous farmers, that program would be quietly killed. The net effect of the do good arm is then just PR for the extricating of resources.
- ardent_uno 8y ago
  That's foolish. In order to start the gears of capitalism turning in a country you have to start somewhere. As the standard economic development model goes, agriculture -> industry -> services. In Ethiopia they are starting with advanced agriculture, and the World Bank is critical in jump starting that process. Foreign companies need to participate in a local economy when there are no local alternatives. The people don't get the food produced on their farms because they can't afford the food. They can't afford it because the Ethiopian economy is in its infancy. Sure it doesn't feel right when the food is being shipped out of the country, but that's how capitalism works. If Ethiopia plays by the rules of the game for the next few decades then their economy will grow the problems we see in today's Ethiopia will be diminished. Starting this process is the purpose of the World Bank.
  - darpa_escapee 8y ago
    If Ethiopians starve for a generation or two, maybe those who got rich by taking their land will employ their grandkids for minimum wage. Maybe there's a better way without inherent suffering?
  - alexbeloi 8y ago
    >The people don't get the food produced on their farms because they can't afford the food. They can't afford it because the Ethiopian economy is in its infancy. Sure it doesn't feel right when the food is being shipped out of the country, but that's how capitalism works. >If Ethiopia plays by the rules of the game for the next few decades then their economy will grow the problems we see in today's Ethiopia will be diminished. If someone came to you with this proposition, that your region would grow in a few decades (maybe in time for your grandchildren to benefit) while you watch your neighbors starve and the profits and food from your countries land is shipped overseas for the majority of your adult life, I hope you would do the sane thing and tell that person to fuck off. The "rules of the game" are "get yours, and get it now by whatever means capable", which is what countries with capability do and will continue to do. If their actions result in any benefit to the world outside their borders, it is incidental.
ejanus 8y ago
This is not news , Africa is the only continent that produces what it doesn't need but imports all that it needs. It is very unfortunate that Africans have not been able to break this colonial structure.
- ihsw2 8y ago
  They can start with the corrupt scum that enable this behavior, for example local warlords/political kingmakers that ingratiate themselves to the foreign markets and blatantly enrich themselves at the expense of their neighbors. They're not all "victims."
- jkaplowitz 8y ago
  Unlike most of Africa, Europeans never colonized Ethiopia. The closest they got is a 5-year occupation during World War II which is too short to count as true colonization.
  - albemuth 8y ago
    Until now?
    - jkaplowitz 8y ago
      This is still true. They do receive some foreign aid money from Western countries, including the US, but that's different from being a colony even if it is a tie to the global economic and geopolitical system.
  - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
    The Italian occupation was definitely an attempt at colonization. We can argue if it was considered temporarily successful or not, but I’m not sure what true colonization is like I’m not sure what a true Scotsman is.
    - jkaplowitz 8y ago
      Yeah they definitely tried to colonize Ethiopia then. We're agreeing. They simply failed to stay long enough to convert an occupation into a colonization.
johnchristopher 8y ago
You know the corruption mindset and very bad things are on the horizon when your gouvernement can't or is unwilling to protect its territory from foreign actors :/.
jopsen 8y ago
We absolutely should donate to end extreme poverty. And we should make our governments work towards this effort. But are the people employed, at what is admittedly low wages, better off than the alternative? And if we in the EU pressure for fair wages, then might this not be better than nothing?
Karishma1234 8y ago
When the land is sold who earns that money ? How do the foreign companies grow produce ? Do they employ local people ? From examples of India I personally feel the real issue here is the inability of the country to clearly enforce property rights and especially for poor and tribal people. (Tribal people might be better off selling off land to richer corporation and working in those fields as an employee)

pjc50 8y ago

> "Dead Donkeys Fear No Hyenas was triggered by a seemingly trivial scene at the airport in Addis Ababa, six years back. Waiting for my flight late at night, I happened to see some tired workers at the tarmac who were loading food products on an airplane destined for Europe. At the same time, another team was busy unloading sacks with food aid from a second plane. It took some time to realize the real meaning of it – that this famine struck country, where millions are dependent on food aid, is actually exporting food to us." This is straight out of the Potato Famine. :(

