Why nothing may happen in Africa

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

A fine example, but it doesn't really tell us anythin new.
Stupidity in the government and corruption in a third world hellhole? Who would have thought it!

Both are easily explained. The governments in all firstworld countries are eternally stupid due to the fact they are not actually run by people: they are run by paperwork. Damn near everyone employed is a paperpusher, devoid of real thought and the slave of whatever due process and the rulebook call for. Free thought and common sense are actively punished.

At higher levels of the government, particularly where individuals are elected rather than appointed, we find a similar thing. Politicians are unwilling to do or say anything that their voting block might possibly disagree with. By the same lights, they avoid important issues that are not in the public eye because, by handling them, it subtracts from the time they have to spend doing things to get themselves reelected.


As for corruption in mosquito-infested blights which some mistakenly call countries, what did you expect? Taking bribes is damn near the only way to get anywhere in the world in places like that.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

So the Visa was denied by the US, is that correct?

If that's the case, contact someone at the company you want to buy the equipment from. Tell him of your difficulties and of your intention to buy twenty million dollars worth of his products. He'll contact his Senator. The Senator can then put pressure on the beaurocrats to do what needs to be done to make the deal happen.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

A VISA is denied or approved by the nation to which one wants to go, not by the nation from which you come. A nation might restrict travel to another nation, but that's not a VISA.

So if the VISA was denied, it was denied by the African country, and seeing ones senator isn't likely to help.

Baron Max

 

15,000 people?! That is one huge, major, extra-LARGE, HUGE, major food processing facility!!! I'd guess that there's no other food processing facility in the world that's that huge! Care to tell me more?

Baron Max

 

that tells a lot about intelligence and humanist ideals of African nations...

 

ummm...China.

 

Okay, which food processing plant in China is that large?

Baron Max

 

well I wouldn't know that...but from kn0wing Chinese...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I am sure there are.

 

Do some checking about food processing plants, and the number of employees. You'll soon see that 15,000 employees is not only a ridiculous number, but is totally out of the realm of a start-up compnay in Africa (or anywhere else, for that matter.).

Baron Max

 

What is corruption? Do corruptioners charge a business owner % of his profit, or they just take money? In the last case, it's just cost of business and a business owners pass it down the chain, it doesn't cost them a thing. More than that, business owners frequently seek a corrupted official, if perfect, ucorrupted regulations are in the way of profits. In this case, corruption is good for business, isnt' it? Corruption is only "bad", if there is unevennes in its applying (i.e. some people, for various reasons, are less fleeced than the others), or it's being used as a weapon to remove less connected competitors. otherwise, it's just another tax on consumers, not business.

As for a food processing plant, fuck it, only if Western agrobig will be kicked out of Africa, they may stop starving. Westernlike agrobig providing local "elites" with green cash is one of the main causes of African's misery.

 

So what excuse did the Africans have before the whites came along? I mean, think about it ....the Africans had a gazillion years to develop over and above that of the whites, yet the whites have out developed the Africans so much that they still live in mud huts with dirt floors and no industry at all.

Why?

Baron Max

 

Yeah, yeah, yeah, whitey are supermen, USA is #1 and, by association, Baron Max is a superior in all regards nick.

First, living in a mud hat is as meaningful and rewarding as living in a paperboard house and eating whatever tasteless shit they sell in grocery stores, in the breaks between other extremely rewarding things. You just mutated beyond the point of return to realize that mud hat dwellers enjoy and appreciate life as much, if not more, as you do. "Development" is not a sacred goal of human spicies. I see more of degradation than development, whatever it's, anyway.

Second, superior Europian race did not take off "developentwise" until relatively recently. It could take off only because other continents were plundered using, at that time, not that great technological advantage, luck and lots of germs. Needless to say that development of few surviving aboriginal people on continents was stopped or even reversed.

The question "Why Africans did not invade Europe" was asked and (as for me satisfactory) answered by Diamond in his "Guns, Germs, and Steel". It's all about environment and available resources, stupid. Today, Africa is neo colony with bought and intimidated into the obedience "leaders".

 

That's not what you're trying to do, then?

 

Unabomber's manifesto. http://www.thecourier.com/manifest.htm. The man was definitely onto something as far as "progress" and "development" are concerned.


45. Any of the foregoing symptoms can occur in any society, but in modern industrial society they are present on a massive scale. We aren't the first to mention that the world today seems to be going crazy. This sort of thing is not normal for human societies. There is good reason to believe that primitive man suffered from less stress and frustration and was better satisfied with his way of life than modern man is. It is true that not all was sweetness and light in primitive societies. Abuse of women and common among the Australian aborigines, transexuality was fairly common among some of the American Indian tribes. But is does appear that GENERALLY SPEAKING the kinds of problems that we have listed in the preceding paragraph were far less common among primitive peoples than they are in modern society.

46. We attribute the social and psychological problems of modern society to the fact that that society requires people to live under conditions radically different from those under which the human race evolved and to behave in ways that conflict with the patterns of behavior that the human race developed while living under the earlier conditions. It is clear from what we have already written that we consider lack of opportunity to properly experience the power process as the most important of the abnormal conditions to which modern society subjects people. But it is not the only one. Before dealing with disruption of the power process as a source of social problems we will discuss some of the other sources.

