Topic: Haiti is pretty much at a point of no return.
Anonymous A started this discussion 3 weeks ago #137,184
Keep in mind they once had some business and were a minor tourist destination in the 1970s (150,000 visitors per year). After Papa Doc and Baby Doc and Aristide looted the national wealth fast forward to the 2010 earthquake. Now it’s a lesser streaming service dystopian film (“a Tubi original”). I wonder how Kenya was bullied or bribed into sending peacekeepers.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 17 minutes later[^] [v] #1,453,953
It seems like most of the issues a country has can be put into two buckets: not enough more or not enough democracy. Usually not having enough money is worse than not having enough democracy.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 5 minutes later, 22 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,453,954
Tbh one of the things that’s annoying about foreign aid is that right wing racist nuts hijack the whole thing. But generally, I think the reason why it doesn’t always produce positive results is the same reason why giving money to a homeless person won’t produce positive results. They need the money, they’re poor, they’re going to spend it on what they need in the short term like food or whatever, then tomorrow they’re not going to have any money again. It has to be directed towards profitable industries, and in a country that doesn’t have a lot of profitable industries with a lack of infrastructure, you need a certain amount of capital in order to fund the construction of necessary infrastructure. So investing in building roads, bridges, apartment buildings, hospitals, universities, ports, etc. in theirs world countries, that kind of think would have better long term impact. It’s the same problem if you’re starting a company if you think about it. Most people can’t just walk out their front door and say, "I’m starting a car company!" You need to build the factory, but how are you going to build the factory if you don’t have the money to build the factory? You need industrial investment not just handouts for food or whatever even though that can save people’s lives, but still.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 25 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,453,955
Of course there’s a trade off. Because if poor people are working in factories for low wages to make things for rich countries (like what happened with China), that can get called out as exploitation, but that can genuinely be a path towards industrial development. Especially because the skills needed for more advanced manufacturing build up from less advanced manufacturing.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc quadruple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 6 minutes later, 31 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,453,956
Although it’s not guaranteed to work, like when US based companies started moving manufacturing "overseas" (Mexico isn’t really "overseas" but whatever), Mexico didn’t come out with their own internationally successful car brands by copying the Americans. So I think there has to be a political / cultural climate that makes it possible. If there’s either some urgency placed on building an industrial base for ideological reasons or purely competitive reasons. But I think that could be a strategy for third world countries in general to take in international companies and let them build factories, get people trained in random niche roles, and then just copy it. I feel like that would be the fastest way to improve certain parts of the world. But the main barrier is just political there are "oh I wouldn’t go to that country" type places. Although, China didn’t it, so it’s like… you don’t really need a great government.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 12 minutes later, 44 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,453,959
Compare to the Dominican Republic which is thriving. Curious.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc replied with this 3 weeks ago, 5 minutes later, 49 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,453,960
@previous (C)
Tbh I don’t know a whole lot about either but stuff like that has happened before in other places, like Korea for example.
Tbh I don’t know a whole lot about either but stuff like that has happened before in other places, like Korea for example.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 hour later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,453,966
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 hour later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,453,998
USAID had a lot of good programs because it engaged with initiatives directly. Before Elon destroyed it so his online friends would cheer for him.
Foreign aid gets murky with certain NGOs and certainly with any aid filtered through political elites. In Africa and Latin America, this aid is transferred to Swiss bank accounts or the like and then used to pay other loyalists.
Foreign aid gets murky with certain NGOs and certainly with any aid filtered through political elites. In Africa and Latin America, this aid is transferred to Swiss bank accounts or the like and then used to pay other loyalists.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade. !0JqexkOGBc joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,453,999
@previous (E)
Some people complain that USAID was really about America gaining influence by giving good will to other countries to push political agendas.
What I don’t understand is how as an American I’m supposed to see that as a bad thing. Even if that’s true, shouldn’t we keep doing that?
Some people complain that USAID was really about America gaining influence by giving good will to other countries to push political agendas.
What I don’t understand is how as an American I’m supposed to see that as a bad thing. Even if that’s true, shouldn’t we keep doing that?
Mr. Bloody Lemonade. !0JqexkOGBc double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,000
I mean imagine if during the Cold War everybody was like, "Woah woah woah there buddy, slow down, I don’t know if you want to be spending money on spreading capitalist ideology in third world countries, think about how much money that wastes on non white people." I’m just saying.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade. !0JqexkOGBc triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,001
I’m not even saying that was what it was, I’m just saying, even if that hypothetically was what it was, that sounds like it benefits us.
Anonymous F quadruple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,002
The Chinese… I’ve seen the comments they’re pumping out on the internet. Their propaganda strategy I probably shouldn’t say it, but their strategy kinda makes more sense than ours, if you can even call our strategy a strategy. Like what is our propaganda strategy? Call Somalians low IQ? What’s China’s propaganda strategy? It makes just a little bit more logical sense even if it’s bullshit, they have more than air between their ears.