sitkack 8y ago
There is value in learning history, makes an excellent crib sheet.
chocolatebunny 8y ago
Or the famines of British India.
Barrin92 8y ago
>food products on an airplane destined for Europe. At the same time, another team was busy unloading sacks with food aid from a second plane. while everyone should acknowledge the degree of poverty that is still rampant in countries like Ethiopia, that image is not particularly well suited to make a point. It can be true that at the same time that Ethiopian farmers sell produce to Europe, while people from somewhere else try to alleviate poverty in the country. It would not make sense for farmers in Ethiopia to stop trading food with the world at large just because people in the country are hungry. In fact, depending on whatever economic transaction is going on, the food coming in might be significantly cheaper than the food going out. Trade and reducing poverty or hunger are not at odds. The goal should be to generate better incomes and social services for poor Ethiopians, not stopping businesses from trading with Ethiopia globally.
- ballenarosada 8y ago
  On the contrary, the image itself is uncomfortably well suited to make a point. This comment is a classic example of defending an obvious absurdity of capitalism by appealing to the overall system. It's true that individuals are all acting rationally, and that imposing limits on exports would not be a panacea. However, at the most basic level, it is monstrous that food exports are happening in the context of local starvation. The rationality of the outcome within capitalism shouldn't blind us to the absurdity of the outcome itself.
  - Barrin92 8y ago
    There's really nothing absurd about this. A country like Ethiopia consists of independent actors. Someone might sell food abroad to Europe, someone in Europe might decide to send food to Ethiopia. There's really no way to stop this other than to outlaw all exports of food while starting to centrally distribute food in Ethiopia. This is neither productive nor would it reduce the amount of starving people in Ethiopia. In fact, it would increase the amount of poverty. There are certainly poor people who have trouble affording basic goods in California. Still the solution is not to stop all exports of goods from California to Washington and vice versa. This would just make everybody worse off.
    - ryandrake 8y ago
      A thing could be both morally/ethically absurd and, when viewed through the tinted lens of capitalism, totally logical, rational, and expected.
    - RobertoG 8y ago
      Any country that pretend to develop and keep some independence need to prioritize a minimum of food production. That's a strategic need. Europe is a good example of that, where food production is strongly protected. I bet is the same in the States. The point of the original post is that those "independent actors" are not "independents", not from Ethiopia.
      - 8y ago
opinionator1 8y ago
A lot of things don't make sense to people who don't understand economics.
skybrian 8y ago
It's striking, but trading a small amount of high-priced food for a much larger amount of low-priced food might be a good trade, provided that the imported food somehow gets to the people who need it. To get some real insight into this we'd need to find out what goes wrong when that last step doesn't happen.
- javier2 8y ago
  This might go terribly wrong in the case where profits from this trade goes to foreign held companies, who pay the farmers next to nothing for their work, taking advantage of the situation where people are literally dying of starvation.
- sunir 8y ago
  It is the same thing that allowed someone to decide to grow high priced export crops instead of feeding their neighbours. And the same thing that allows them to trade their crops for money. The country of Ethiopia is not one collective organization but made up of individuals. The enclosure of resources for individuals allow independent trade and returns, meaning that gains are not distributed across society but held by the individual. It is the same system everywhere. Why are schools underfunded? Why are homeless shelters underfunded? Why are food banks underfunded? Productivity is best held in individual hands. Taxation is the best mechanism to distribute wealth. However the taxes go through political hands and is thus corruptible.
  - Can_Not 8y ago
    > However the taxes go through political hands and is thus corruptible. Seems like an individual with too much money is just as corruptable.
martinald 8y ago
They are airfreighting food aid in?