47. Among the abnormal conditions present in modern industrial society are excessive density of population, isolation of man from nature, excessive rapidity of social change and the break-down of natural small-scale communities such as the extended family, the village or the tribe.

48. It is well known that crowding increases stress and aggression. The degree of crowding that exists today and the isolation of man from nature are consequences of technological progress. All pre-industrial societies were predominantly rural. The industrial Revolution vastly increased the size of cities and the proportion of the population that lives in them, and modern agricultural technology has made it possible for the Earth to support a far denser population than it ever did before. (Also, technology exacerbates the effects of crowding because it puts increased disruptive powers in people's hands. For example, a variety of noise-making devices: power mowers, radios, motorcycles, etc. If the use of these devices is unrestricted, people who want peace and quiet are frustrated by the noise. If their use is restricted, people who use the devices are frustrated by the regulations... But if these machines had never been invented there would have been no conflict and no frustration generated by them.)

49. For primitive societies the natural world (which usually changes only slowly) provided a stable framework and therefore a sense of security. In the modern world it is human society that dominates nature rather than the other way around, and modern society changes very rapidly owing to technological change. Thus there is no stable framework.

50. The conservatives are fools: They whine about the decay of traditional values, yet they enthusiastically support technological progress and economic growth. Apparently it never occurs to them that you can't make rapid, drastic changes in the technology and the economy of a society with out causing rapid changes in all other aspects of the society as well, and that such rapid changes inevitably break down traditional values.

51.The breakdown of traditional values to some extent implies the breakdown of the bonds that hold together traditional small-scale social groups. The disintegration of small-scale social groups is also promoted by the fact that modern conditions often require or tempt individuals to move to new locations, separating themselves from their communities. Beyond that, a technological society HAS TO weaken family ties and local communities if it is to function efficiently. In modern society an individual's loyalty must be first to the system and only secondarily to a small-scale community, because if the internal loyalties of small-scale small-scale communities were stronger than loyalty to the system, such communities would pursue their own advantage at the expense of the system.

52. Suppose that a public official or a corporation executive appoints his cousin, his friend or his co-religionist to a position rather than appointing the person best qualified for the job. He has permitted personal loyalty to supersede his loyalty to the system, and that is "nepotism" or "discrimination," both of which are terrible sins in modern society. Would-be industrial societies that have done a poor job of subordinating personal or local loyalties to loyalty to the system are usually very inefficient. (Look at Latin America.) Thus an advanced industrial society can tolerate only those small-scale communities that are emasculated, tamed and made into tools of the system. [7]

53. Crowding, rapid change and the breakdown of communities have been widely recognized as sources of social problems. but we do not believe they are enough to account for the extent of the problems that are seen today.

54. A few pre-industrial cities were very large and crowded, yet their inhabitants do not seem to have suffered from psychological problems to the same extent as modern man. In America today there still are uncrowded rural areas, and we find there the same problems as in urban areas, though the problems tend to be less acute in the rural areas. Thus crowding does not seem to be the decisive factor.

55. On the growing edge of the American frontier during the 19th century, the mobility of the population probably broke down extended families and small-scale social groups to at least the same extent as these are broken down today. In fact, many nuclear families lived by choice in such isolation, having no neighbors within several miles, that they belonged to no community at all, yet they do not seem to have developed problems as a result.

56.Furthermore, change in American frontier society was very rapid and deep. A man might be born and raised in a log cabin, outside the reach of law and order and fed largely on wild meat; and by the time he arrived at old age he might be working at a regular job and living in an ordered community with effective law enforcement. This was a deeper change that that which typically occurs in the life of a modern individual, yet it does not seem to have led to psychological problems. In fact, 19th century American society had an optimistic and self-confident tone, quite unlike that of today's society. [8]

57. The difference, we argue, is that modern man has the sense (largely justified) that change is IMPOSED on him, whereas the 19th century frontiersman had the sense (also largely justified) that he created change himself, by his own choice. Thus a pioneer settled on a piece of land of his own choosing and made it into a farm through his own effort. In those days an entire county might have only a couple of hundred inhabitants and was a far more isolated and autonomous entity than a modern county is. Hence the pioneer farmer participated as a member of a relatively small group in the creation of a new, ordered community. One may well question whether the creation of this community was an improvement, but at any rate it satisfied the pioneer's need for the power process.

58. It would be possible to give other examples of societies in which there has been rapid change and/or lack of close community ties without he kind of massive behavioral aberration that is seen in today's industrial society. We contend that the most important cause of social and psychological problems in modern society is the fact that people have insufficient opportunity to go through the power process in a normal way. We don't mean to say that modern society is the only one in which the power process has been disrupted. Probably most if not all civilized societies have interfered with the power ' process to a greater or lesser extent. But in modern industrial society the problem has become particularly acute. Leftism, at least in its recent (mid-to-late -20th century) form, is in part a symptom of deprivation with respect to the power process.

 

You know a thread has gone downhill (or started out at the bottom) when somebody starts quoting Mr. Unabomber.
*sigh*