(Edited 10 seconds later.)
Anonymous F quintuple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 56 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,003
This is just a sad state of affairs…
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 59 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,004
theres way too much niggerbabble in this thread
Anonymous F replied with this 3 weeks ago, 7 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,006
Especially when you combine the political thing with the racial thing, because they’re one and the same, they’re not separate. Okay, so in America, we have a diverse country, everyone wants to come here from around the world to study. China is authoritarian. So what do we do? Kick all the international students out of Harvard because Harvard made Trump cry, assert that the Chinese deserve to be in American universities more than African Americans (as if there’s not room for both of us but whatever), they say that when China is America’s geopolitical rival, and we call Somalians in particular low IQ for some reason. I don’t know why MAGA just has beef with Somalians fuck if I know why. Then what does China do? The Chinese government literally built the African union headquarters (granted they bugged the place and it was a whole thing where the African countries had to remove all the recording devices). How come we’re educating their engineers so their engineers can go into African countries and build governmental buildings… you know the parliament of the DRC was also built by China? They pretend they don’t have political ambitions but they obviously do. They obviously are trying to get more influence in Africa. During the Cold War could you imagine if we just did nothing in Asia when communism was spreading in Asia? Regardless of whether you agree with it morally, it’s obviously stupid to just let your geopolitical rival go uncontested.
(Edited 55 seconds later.)
Anonymous F double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,007
And the thing is right, the west has this idiotic idea born out of colonial era arrogance that Africa is just predestined to be poor forever, but if you just look at population projections, population pyramids, population statistics, there’s a reason why Russia and China have an interest in Africa in particular. It would give them an advantage militarily in the future if they could align African countries against the west. And we’re not doing a damn thing to combat that.
Anonymous F triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,008
And it’s stupid too because half the reason why Trump didn’t have a prolong conflict in Nigeria even after he bombed it is because our only airbase in that region is now in a country that’s aligned with Russia so we can’t actually fight a war there and everybody just brushed that off like it doesn’t matter it’s fucking insane.
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 41 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,013
@1,453,999 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade. !0JqexkOGBc)
> Some people complain that USAID was really about America gaining influence by giving good will to other countries to push political agendas.
>
> What I don’t understand is how as an American I’m supposed to see that as a bad thing. Even if that’s true, shouldn’t we keep doing that?
Kind of the point of “soft power.”
> Some people complain that USAID was really about America gaining influence by giving good will to other countries to push political agendas.
>
> What I don’t understand is how as an American I’m supposed to see that as a bad thing. Even if that’s true, shouldn’t we keep doing that?
Kind of the point of “soft power.”
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 2 weeks ago, 43 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,019
Definitely nothing to do with France enslaving them, literally stripping the island bare, and leaving them.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc joined in and replied with this 2 weeks ago, 2 hours later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,029
@previous (I)You left out the part where the slaves declared Polish people honorary blacks, revolted against the French, successfully, and had an emperor.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc double-posted this 2 weeks ago, 8 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,030
You know, Africa actually wasn’t completely conquered by Europeans and Ethiopia was independent until World War Two? For some reason people don’t bring that up.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc triple-posted this 2 weeks ago, 8 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,032
Everyone says that Europeans conquered Africa because of gunpowder, but they didn’t conquer large parts of Africa for centuries after gunpowder was introduced to Europe, it didn’t happen until the Industrial Revolution, and even then they didn’t completely conquer it even with a technological and population advantage.
Anonymous I replied with this 2 weeks ago, 58 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,035
@1,454,029 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
Yes, because revolting slaves on an island quite literally stripped bare of all vegetation and resources certainly have a great chance for success.
Yes, because revolting slaves on an island quite literally stripped bare of all vegetation and resources certainly have a great chance for success.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc joined in and replied with this 2 weeks ago, 29 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,037
@previous (I)
It’s still kind of inspiring though that a people could go from being slaves to emperors. I think some people are just evil and they like the idea that the rich should get richer and the poor should always get poorer and the powerful should do what they want and the weak should suffer what they must. But honestly, I don’t really like that. I feel like rooting for the underdog. When someone is born rich and dies rich, it’s not very interesting. When someone comes from nothing, and they build something up, even if it’s unlikely or could be due in part to chance or luck, it just feels right somehow. I don’t know if I believe that history has a direction, but people have said things like, "The moral arc of the universe bends towards justice." I don’t know if that’s true, and using my rationality, I think it’s probably not true. But money isn’t true, money is valuable because everyone thinks it’s valuable. Even if it’s not natural and it’s something you have to engineer, I feel like that type of world would be a better one.
