3 ms·

To add to sp332's comment: A common, very large problem in development and other types of foreign aid (military, etc.) is 'expert' outsiders with little local

To add to sp332's comment: A common, very large problem in development and other types of foreign aid (military, etc.) is 'expert' outsiders with little local knowledge telling the locals what they should be doing. It results in a lot of wasted money and harm to the recipients. Also, I'm sure most reading this wouldn't appreciate 'experts' from another country (e.g., Japan) coming to your community and imposing their ideas on your government, business practices, and way of life. It's far worse with military 'aid', which can result in your family dead, you homeless, and your country in ruins for generations. American assistance to Iraq resulted in >100,000 dead (by conservative estimates), an ongoing civil war, and untold crime and destruction. We thought democracy would blossom as soon as we removed Hussein; one absurd example: We actually had personnel there trying to setup a stock market soon after the invasion.

dragonwriter 12y ago
> Also, I'm sure most reading this wouldn't appreciate 'experts' from another country (e.g., Japan) coming to your community and imposing their ideas on your government, business practices, and way of life. I don't appreciate anyone (outsiders or not) imposing their ideas on my government, business practices, or way of life; but that doesn't mean that foreigner's arguments as to policy are less valid because of their status as foreigners. In fact, I think that one of the big problems in US policy is an often willful blindness to outside experience and a very big dose of NIH syndrome. > We thought democracy would blossom as soon as we removed Hussein Well, you might have. Plenty of Americans -- including many experts, and pretty much everyone whose argument supporting their belief referenced actual facts of history of other conflicts -- did not. Certainly, plenty of members of the senior leadership of the US administration -- people like Doug Feith, Richard Perle, and Paul Wolfowitz -- made statements that indicated that they did, but then there's probably a reason that, e.g., General Tommy Franks described Feith as the "dumbest f-ing guy on the planet". Seems to me that situation is further evidence for evaluating people's policy positions based on the content of the support for their argument, rather than simply their nationality or other positional traits.

dragonwriter 12y ago

> Also, I'm sure most reading this wouldn't appreciate 'experts' from another country (e.g., Japan) coming to your community and imposing their ideas on your government, business practices, and way of life. I don't appreciate anyone (outsiders or not) imposing their ideas on my government, business practices, or way of life; but that doesn't mean that foreigner's arguments as to policy are less valid because of their status as foreigners. In fact, I think that one of the big problems in US policy is an often willful blindness to outside experience and a very big dose of NIH syndrome. > We thought democracy would blossom as soon as we removed Hussein Well, you might have. Plenty of Americans -- including many experts, and pretty much everyone whose argument supporting their belief referenced actual facts of history of other conflicts -- did not. Certainly, plenty of members of the senior leadership of the US administration -- people like Doug Feith, Richard Perle, and Paul Wolfowitz -- made statements that indicated that they did, but then there's probably a reason that, e.g., General Tommy Franks described Feith as the "dumbest f-ing guy on the planet". Seems to me that situation is further evidence for evaluating people's policy positions based on the content of the support for their argument, rather than simply their nationality or other positional traits.