A durable solution for Africa

I can think of only one, and it's rather drastic, let's recolonise parts of the damn place, with force if needed. Birthrates are too high it can never be sustainable, but we can hardly let them starve either. We have the expertise to make sure there is enough food, and the military capacity to ensure the stability. In a period of 30 years we can build it up the and teach them how to do it themselves, after that we leave. We would be taking away their freedom and dignity, but in the long term we would help them. Africa will not improve when left to their own devices

If there were a way to move the continent farther away from Yemen well that would be a start.

Isn't the overall stats for Africa improving... not as fast as India or let alone China, but overall Africa as a continent is getting better... particularly the non-oil countries.

well. africa is pretty :daisy: up right now, but who can tell that China, no more than 30 years ago is also still :daisy: up as well and now they are better than USA in some aspects?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

I can think of only one, and it's rather drastic, let's recolonise parts of the damn place, with force if needed. Birthrates are too high it can never be sustainable, but we can hardly let them starve either. We have the expertise to make sure there is enough food, and the military capacity to ensure the stability. In a period of 30 years we can build it up the and teach them how to do it themselves, after that we leave. We would be taking away their freedom and dignity, but in the long term we would help them. Africa will not improve when left to their own devices

---

And if they don't comply we can just send them to concentration camps. Yeah.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

Isn't the overall stats for Africa improving... not as fast as India or let alone China, but overall Africa as a continent is getting better... particularly the non-oil countries.

---

7 of the countries on the top 10 list for highest expected economic growth in the next 10 years are african.

They are all relatively politically stavle, howevr. That is the main factor in Africa, not economic system or resources, but stability and peace.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by classical_hero

And if they don't comply we can just send them to concentration camps. Yeah.

---

Why if we just stop feeding them they die out of theirselves no

The most durable solution for Africa is just to not care, look the other way and let them solve everything themselves like we did ourselves. Placing them on a food-and-money infuse isn't helping anyone and is just killing any impulse to let them do anything themselves, it is just a neverending cycle. Africa is fertile enough, they should manage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skullhead

The most durable solution for Africa is just to not care, look the other way and let them solve everything themselves like we did ourselves. Placing them on a food-and-money infuse isn't helping anyone and is just killing any impulse to let them do anything themselves, it is just a neverending cycle. Africa is fertile enough, they should manage.

---

Horrible but true, but we got to be able to help somehow, you don't just let your fellow humans die

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

They are all relatively politically stavle, howevr.

---

You mean 'stable' dictatorships in which the undeserving few usurp all the riches.

I wouldn't mind colonising any backward dictatorship, if only it were feasible. There will be tremendous resistance however, and even in places where there isn't, it will be impossible to enforce democracy, install a middle class, raise education levels and improve productivity without the whole operation spiralling into chaos. I mean, whom would you entrust with mission? Ngo's? :rolleyes:

AII

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Horrible but true, but we got to be able to help somehow, you don't just let your fellow humans die

---

If we feed them now, the next food crisis will be 8 times worse. Somalia obviously can't handle this huge number of inhabitants.

Yes, leave them alone.

The reasons loads of africans die in the famines is because there are too many people for the land to support and the rulers can also use famine as a weapon in itself.

We let our fellow humans die all the time. But it would be better for them to die once rather than cling on to life, have a litter of malnourished children and for the cycle to continue.

The concept of a country taking over a piece of Africa, replacing the existing beaurocratic apparatus with something that works better, possibly even redefining borders and then leaving the locals to sort themselves out is tantamount to Racism as you are clearly saying that the locals are less able to do this than Europeans.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

The concept of a country taking over a piece of Africa, replacing the existing beaurocratic apparatus with something that works better, possibly even redefining borders and then leaving the locals to sort themselves out is tantamount to Racism as you are clearly saying that the locals are less able to do this than Europeans.

~:smoking:

---

Because it is regarded as racist doesn't mean it doesn't work better. And the locals have, over the course of 60 years, clearly shown that they are less able. The permanent state of civil war and food crises just proves it.

The next big multi-national campaign is going to be North Africa. This has been in the works since well before the Libya debacle: despots, pirates and islamofascists all working side by side, pretty obvious actually.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skullhead

Because it is regarded as racist doesn't mean it doesn't work better. And the locals have, over the course of 60 years, clearly shown that they are less able. The permanent state of civil war and food crises just proves it.

---

Sure. But not able is not the same as not capable. Now if we put the money we throw away now in something that can work. Screw the accusationss of racism and govern for while

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Sure. But not able is not the same as not capable. Now if we put the money we throw away now in something that can work. Screw the accusationss of racism and govern for while

---

We did it once, and they screwed up afterwards and we were seen as evil and blamed for the failure of what happened afterwards, even to this day some hold this view.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adrian II

You mean 'stable' dictatorships in which the undeserving few usurp all the riches.

I wouldn't mind colonising any backward dictatorship, if only it were feasible. There will be tremendous resistance however, and even in places where there isn't, it will be impossible to enforce democracy, install a middle class, raise education levels and improve productivity without the whole operation spiralling into chaos. I mean, whom would you entrust with mission? Ngo's? :rolleyes:

AII

---

Don't we all dream for that one Cinncinnatus esque military genius? A man (or woman) who is smart enough to rule and fix somewhere like this but who is incorruptible and truly wishes to bring the nation up......

Unfortunately such individuals with the ability to seize power are few and far between and those who could do so are usually found within the worlds western militaries. Which is nearly worthless because what fragony is suggesting is likely to never happen.

When I saw the thread title, and the person who started it, I laughed a lot. When I opened the thread, I laughed some more.

I agree with recolonization, but why leaving? Why should a economical failing Europe invest in defeating well equipped and modern armies, plus having to endure guerilla groups in every single country, and then dumping loads of money (Provided we actually manage to defeat or minimize guerrilla groups), and then leaving?

If we actually went in, we would be there to stay for another couple hundred years. Africa has a huge economical potential, but its elites are braindead retarded, most of the African societies are run on corruption and patronage. Wealth and opportunity are absorbed and siphoned off to those elites. We'd have a green-based electrical powerhouse in the Sahara if it were up to the Europeans, providing a much cheaper and reliable alternative to the Russian imports. And that is just one side of how a united Europe could turn a colonial Africa into a superpower.

We could really start with Somalia. Invade the whole :daisy: thing and implement European colonial rule. No more pirates in a year's time.

Meh. There's lots of misery in Africa, but if you were truly intent on fixing it I suggest you donate some money to the likes of Oxfam and leave the White Man's Burden at home. Micro credit beats colonial rule.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skullhead

We did it once, and they we all screwed up afterwards

---

Exploitation, slavery, humiliation and bloodshed left their mark on Africa at least as much as railways, schools, cigarettes and Albert Schweitzer did.

Afterwards everybody screwed up, not just Africans. The greatpowers mangled that continent and bled it dry with their proxy wars and military coups and fights over minerals.

I don't know, I have a sense that somehow we're not welcome yet as overlords of Africa.

AII

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jolt

..., but its elites are braindead ...

---

and ours are better? :inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

and ours are better? :inquisitive:

---

I am going to answer that one............... YES. A thousand times YES.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Centurion1

I am going to answer that one............... YES. A thousand times YES.

---

And I think that political leaders will get away with what ever they can.

I don’t think that a Bill Clinton or George Bush would govern an African country much different from the leaders they have.

When someone has power of that extent they tend to use it in the same way.

Look at the colonial legacy and see if they are not handling things in much the same way as those who came before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

and ours are better? :inquisitive:

---

I'll leave that as a rhethorical.

So would a "durable" solution be something similar to a "final" solution? Oh, I couldn't help myself! Thank you, thank you, I'll be playing here all week. Try the veal. Tip your waitress -- but don't tip her over!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adrian II

You mean 'stable' dictatorships in which the undeserving few usurp all the riches.

AII

---

No, I do not.

Europe installs ruthless colonial regimes which pillage the natural resources, all the while pllaying ethnic and tribal strife against eachother

Then Europe leaves in the dead of night leaving the colonial head crackers in charge. They in turn become ruthless despots...surprise

Now we should do it again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

Look at the colonial legacy and see if they are not handling things in much the same way as those who came before.

---

India was a colony, so were Singapore and Malaysia. Seems to be that colony =/= automatic failure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

India was a colony, so were Singapore and Malaysia. Seems to be that colony =/= automatic failure.

---

No indeed an ex colony does not always mean present failure, the failure's in the places you mention were when the Empire was still knocking about.

Wait can you rephrase that. The syntax has me confused. The statement doesn't really make any sense. I have an idea what you meant but I am not sure.