Open letter to Kevin Myers

This letter to Kevin Myers is doing the rounds - thought some MN readers might be interested. It's a response to this article:

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/africa-is-giving-nothing-to-anyone--apart-from-aids-1430428.html


12 July 2008

"Dear Sir

Kevin Myers article 'Africa gives absolutely nothing to anyone – apart from Aids' on Thursday 10^th July , plumbs new depths of egregious bad taste and offensiveness.

I hope other readers will forgive my presumption, but I'm writing here to make some attempt to tell it like it is about Myers on behalf of what I sincerely hope is a majority of decent, humane people in Ireland and also to try and help redress the insult to African people living here and in Africa. If Myers sewer-like thoughts were restricted to expression among his personal acquaintance, it would be bad enough but it is a sad reflection on The Independent newspaper, that it could even consider that article as appropriate for publication. There is a good case to be made for describing it as an incitement to hatred. At the front of my mind are the Nigerian doctors and nurses who recently attended me in hospital and to whom I owe a debt of gratitude for their care and professionalism. It's disturbing to think how they might have felt on reading Myers stinking outpourings. I wonder too how comfortable the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Michael Martin, will feel if asked to explain by, say, Nelson Mandela, why our foremost national newspaper can include such venomously racist journalism?

Myers is into the business of shock and awe journalism and this somewhat jaded recipe for attracting attention to himself has long since descended into self-parody. He is the screaming brat in the corner whose tantrums grow ever more tiresome with each passing year. His thoughts on any given subject are entirely predictable – so much so that one needs only to understand what his chosen theme is in order to know exactly what he is going to say. There is no necessity whatsoever to bother reading his column. This is a point that The Independent ought to consider. How much stupefaction can they inflict on the reading public before it dawns on them that there are other voices that it might be quite nice to hear from for a while? While, I'm on the subject, this is a problem with all of our national press, many of whose columnists appear to have actually fossilised into the fabric of their respective publishing institutions. Even when they do succeed in getting rid of them, they are passed around to the others - as has happened with Myers. Why must we go on as if there were only four people with anything worthwhile to say in Ireland? At any rate, I hope that Kevin in particular can be put out to grass as soon as possible so we can all have a much-needed rest from this particularly obnoxious bore. Failing that, and since Myers himself is cheerfully hypothesising about the desirability of millions of African children dying of malaria, I'd like to adapt the idea to my purpose here: I wonder is there any possibility that some hitherto unknown and virulent strain of that - or any other disease capable of doing the job - might strike him down some time soon? I'd mark the anniversary of his culling with a champagne celebration every year.
Yours sincerely
Miriam Cotton
Editor
MediaBite

The Myers article is offensive where it lumps all citizens of these countries into the one boat. That is just about unforgivable. It also doesn't come out in favour of any helpful solutions.
The fact that Myers is so over the top allows him to say these things and get away with it. These are very dangerous things he is saying though. One might think his tongue is in his cheek, but is it really? and who else will he inspire?
On the other hand, Miriam Cotton's reply plays only the man and not the ball. The fact of the matter is that Africa is experiencing huge problems because of population explosion and these problems are being exported to the rest of the world. In essence, Myers has a point and if this point is ignored it will be more people like him who mix such important and threatening issues up with stigmatisation, repulsive characterisations and racist undertones that will be most heard by the worried West and the angry poor. The model of support for Africa needs to be totally re-worked as it is not working and the fuse is running short.

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

The Myers article is offensive where it lumps all citizens of these countries into the one boat. That is just about unforgivable. It also doesn't come out in favour of any helpful solutions.
The fact that Myers is so over the top allows him to say these things and get away with it. These are very dangerous things he is saying though. One might think his tongue is in his cheek, but is it really? and who else will he inspire?
On the other hand, Miriam Cotton's reply plays only the man and not the ball. The fact of the matter is that Africa is experiencing huge problems because of population explosion and these problems are being exported to the rest of the world. In essence, Myers has a point and if this point is ignored it will be more people like him who mix such important and threatening issues up with stigmatisation, repulsive characterisations and racist undertones that will be most heard by the worried West and the angry poor. The model of support for Africa needs to be totally re-worked as it is not working and the fuse is running short.

