4 ms·

> but work out what it’ll take for the country to not need it and try to get there.. One moment. You are just asking to increase the program that will take gen

> but work out what it’ll take for the country to not need it and try to get there.. One moment. You are just asking to increase the program that will take generations, while being dependent on factors you don't influence. Many African countries are overrun by Russian wagnerites, who protect local war lords and take control of natural resources. Part of the program is to ensure ongoing chaos and prevent local development. Some other African countries are burried by Chinese debt, their "development" agenda is set by China with focus on extracting natural resources. So that is why health, democracy, rule of law and state building is not on the agenda. Thus children die. The USA has/had an organized administration, laws, police, hospitals etc. But if Americans in comfort even then bow their head for a weird mix of criminals and sectarians, what magic agency would you expect from a population living from health crisis to health crisis in extreme poverty?

sillyfluke 1y ago
Although I think your general position is by and large correct, it would test the limits of credulity to think that previous US administrations did not use USAID to extract concessions from African countries for decades prior. The case can be made that it is the better of three evils perhaps, but how far one can argue past that is a more difficult proposition. And one also needs to explain why Russia, who prefers making deals with a single person on the other side (ie a dictator) in the rest of world, would rather deal with a bunch of warring warlords when it comes to Africa.
- exceptione 1y ago
  > it would test the limits of credulity to think that previous US administrations > did not use USAID to extract concessions from African countries for decades prior. Sure. But it is about what strings are attached. If we normalize self serving transactionalism, we will self-corrupt. The correct strings to attach would be those which pushes towards a democratic rule of law, which would eventually enable the affected society to self-sustain them. Now you can already hear the bots coming out of the woods: "who is the west to tell countries what is right/WOKE!/ western colonialism" etc. We should never take advantage of a country in need. Our philosophy is win-win. > Russia, who prefers making deals with a single person on the other side (ie a dictator) Sure, and they do that too! But not all governments are in official control of all their territory. The Kremlin network, just like the current USA government, ascribe to the notion of "might makes right". Helping a local warlord making a coup to extract more is business as usual. The war in the west is not about Trump, nor about transgenders, but about the mind of normal citizens. How much of this criminal mindset has been normalized already?
- exceptione 1y ago
  ... I will add one more bit food for thought: if people started to realize that "multi-polar world" is dictator-lingo for "hegemons exploiting smaller countries", and what it means in practical matters, of which this topic is just a single instance, how many would still prefer it?

sillyfluke 1y ago

Although I think your general position is by and large correct, it would test the limits of credulity to think that previous US administrations did not use USAID to extract concessions from African countries for decades prior. The case can be made that it is the better of three evils perhaps, but how far one can argue past that is a more difficult proposition. And one also needs to explain why Russia, who prefers making deals with a single person on the other side (ie a dictator) in the rest of world, would rather deal with a bunch of warring warlords when it comes to Africa.

exceptione 1y ago
> it would test the limits of credulity to think that previous US administrations > did not use USAID to extract concessions from African countries for decades prior. Sure. But it is about what strings are attached. If we normalize self serving transactionalism, we will self-corrupt. The correct strings to attach would be those which pushes towards a democratic rule of law, which would eventually enable the affected society to self-sustain them. Now you can already hear the bots coming out of the woods: "who is the west to tell countries what is right/WOKE!/ western colonialism" etc. We should never take advantage of a country in need. Our philosophy is win-win. > Russia, who prefers making deals with a single person on the other side (ie a dictator) Sure, and they do that too! But not all governments are in official control of all their territory. The Kremlin network, just like the current USA government, ascribe to the notion of "might makes right". Helping a local warlord making a coup to extract more is business as usual. The war in the west is not about Trump, nor about transgenders, but about the mind of normal citizens. How much of this criminal mindset has been normalized already?
exceptione 1y ago
... I will add one more bit food for thought: if people started to realize that "multi-polar world" is dictator-lingo for "hegemons exploiting smaller countries", and what it means in practical matters, of which this topic is just a single instance, how many would still prefer it?