Ron Bailey urges us to forget Bono. It's Microsoft billionare Bill Gates who just might be Africa's savior.
New at Reason
Comments to "New at Reason":
Ersatz Joe | January 29, 2008, 3:31pm | #
"Poor infrastructure" means that governments built no roads over which seeds, fertilizers and pesticides could be shipped cheaply to farmers.Hey, I thought you Libertarians didn't think governments were supposed to build roads.
John | January 29, 2008, 3:32pm | #
"In The Seattle Times, Food First executive director Eric Holt-Gimenez denounced the Gates Foundation's efforts to foster an African Green Revolution. "It's a corporate strategy for colonizing Africa's food and agriculture systems, which thus far have resisted," he said. "Yes because AFricans are better off starving than living under the thumb of capitalism. I love how people like this are always willing to sacrifice other people's lives for their principles. Something tells me that Mr. Himenez hasn't missed many meals in his life.
Cesar | January 29, 2008, 3:35pm | #
John, you have to understand leftist thought.Corporate=evil, even if starvation is the alternative.
JW | January 29, 2008, 3:38pm | #
Food First executive director Eric Holt-Gimenez denounced the Gates Foundation's efforts to foster an African Green Revolution. "It's a corporate strategy for colonizing Africa's food and agriculture systems, which thus far have resisted," he said. "Ooooo, I bet he's been waiting to use that line for a while now.
What. A. Fucking. Tool.
Ventifact | January 29, 2008, 3:43pm | #
Libertarians would never be hard-nosed about principle, considering practicalities later...Danny | January 29, 2008, 3:44pm | #
Ersatz Joe:Who else is going to build them? Wealthy private companies? Ooh, I know, they can read the license plates and send road users a bill. They could even charge directly to their credit cards! Toll booths might work in Africa, if people traded consistently in anything other than livestock.
I had a foster brother from Sudan that would often see a beautiful woman and say, "I'd give two fat cows for that girl!" God, he is hilarious, and it's always a treat to learn how other parts of the world run things.
So, yeah, at this point, government-built roads seem like the only foreseeable solution (as far as roads go). As far as I'm concerned, being a libertarian is going for the best solution for individuals, even if that means getting the government involved. If government wasn't so inherently evil, it might happen rightly more often.
jackanapestarian | January 29, 2008, 3:52pm | #
One wonders what colonial Africa might have become if liberalism had had a chance to take hold. How many home-rule success stories are there? Why is Africa a perpetual basket case?BakedPenguin | January 29, 2008, 4:12pm | #
Why is Africa a perpetual basket case?1) War
2) Government corruption
R C Dean | January 29, 2008, 4:55pm | #
"It's a corporate strategy for colonizing Africa's food and agriculture systems, which thus far have resisted," he said.Yeah, and look how well that's turning out.
Road building technology is hardly limited to governments, so yeah, I'd assume there's something other than mere government neglect that accounts for lack of African roads. That said, as bad as governments are, accountable ones are usually a little better than unaccountable ones. And it's certainly possible, although by no means definite, that governments have a comparative advantage in road building owing to eminent domain (and being able to get people to ante up whether they'll use the road or not doesn't hurt either, even if it's not exactly fair).
Ron Bailey | January 29, 2008, 5:40pm | #
All: It might well be that private roads would be built in African countries if there governments were not so corrupt. The larger point is that governments are enforcing poverty. In my column "Poor Planning: How to achieve the miracle of poverty" I gave free advice to kleptocrats on how to manufacture poverty and keep their people down.This will likely come to nought as long as present trade practices are maintained that allow developed countries to dump their subsidized produce into developing nations that have been forbidden by the IMF or other agencies from doing anything about it.
alisa | January 29, 2008, 5:49pm | #
"Who cares if a cat is white or black, so long as it catches mice?"Deng Xiaopeng, actually.
In the pragmatic (ha) spirit of Communist China, can somebody explain why we haven't beaten cholera yet? All it takes is a salt-and-sugar packet to prevent the water loss from diarrhea that causes death. Richard Cash developed it in the 60's, and it's working in Bangladesh, but there's still an epidemic in Africa (and governments have a bias towards vaccines over the cheaper and more effective rehydration packets.)
Lurker Kurt | January 29, 2008, 5:53pm | #
Danny,I believe Ersatz Joe was imitating another H&R poster's potential response for humorous purposes.
You may want to have your humor gauge checked to make sure it is working correctly.
T | January 29, 2008, 5:55pm | #
alisa,Because almost all African governments find famine and disease useful tools for eliminating rival power groups. If the proles are starving and disease ridden, they aren't going to storm the palisades of the government building and demand change.
Windtell | January 29, 2008, 5:56pm | #
The anti-African trade policies of the EU to protect its subsidized farms are breath taking in their stupidity. I live in the heart of Europe and I can attest that produce is both awful and pricey.That being said, more power to Bill and keep up the good work, I can only hope that he succeeds.