It’s still kind of inspiring though that a people could go from being slaves to emperors. I think some people are just evil and they like the idea that the rich should get richer and the poor should always get poorer and the powerful should do what they want and the weak should suffer what they must. But honestly, I don’t really like that. I feel like rooting for the underdog. When someone is born rich and dies rich, it’s not very interesting. When someone comes from nothing, and they build something up, even if it’s unlikely or could be due in part to chance or luck, it just feels right somehow. I don’t know if I believe that history has a direction, but people have said things like, "The moral arc of the universe bends towards justice." I don’t know if that’s true, and using my rationality, I think it’s probably not true. But money isn’t true, money is valuable because everyone thinks it’s valuable. Even if it’s not natural and it’s something you have to engineer, I feel like that type of world would be a better one.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc double-posted this 2 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,038
Honestly I don’t feel satisfied with the way that history has turned out so far.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc triple-posted this 2 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,039
Like okay, western countries are rich and they’re mostly democracies. And Africa is poor, but it’s poor because western countries got rich before they were democracies back when they were imperialist monarchies and that’s why Africa is poor. So people will just look at the present situation and act like it’s fair somehow.
Anonymous K quadruple-posted this 2 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,040
And of course, with good intentions, the western countries established a global order where invasion is bad. But that’s how the west got rich. So they judge third world countries for not getting rich by trying to play by the rules they didn’t play by in the first place and have no remorse for.
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 2 weeks ago, 7 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,041
It really doesn’t seem like democracy and wealth are connected, it seems like more of a coincidence. Most countries for most of history were not democracies.
Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 2 weeks ago, 3 hours later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,072
@1,454,035 (I)
> Yes, because revolting slaves on an island quite literally stripped bare of all vegetation and resources certainly have a great chance for success.
It wasn’t stripped bare. It is now and especially since the earthquake.
> Yes, because revolting slaves on an island quite literally stripped bare of all vegetation and resources certainly have a great chance for success.
It wasn’t stripped bare. It is now and especially since the earthquake.
Oatmeal Fucker !BYUc1TwJMU joined in and replied with this 2 weeks ago, 10 hours later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,139
is barbecue still the king there
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc joined in and replied with this 2 weeks ago, 57 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,140
Oatmeal Fucker !BYUc1TwJMU replied with this 2 weeks ago, 16 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,271
I checked and barbecue is still unable to become king of Haiti, he's just king of port au prince.
Live&Lemon joined in and replied with this 2 weeks ago, 31 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,454,272
@1,453,953 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
> It seems like most of the issues a country has can be put into two buckets: not enough more or not enough democracy. Usually not having enough money is worse than not having enough democracy.
@1,453,954 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
> Tbh one of the things that’s annoying about foreign aid is that right wing racist nuts hijack the whole thing. But generally, I think the reason why it doesn’t always produce positive results is the same reason why giving money to a homeless person won’t produce positive results. They need the money, they’re poor, they’re going to spend it on what they need in the short term like food or whatever, then tomorrow they’re not going to have any money again. It has to be directed towards profitable industries, and in a country that doesn’t have a lot of profitable industries with a lack of infrastructure, you need a certain amount of capital in order to fund the construction of necessary infrastructure. So investing in building roads, bridges, apartment buildings, hospitals, universities, ports, etc. in theirs world countries, that kind of think would have better long term impact. It’s the same problem if you’re starting a company if you think about it. Most people can’t just walk out their front door and say, "I’m starting a car company!" You need to build the factory, but how are you going to build the factory if you don’t have the money to build the factory? You need industrial investment not just handouts for food or whatever even though that can save people’s lives, but still.
@1,453,955 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
> Of course there’s a trade off. Because if poor people are working in factories for low wages to make things for rich countries (like what happened with China), that can get called out as exploitation, but that can genuinely be a path towards industrial development. Especially because the skills needed for more advanced manufacturing build up from less advanced manufacturing.
@1,453,956 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
> Although it’s not guaranteed to work, like when US based companies started moving manufacturing "overseas" (Mexico isn’t really "overseas" but whatever), Mexico didn’t come out with their own internationally successful car brands by copying the Americans. So I think there has to be a political / cultural climate that makes it possible. If there’s either some urgency placed on building an industrial base for ideological reasons or purely competitive reasons. But I think that could be a strategy for third world countries in general to take in international companies and let them build factories, get people trained in random niche roles, and then just copy it. I feel like that would be the fastest way to improve certain parts of the world. But the main barrier is just political there are "oh I wouldn’t go to that country" type places. Although, China didn’t it, so it’s like… you don’t really need a great government.
@1,454,000 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade. !0JqexkOGBc)
> I mean imagine if during the Cold War everybody was like, "Woah woah woah there buddy, slow down, I don’t know if you want to be spending money on spreading capitalist ideology in third world countries, think about how much money that wastes on non white people." I’m just saying.
@1,454,037 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
> It’s still kind of inspiring though that a people could go from being slaves to emperors. I think some people are just evil and they like the idea that the rich should get richer and the poor should always get poorer and the powerful should do what they want and the weak should suffer what they must. But honestly, I don’t really like that. I feel like rooting for the underdog. When someone is born rich and dies rich, it’s not very interesting. When someone comes from nothing, and they build something up, even if it’s unlikely or could be due in part to chance or luck, it just feels right somehow. I don’t know if I believe that history has a direction, but people have said things like, "The moral arc of the universe bends towards justice." I don’t know if that’s true, and using my rationality, I think it’s probably not true. But money isn’t true, money is valuable because everyone thinks it’s valuable. Even if it’s not natural and it’s something you have to engineer, I feel like that type of world would be a better one.
@1,454,038 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
> Honestly I don’t feel satisfied with the way that history has turned out so far.
@1,454,039 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
> Like okay, western countries are rich and they’re mostly democracies. And Africa is poor, but it’s poor because western countries got rich before they were democracies back when they were imperialist monarchies and that’s why Africa is poor. So people will just look at the present situation and act like it’s fair somehow.
Damlol
> It seems like most of the issues a country has can be put into two buckets: not enough more or not enough democracy. Usually not having enough money is worse than not having enough democracy.
@1,453,954 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
> Tbh one of the things that’s annoying about foreign aid is that right wing racist nuts hijack the whole thing. But generally, I think the reason why it doesn’t always produce positive results is the same reason why giving money to a homeless person won’t produce positive results. They need the money, they’re poor, they’re going to spend it on what they need in the short term like food or whatever, then tomorrow they’re not going to have any money again. It has to be directed towards profitable industries, and in a country that doesn’t have a lot of profitable industries with a lack of infrastructure, you need a certain amount of capital in order to fund the construction of necessary infrastructure. So investing in building roads, bridges, apartment buildings, hospitals, universities, ports, etc. in theirs world countries, that kind of think would have better long term impact. It’s the same problem if you’re starting a company if you think about it. Most people can’t just walk out their front door and say, "I’m starting a car company!" You need to build the factory, but how are you going to build the factory if you don’t have the money to build the factory? You need industrial investment not just handouts for food or whatever even though that can save people’s lives, but still.
@1,453,955 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
> Of course there’s a trade off. Because if poor people are working in factories for low wages to make things for rich countries (like what happened with China), that can get called out as exploitation, but that can genuinely be a path towards industrial development. Especially because the skills needed for more advanced manufacturing build up from less advanced manufacturing.
@1,453,956 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
> Although it’s not guaranteed to work, like when US based companies started moving manufacturing "overseas" (Mexico isn’t really "overseas" but whatever), Mexico didn’t come out with their own internationally successful car brands by copying the Americans. So I think there has to be a political / cultural climate that makes it possible. If there’s either some urgency placed on building an industrial base for ideological reasons or purely competitive reasons. But I think that could be a strategy for third world countries in general to take in international companies and let them build factories, get people trained in random niche roles, and then just copy it. I feel like that would be the fastest way to improve certain parts of the world. But the main barrier is just political there are "oh I wouldn’t go to that country" type places. Although, China didn’t it, so it’s like… you don’t really need a great government.
@1,454,000 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade. !0JqexkOGBc)
> I mean imagine if during the Cold War everybody was like, "Woah woah woah there buddy, slow down, I don’t know if you want to be spending money on spreading capitalist ideology in third world countries, think about how much money that wastes on non white people." I’m just saying.
@1,454,037 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
> It’s still kind of inspiring though that a people could go from being slaves to emperors. I think some people are just evil and they like the idea that the rich should get richer and the poor should always get poorer and the powerful should do what they want and the weak should suffer what they must. But honestly, I don’t really like that. I feel like rooting for the underdog. When someone is born rich and dies rich, it’s not very interesting. When someone comes from nothing, and they build something up, even if it’s unlikely or could be due in part to chance or luck, it just feels right somehow. I don’t know if I believe that history has a direction, but people have said things like, "The moral arc of the universe bends towards justice." I don’t know if that’s true, and using my rationality, I think it’s probably not true. But money isn’t true, money is valuable because everyone thinks it’s valuable. Even if it’s not natural and it’s something you have to engineer, I feel like that type of world would be a better one.
@1,454,038 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
> Honestly I don’t feel satisfied with the way that history has turned out so far.
@1,454,039 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
> Like okay, western countries are rich and they’re mostly democracies. And Africa is poor, but it’s poor because western countries got rich before they were democracies back when they were imperialist monarchies and that’s why Africa is poor. So people will just look at the present situation and act like it’s fair somehow.
Damlol