erikpukinskis 8y ago

I’m generally loathe to make blanket statements about organizations, because they are made up of many people with many motives... But I’m pretty sure this is the entire purpose of the World Bank. Scam weak nations out of their resources and give them to extranational corporations. I think they have a “do good” arm but the “extricate resources” arm has final say. If the do good arm ever, say, started returning large amounts of productive land to indigenous farmers, that program would be quietly killed. The net effect of the do good arm is then just PR for the extricating of resources.

ardent_uno 8y ago
That's foolish. In order to start the gears of capitalism turning in a country you have to start somewhere. As the standard economic development model goes, agriculture -> industry -> services. In Ethiopia they are starting with advanced agriculture, and the World Bank is critical in jump starting that process. Foreign companies need to participate in a local economy when there are no local alternatives. The people don't get the food produced on their farms because they can't afford the food. They can't afford it because the Ethiopian economy is in its infancy. Sure it doesn't feel right when the food is being shipped out of the country, but that's how capitalism works. If Ethiopia plays by the rules of the game for the next few decades then their economy will grow the problems we see in today's Ethiopia will be diminished. Starting this process is the purpose of the World Bank.
- darpa_escapee 8y ago
  If Ethiopians starve for a generation or two, maybe those who got rich by taking their land will employ their grandkids for minimum wage. Maybe there's a better way without inherent suffering?
- alexbeloi 8y ago
  >The people don't get the food produced on their farms because they can't afford the food. They can't afford it because the Ethiopian economy is in its infancy. Sure it doesn't feel right when the food is being shipped out of the country, but that's how capitalism works. >If Ethiopia plays by the rules of the game for the next few decades then their economy will grow the problems we see in today's Ethiopia will be diminished. If someone came to you with this proposition, that your region would grow in a few decades (maybe in time for your grandchildren to benefit) while you watch your neighbors starve and the profits and food from your countries land is shipped overseas for the majority of your adult life, I hope you would do the sane thing and tell that person to fuck off. The "rules of the game" are "get yours, and get it now by whatever means capable", which is what countries with capability do and will continue to do. If their actions result in any benefit to the world outside their borders, it is incidental.

ejanus 8y ago

This is not news , Africa is the only continent that produces what it doesn't need but imports all that it needs. It is very unfortunate that Africans have not been able to break this colonial structure.

ihsw2 8y ago
They can start with the corrupt scum that enable this behavior, for example local warlords/political kingmakers that ingratiate themselves to the foreign markets and blatantly enrich themselves at the expense of their neighbors. They're not all "victims."
jkaplowitz 8y ago
Unlike most of Africa, Europeans never colonized Ethiopia. The closest they got is a 5-year occupation during World War II which is too short to count as true colonization.
- albemuth 8y ago
  Until now?
  - jkaplowitz 8y ago
    This is still true. They do receive some foreign aid money from Western countries, including the US, but that's different from being a colony even if it is a tie to the global economic and geopolitical system.
- seanmcdirmid 8y ago
  The Italian occupation was definitely an attempt at colonization. We can argue if it was considered temporarily successful or not, but I’m not sure what true colonization is like I’m not sure what a true Scotsman is.
  - jkaplowitz 8y ago
    Yeah they definitely tried to colonize Ethiopia then. We're agreeing. They simply failed to stay long enough to convert an occupation into a colonization.

johnchristopher 8y ago

You know the corruption mindset and very bad things are on the horizon when your gouvernement can't or is unwilling to protect its territory from foreign actors :/.

jopsen 8y ago

We absolutely should donate to end extreme poverty. And we should make our governments work towards this effort. But are the people employed, at what is admittedly low wages, better off than the alternative? And if we in the EU pressure for fair wages, then might this not be better than nothing?

Karishma1234 8y ago

When the land is sold who earns that money ? How do the foreign companies grow produce ? Do they employ local people ? From examples of India I personally feel the real issue here is the inability of the country to clearly enforce property rights and especially for poor and tribal people. (Tribal people might be better off selling off land to richer corporation and working in those fields as an employee)