Do you see africa improved in about 50 years time if africans were highly educated?
|
2
points
If Africa were suddenly populated by modern westerners or orientals, perhaps. One cannot educate an entire society of savages in so comprehensive and easy a manner as the debate title suggests. Education must evolve naturally, as a means of ensuring the survival and prosperity of particular groups of peoples. I do not consider it a moral obligation to protect and relieve every society of humans on Earth. Many parts of Africa are locked in a pre-mediæval society, yet access to modern weaponry has entirely prevented its natural progression. Our ongoing mistake is that we continue to treat these people as though they were in any way our philosophical or moral equals. They have been impoverished by maintaining a modern system of currency that their industrial and educational base is not even close to sustaining. They starve due to massive overpopulation of infertile lands. The very best thing that could possibly happen for the people in question is almost complete isolation from Western interference, including international aid. To remove every natural population check, such as disease, famine and war is to treat a symptom but not a cause, and to exacerbate one of the greatest problems. Societal strength and advancement come from within a society. It cannot be imported, and it does not come in a box bearing the insignia 'UN' or 'EU'. I have heard the counter-argument that tribal and civil warfare are responsible for stalling the advancement of the poorest African peoples, and this may be the case. However, I fail to see how any external nation has the right to interfere in a civil conflict. Nor do I see how barbarism promoted by the thirst for precious resources (such as diamonds) can possibly be quelled by interference from the nations to which they are exported. There are two obvious solutions, one that serves our interests, another that serves theirs. The former is that we continue to exterminate the population through inflation of their populations, until they are gone, leaving the resources our enterprises so patently desire. Second, that we leave Africa, allow the conflicts to reach a natural solution, and give the societies there, whomever they may be, to develop naturally, in much the same way as did our own. Side: impossible
Or, we could allow completely free trade to them, allowing the import and export of almost anything. Considering that their current dilemma is that there are war lords who already have weapons (mostly which they buy illegally, by the way), I would think that "cutting off" trade would only hurt the chances of those who wish to fight back. The War Lords aren't going to give up power just because it may be harder to get some extra ammo. Completely free trade with the Africans (as well as eliminating any government influence) may not fix things, but it very well could. But it surely won't make things worse. Side: depends
1
point
Or, we could allow completely free trade to them, allowing the import and export of almost anything. This would be possible were it not for the abundance of cheap ex-Soviet weaponry. Currently, there is a demand for food within Africa, and a demand for Gold, Diamonds and other precious substances in the West. An ordinary primitive society would have been conquered or united by a military or economic power, as Ancient Rome, for example. For this to occur, there would need to be an incentive, such as a tradable resource (exempli gratia diamonds), and a unifying or annexing power, superior to all others. In the past, this was based on innovation, such as the ability to work bronze or iron, utilise mathematics to properly equip an army and design siege weaponry et cetera. Now, however, it is simply those who control the market for AK-47s, AK-74us, RPGs and all manner of contemporary weapons technology, who control the natural resources. Indeed, it is possible that Western and Eastern corporations use this system to their advantage. In this manner, the progress of the society as a whole is stalled frightfully. Considering that their current dilemma is that there are war lords who already have weapons (mostly which they buy illegally, by the way), I would think that "cutting off" trade would only hurt the chances of those who wish to fight back. The War Lords aren't going to give up power just because it may be harder to get some extra ammo. I am a tad archaic in my foreign policy. The most practical solution that I can see (and here follows a grossly simplified account) would be to conquer the region and execute anybody known to be selling weaponry. Then find the leaders of the largest gangs, capture them, and publicly crucify them. Freeze all trade with nations other than your own and lay the basic foundation of a classical African society (such as the Songhai Empire). Install a common legal system and educational system, then gradually phase out your own personnel until an autonomous state is left behind. To counteract famine, sell them Genetically modified crops in return for whatever resources you require. Of course, those incompetent fools at the United Nations would never allow that, they are so committed to sustaining the unsustainable. Side: depends
1
point
Britain, after throwing off the shackles of Roman occupation went in to a period of turmoil. Many African countries are currently in a similar position. They have recently gotten rid of the British, French Italian, Belgian etc. occupiers, this has caused many problems but also created opportunities. Some of the fastest growing economies are in Africa, they are already improving. Poverty actually is decreasing together with the rise of democracy. Side: Of course
1
point
the thing i don't understand is if other country r leaving an improved and better life by educating their population i don't see why africans couldn't and they say an educated person is future of tomorrow.let's say about 50 % of african people where educated in 20-30 years even if they r half of the entire population they could start thinking for themselves and say corruption is not doing good for each of our society and start taking down those who r corrupted individuals and also having and educated population could help especially african women so they start saying no to making 10 children when they don't have money to feed 5 children and helps africa because they don't to relly on foreign help and have to feed more than they should.future thinker. Side: Production and Property
|