Lurker Kurt | January 29, 2008, 5:57pm | #
I must say, if I were living on the brink of starvation, I would gladly welcome some colonial overlords.Clemsonuee | January 29, 2008, 6:34pm | #
This can't be right. Steve Jobs is really cool, hip, and cares. Bill Gates is greedy, dorky, and I assume kicks kittens when he can. I mean all those Apple fans can't have been wrong could they?BakedPenguin | January 29, 2008, 6:35pm | #
Aresen, thx for "OECD". I was going to point out the US's not-so-productive policies, but you beat me to it.douglas gray | January 29, 2008, 6:56pm | #
Zimbabwe didn't need Bill Gates when it was Rhodesia run by white farmers.Two things are needed for successful farming; the technical expertise and enough social stability to get your crop to market and get paid.
What has happened in Africa is the closest thing to ATLAS SHRUGGED, only the competent farmers did not go on strike, they were kicked off the land by stupid black despots.
Don't think Bill Gates can fix this one.
Don't look for private roads in Africa any time soon. Why would a I build a private road(large farm, power plant etc...) only to have the govt nationalize it. With the exception of areas, Africa's govts take the concept of kleptocracy to a hyperbolic level. Africa is such a beautiful place, it's a shame the people are subjected to such grinding poverty by their govts with the complicity of western govts.
Gary Owen | January 29, 2008, 7:36pm | #
In order to see the whole picture regarding price behavior, one should consider the following:http://www.wilsoncenter.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=wq.essay&essay_id=359819
It is the Wilson Center, but it has some context that any interested observer should consider.
Franklin Harris | January 29, 2008, 9:27pm | #
Meanwhile, I received a press release from the Ayn Rand Institute attacking Bill Gates:Memo to Gates: The Cause of Third-World Poverty Is Not Capitalism, But a Lack of Capitalism
January 28, 2008
Irvine, CA--Bill Gates made waves at the World Economic Forum by calling on Western nations to adopt a new, “creative capitalism.” He complained that under “pure capitalism . . . . the great advances in the world have often aggravated the inequities in the world. The least needy see the most improvement, and the most needy see the least . . .” Gates called for corporations and governments to devote far more time and money “doing work that eases the world's inequities.”
“Gates’s entire speech essentially blames Western capitalism for the Third World’s poverty,” said Alex Epstein, an analyst at the Ayn Rand Institute, “and offers a slightly more sophisticated form of foreign welfare handouts as the antidote. But the West did not become wealthy at the Third World’s expense--we did not seize computers, houses, pharmaceuticals, and railroads from the Sahara. We created our wealth under capitalism, the system that liberates individuals to produce and trade without interference. And Third World countries could do the same if they adopted that system.
“The last 200 years have shown that wherever capitalism is adopted--from Singapore to the United States to Hong Kong to Australia--it enables its citizens to create wealth and prosper. Yet not one word of Gates’s speech calls for poor countries to change their anti-capitalist governments.
“No matter how many billions Bill Gates gives to poor nations, until he starts advocating universal capitalism instead of attacking it, he is acting as an enemy of prosperity in the undeveloped world.”
sv | January 30, 2008, 10:06am | #
i am confused. what exactly is mr. holt-gimenez advocating- a hands-off policy? i've heard arguments that the green revolution had some negative effects, such as the development of a worldwide monoculture (i didn't say i understood the arguments, just that i'd heard them), but does he also believe that this is actually a ploy to exert control over and extend the worldwide capitalist market into africa? what's wrong with that- left to themselves, without oppressive, corrupt governments, africans would, and have, naturally resort to a market of some kind, happily.does he believe that it exacerbates a rich-poor gap so much that it outweighs the benefits of farmers having, you know, more food and money? they make up the bulk of farmers, don't they? are the gates foundation's proxies going to charge too much for these subsidized seeds/technologies for many african farmers to afford?
i admit i don't know a lot about this subject, but i'm going through a few objections i imagine someone could make... seriously i do not get what is so bad about this gates initiative. Food-First is not making the more plausible argument that it is 'pouring good money after bad' and will be the same old situation of corrupt governments diverting/skimming most of the aid and keeping their people down on purpose.
i'm trying to assume good faith on the part of Food-First.
sv | January 30, 2008, 10:09am | #
EDIT: "does he believe that it exacerbates a rich-poor gap so much that it outweighs the benefits of farmers having, you know, more food and money?Neu Mejican | January 30, 2008, 11:09am | #
I really think Melinda deserves more of the credit...the Gates Foundation is really more her baby...although Bill has embraced it and should be applauded.Rhywun | January 30, 2008, 11:13am | #
"It's a corporate strategy for colonizing Africa's food and agriculture systems, which thus far have resisted," he said.Director Eevil continued, "We need to allow Africans to remain in their current state in order to create more opportunities for Cameron Diaz to swoop in and fling shit at their huts."
dreamer | February 7, 2008, 11:23pm | #
The Malthusian trap has been well-documented. Has Gates never heard of it ? Increasing food supply does nothing to alleviate poverty or hunger, because of population growth.Africans can only help themselves if women will be able to plan number of kids, and have access to contraception.
USA is brainwashed and has put itself in a gridlock on the population issue, with liberals wanting to avoid the racism charge, and conservatives sliding towards religious fundamentalism and irrational thinking.