Basic needs and structural issues are like the chicken and the egg debate when it comes to assisting third world and developing nations. Without structural elements a fledgling nation can’t feed and shelter their population, but without food and water, people won’t be able to put those structural elements into place.
I agree with Perry that stability is an important factor for a rising nation. If political, economic and social systems are extremely volatile, it is nearly impossible to make any progress in development. Simply providing food aid is not going to help anyone in the long run. No third world country has been pulled into the modern sphere through foreign aid. It always happens through business and investment, which would not happen without a stable environment in which they can thrive.
Dealing with poverty is a hard task- as was brought up by Andrew, you can’t expect Western European countries to go in and build up a poor nation without having them exercising power over the nation in question. It’s important for nations to pass through certain stages of development on their own, because not only are they creating a concrete foundation for their nation, the people are passing through important social steps towards increased liberty and human rights. You can’t go from an isolated agricultural community to a technologically advanced nation overnight or you stray closer to a Great Leap Forward.
On a somewhat related note, for my Macro class we read an article called “The Future for Trade,” discussing the “unsuitability of free-trade economics at the early stage of economic development.” Though I'm not sure I fully agree, it's a clear, interesting read that deals with some of what we are discussing about poverty and rising nations.
p.s. Paul Gottfried is a ridiculous man and in no way do I or anyone I know associate ourselves with his not-so-vaguely fascist views.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment