Originally posted by Lira
And tigers! Only in Kenya they've got tigers!
ps.: Where's Wangari Muta Maathai?
a tiger ? in africa ?
is that why they run so fast ?
Posted by pkcRAISTLIN on Jan-02-2008 22:44:
perhaps the world can get off their fat asses and do something to help? oh that's right, nobody actually does anything unless the americans help fund/organise it.
hey, why isn't china sending troops to stabilise the region? fuck knows they have enough of them.
or the french? lord knows they need the training.
it fucks me right off that america gets constant bad press, yet the rest of the globe contributes a whole load of fuck all to peace keeping in these situations. sit around and talk and talk whilst people get butchered and burned alive.
Posted by chimera66 on Jan-02-2008 22:53:
quote:
Originally posted by sheila-neil
I saw this on the news feed the other day and was appalled. There were over 25 children in that church as well. Whatever the differences are there is no justification for burning up kids! I think we in the US really take for granted the seamless transfer of power we have. It's just not so in many parts of the world.
generally this doesn't happen...mostly because kenya is only on it's 3rd president the last transition after the dictator was pretty good.
Posted by Ted Promo on Jan-02-2008 22:59:
I don't pay too much attention to things like Darfur and African problems as they seem to be consistent, without anything ever getting anywhere. I've yet to see a time beyond pangea when Africa wasn't anything but tribal warfare and corrupt governments. What is all this "aid" going to and why do people keep sending it without seeing any real results?
Posted by noikeee on Jan-02-2008 23:10:
Re: kenya
quote:
Originally posted by chimera66
does anyone else seem to care that kenya pretty much one of the most stable countries in all of africa is turning to shit? granted i care because 98% of my family lives there and our tribe is the one being attacked/burned to death in freakin churches but seems like whenever i try to talk about this craziness like an adult few seem to care or know enough to talk about the situation. kinda frustrating especially since i am able to discuss stuff like this that happens in countries that i am not personally close to and if i don't know something i try to learn something. any thoughts or comments?
People don't care because the media doesn't educate them on it. News on remote places like Africa are either ignored or given a background status, mostly because the cultures are so different that the people over here don't understand their culture nor identify themselves with their problems. And because the news from there are usually so negative that the people here really don't want to hear about it.
The usual 9pm news on TV we have here will usually have 20 minutes on national politics, 10 minutes on international politics, 15 minutes on sports, 5 minutes on art/cinema/random crap, and in the middle of all that a 10 seconds mention of "oh yeah, 250 people were killed today in some shithole in Africa". It's fucking sad.
Posted by RJT on Jan-02-2008 23:11:
Posted by sheila-neil on Jan-02-2008 23:21:
Re: Re: kenya
quote:
Originally posted by noikeee
People don't care because the media doesn't educate them on it.
I have to agree with that. The news feed I check out is from the BBC because I get a much better view of world news. US news is so limited its useless.
Posted by chimera66 on Jan-02-2008 23:33:
quote:
Originally posted by Ted Promo
I don't pay too much attention to things like Darfur and African problems as they seem to be consistent, without anything ever getting anywhere. I've yet to see a time beyond pangea when Africa wasn't anything but tribal warfare and corrupt governments. What is all this "aid" going to and why do people keep sending it without seeing any real results?
that's unfortunate that you feel that way...world is smaller than you realize and you should care for other parts of the world because perhaps it will affect you in some indirect way.
as for the aid, maybe we shouldn't send food that we know will never reach hungry people and just sits in trucks until it goes rotten...difficult situation because africa isn't all as backward as some people would like to think. on tv they love to show the people out in the bush.
Posted by Lebezniatnikov on Jan-02-2008 23:35:
quote:
Originally posted by Ted Promo
I don't pay too much attention to things like Darfur and African problems as they seem to be consistent, without anything ever getting anywhere. I've yet to see a time beyond pangea when Africa wasn't anything but tribal warfare and corrupt governments. What is all this "aid" going to and why do people keep sending it without seeing any real results?
Typical American response.
After the enormous success of elections in 2002 and the seemingly widening democratic space among civil society (under Moi unlawful assemblies were subject to crackdown by the state police, a practice that has ended under Kibaki), the latest comes as a bit of a surprise. There has always seemed to be some tension between the various groups within Kenya, but for the most part everything remained stable as there was a healthy opposition party and a fair amount of coalition-building going on in parliament. In any case, Kenya has come a long way since the Moi regime, and here's hoping that the latest political dispute is resolved quickly before further violence is incited.
Posted by Audious on Jan-03-2008 00:02:
Re: Re: Re: kenya
quote:
Originally posted by sheila-neil
I have to agree with that. The news feed I check out is from the BBC because I get a much better view of world news. US news is so limited its useless.
I think a lot of people forget that, despite being one country, most of our states are the size of European countries. Our news covers a lot more area than you would think.
Posted by Ted Promo on Jan-03-2008 00:29:
quote:
Originally posted by Lesbianosaur
Typical American response.
So then please, engross me in the enriching and sustaining African countries. The ones whom aren't warring, but are discovering new things and aren't a detriment to themselves and others around them, but are producing without the aid of others.
hm?
My typical American and ignorant self just can't see these wonderful, new, exciting things Africa is doing these days.
Posted by tubularbills on Jan-03-2008 00:30:
wasn't this the country that had the watering hole webcam?
Posted by Ted Promo on Jan-03-2008 00:35:
quote:
Originally posted by chimera66
that's unfortunate that you feel that way...world is smaller than you realize and you should care for other parts of the world because perhaps it will affect you in some indirect way.
as for the aid, maybe we shouldn't send food that we know will never reach hungry people and just sits in trucks until it goes rotten...difficult situation because africa isn't all as backward as some people would like to think. on tv they love to show the people out in the bush.
The only way I could see this as directly affecting me is the fact that Africa is a host of many important resources. War and pestilence can possibly have a far-reaching effect on the harvesting and usage of said sources, but in all honesty, there's been war and pestilence over there for a while now.
I'm sure my position is not entirely welcome, but I see it as Africa has been given aid for a while now. Many different countries send money, people, technology, and their educational abilities over to Africa with seemingly no apparent outcome. I believe all people are on the whole equal. Why is it then, that nearly everyone else in the world has advanced or is seeking advancement and they aren't? We all started out with relatively the same mental faculties and drive to sustain and progress (I believe), but why can they not? What has this gotten us? Why help someone who won't help themselves?
Meh. Call me a heartless bastard or a "typical American", but it's how I stand.
Posted by sheila-neil on Jan-03-2008 00:38:
Re: Re: Re: Re: kenya
quote:
Originally posted by Audious
I think a lot of people forget that, despite being one country, most of our states are the size of European countries. Our news covers a lot more area than you would think.
Well, despite our size, we are just one small part of a global community. Our national news devotes entirely too much time to crap (Daily Brittany, Anna Nicole, every breath the Presidential candidates take) and not enough on the events occurring in countries other than ours. (unless we are at war with them)
Trust me the news channels are the default channel in our house and I haven't heard a peep about Kenya.
Posted by denys envy on Jan-03-2008 00:41:
kanye > kenya
Posted by tubby on Jan-03-2008 00:50:
quote:
Originally posted by Lesbianosaur
Typical American response.
i think that's pretty harsh. How many countries in africa have been rules by dictators since independance? How many billions of dollars have been given in aid and gone no further than the cronies of those in power?
However, kenya was one of the best functioning democracies in africa, despite the tribal split that has affected most due to the rather random split of the continenet during the colonial rush.
the best way forward for this region seems to be the massive investments by china. Investment, not aid.
News coverage globally is quite poor on africa, though there i splenty of alternate channels to the spoon fed mass media option now.
Posted by Audious on Jan-03-2008 01:01:
They should just have a, "Other countries have problems and it's the US' job to fix them," news channel.
Posted by tubularbills on Jan-03-2008 01:46:
quote:
Originally posted by tubby
i think that's pretty harsh. How many countries in africa have been rules by dictators since independance? How many billions of dollars have been given in aid and gone no further than the cronies of those in power?
However, kenya was one of the best functioning democracies in africa, despite the tribal split that has affected most due to the rather random split of the continenet during the colonial rush.
the best way forward for this region seems to be the massive investments by china. Investment, not aid.
News coverage globally is quite poor on africa, though there i splenty of alternate channels to the spoon fed mass media option now.
kind alike Darfur?
Posted by Ivand on Jan-03-2008 02:38:
quote:
Originally posted by stren
a tiger ? in africa ?
is that why they run so fast ?
only in kenya
Posted by chimera66 on Jan-03-2008 02:48:
quote:
Originally posted by Audious
They should just have a, "Other countries have problems and it's the US' job to fix them," news channel.
the US will not be at the top for much longer and at some point we might be the ones receiving help. why not help those that you can? we don't live in a bubble.
quote:
Originally posted by denys envy
kanye > kenya
....that's stupid
Posted by Audious on Jan-03-2008 04:29:
quote:
Originally posted by chimera66
the US will not be at the top for much longer and at some point we might be the ones receiving help. why not help those that you can? we don't live in a bubble.
I'm not saying that we will be and I'm not saying that we are.
I donate money to several charitable causes, however, I can't donate to everyone who has a problem.
Every country that has a problem appeals to the US. There are other first-world countries.
Posted by Lebezniatnikov on Jan-03-2008 05:30:
quote:
Originally posted by Ted Promo
My typical American and ignorant self just can't see these wonderful, new, exciting things Africa is doing these days.
Well it's obviously because you aren't looking. There are 54 countries in Africa - do you honestly believe that they are all at war? A lot has been made so far about Kenya's purported development in relation to the rest of the continent but the fact of the matter is that Kenya was far more corrupt and impoverished than most other African states for many years, and only through wide-sweeping reforms enacted by President Kibaki (an African) did they see the staggering improvement the country is now lauded for.
Likewise, other African leaders such as Yoweri Museveni in Uganda, who despite the legacy of Idi Amin and civil war has transformed his country into a shining example of economic development; Festus Mogae in Botswana, who has championed the cause of AIDS prevention in the most infested country on the planet - reducing the spread to zero; Armando Guebeza of Mozambique, who has curtailed corruption and increased the capacity of the state to be the very first African state to be entirely self-sufficient in crisis management, as well as the first to willingly decrease the amount of aid it receives in order to build local capacity for relief and NGO work; Nelson Mandela, who I should hardly need to mention.
Look, it is true that there are many problems endemic to the African continent, but how is that much of a surprise for an entire continent of 850 million people that have no real memory of self-governance? The only governance that many Africans knew prior to independence was entirely exploitative (do you have any idea what the DRC looked like under Belgian rule?) - hardly the shining example for them to follow once they gained control. Some of these countries have only been independent for 32 years... imagine that. What did Europe look like 32 years after the creation of Germany? What did the United States look like? If African politics appear archaic compared to the West... well, isn't that to be expected? African states are still in their infancy - need I remind anyone of the Civil War that almost rent the United States apart 75 years after the Constitution was ratified? Of the World Wars that TWICE ravaged Europe? Or what about the entire feudal history of constant war? To disregard Africa because they aren't on par with the transparency and "civility" of Western states is stupid and naive, and demonstrates a complete lack of knowledge about African history and the current improvements being made on both fronts across the continent.
I'm not saying that the United States or any other country bears responsibility for the plight of Africa, but we certainly are complicit in it. That said, I'm not one of those people who will say that we have a moral obligation to help Africans (though I've never really understood the arguments against that either -- "because it doesn't affect me" is one of the most sickening lines of tripe I've ever heard). We don't help because we feel responsible. We don't help because we feel like we should. We help because we can. Because at this moment in time, the United States and other Western countries are capable of doing real good and helping people that are suffering. Pointing our fingers at other countries that don't do anything is missing the point - when it comes down to it, the question is simply what can we do to help?
So yes, it was a typical American (read: me me me I'm ignorant about this issue so why should I care?) response.
Posted by Dieselboy_1206 on Jan-03-2008 05:52:
And now please explain to me why these marginal betterments of their societies took so long to come about?
Posted by Lebezniatnikov on Jan-03-2008 06:02:
quote:
Originally posted by Dieselboy_1206
And now please explain to me why these marginal betterments of their societies took so long to come about?
So long? A generation hasn't even come and gone. What state was perfected 40 years after it first gained independence? Considering the massive disadvantages Africa has stemming from colonialism, which was basically an inscribed social hierarchy designed to keep Africa from being self-sufficient, I'd say any progress comes as a surprise.
And in any case, progress in Africa has ebbed and flowed - I highlighted more recent examples, but there are plenty of other great examples further back in history as well - Julius Nyerere of Tanzania, Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, or Leopold Senghor of Senegal stand out as particularly vivid examples.
But if you are looking at reasons for failings in Africa... there are plenty. Yes, in many countries corruption is rampant. Bad leaders have come to power in places like Chad and the DRC, which are overrun by human rights abuses, corruption, and a blatant disregard for citizens. But Europe had its share of tyrants in its infancy too. Aid itself can sometimes be to blame - the neoliberal economic policies pushed by the IMF and World Bank in the 70's and 80's did little to help local Africans - indeed, in many places poverty deepened as the gap between rich and poor widened. But really, I know some people seem to think that colonialism happened a long long time ago, but there isn't an African head of state that wasn't born under foreign occupation by a European power that sought only to exploit their country. There are very few African heroes only because there has been very little time for them to arise. Just wait, the era of African ascendancy will arrive soon enough.
Edit: And you also have issues of Dutch Disease (economic reliance upon resource exports makes inflation soar), aid dependency (too often aid doesn't do anything to build local capacity), manipulation of conflicts by outside powers (Cold War proxy conflicts, etc.) and diseases endemic across Africa (malaria, cholera, tuberculosis, and diarrhea are all larger killers than AIDS). In a lot of ways, Africa has been facing a very stacked deck.
Posted by Arbiter on Jan-03-2008 08:55:
It's unfortunate but given that even the U.S. government cannot seem to run an election without irregularities, it's not realistic to expect that an African nation can. It is mainly that this election was so close... so those problems are brought to the fore.
My friends there seem to be pretty optimistic that this will not escalate too far, and according to them the violence is pretty much restricted to a few areas. I think that both sides realize that they have much to lose from a protracted or large-scale conflict, and given that the new composition of the parliament will provide the opposition with considerable power anyway, it looks like a situation in which compromises may be reached. From what I hear about the opposition leader, I am a bit skeptical of him (he did name his son Fidel Castro Odinga, after all...) but we shall see.
I'm going there in March, so it will be interesting to see things first hand. Though by then there may not be much of a problem left if things go well.