I agree with what you say Zhou (have you seen the other thread on population control btw - title 'If you do nothing else with your day, your week or even your life'. )

The letter above is making a general point about Myers journalism as a media phenomenon - it isn't really about the Africa issue itself. Myers is routinely obnoxious to and about people. A regular taste of his own medicine might be what is called for.

I haven't looked at those videos and I won' have time today. Is he the same guy who did the vids about peak oil and exponential growth? It looks like him and it is uni of colorado so I guess it is him. The peak oil ones were excellent.

BTW - I don't think KM should be treated to his own medecine.

He can only flourish in a world of broad brush strokes and insults. Attacking him by him by his own methods leaves him with his basic arguments intact. People will say, "look at them attacking him and failing to face up to the truth of what he is saying". That makes his hatred stronger and more dangerous.

Any attack on KM should first disarm him by acknowledging the seeds of truth in some of what he is saying. Would-be supporters can then be satisfied that they can find more reasonable champions who are willing to face up to these problems. After that one can target the insidious, false and dangerous parts of what he is saying.

TBH - I thought Myers was spot on with this article - you mightn't like the way it is expressed - and I dont agree with everything he says - he is polemist and to give him his credit he does not shy away from taking on sacred cows - he took a filleting knife to Enda Kenny last week - and he wasnt that far away from the mark either.

As an atheist who takes a trocaire box every year, who does the concern fast every year, who is currently supporting 10 kids in various countries by a Direct Debit payment every month - I am sadly coming to the same conclusions as Mr Myers about Africa and the whole aid progamme and what it is actually achieving except for overpopulation and a lifesupport for the current dysfuntional setup of the Africa continent. The more I look into it - the more depressed I get and once again ,like the middleeast I think its time for the West to find alternatives to the mineral commodities which keep these wretched despots and regimes alive - stop the money supply and cut and run and let the violent revolutions that should come the way of these archaic and crumbling ways of life and governmence finally happen.

Free trade I hear you all scream - Well the biggest trade barriers and most inpenetratable tarriff systems in the world are between African states themselves - when they finally learn to start trading with each other , particularly in regard to foodstuffs and start up some embyronic fair trade system for the continent - then we can sit down and do deals - at the moment these trade barriers are purely for the benefit of the ruling regimes and their cronies who hold monopolies on very good and commodity concievable in the individual countries (think Ireland in the 1930s,40s and 50s) thus totally obliterating any chance of entrepreneurialship ,enterprise and investment.

I do question whethere Africa can ever join the modern world - maybe we should just turn the whole continent - people and all, into one giant safari park and let them get on with it.

Edo wrote:

TBH - I thought Myers was spot on with this article - you mightn't like the way it is expressed - and I dont agree with everything he says - he is polemist and to give him his credit he does not shy away from taking on sacred cows - he took a filleting knife to Enda Kenny last week - and he wasnt that far away from the mark either.

As an atheist who takes a trocaire box every year, who does the concern fast every year, who is currently supporting 10 kids in various countries by a Direct Debit payment every month - I am sadly coming to the same conclusions as Mr Myers about Africa and the whole aid progamme and what it is actually achieving except for overpopulation and a lifesupport for the current dysfuntional setup of the Africa continent. The more I look into it - the more depressed I get and once again ,like the middleeast I think its time for the West to find alternatives to the mineral commodities which keep these wretched despots and regimes alive - stop the money supply and cut and run and let the violent revolutions that should come the way of these archaic and crumbling ways of life and governmence finally happen.

Free trade I hear you all scream - Well the biggest trade barriers and most inpenetratable tarriff systems in the world are between African states themselves - when they finally learn to start trading with each other , particularly in regard to foodstuffs and start up some embyronic fair trade system for the continent - then we can sit down and do deals - at the moment these trade barriers are purely for the benefit of the ruling regimes and their cronies who hold monopolies on very good and commodity concievable in the individual countries (think Ireland in the 1930s,40s and 50s) thus totally obliterating any chance of entrepreneurialship ,enterprise and investment.

I do question whethere Africa can ever join the modern world - maybe we should just turn the whole continent - people and all, into one giant safari park and let them get on with it.

Man alive, Edo, do you have any idea the extent to which Western corporates control what is happening in Africa - and how the aid supplied is tied in in most cases to forcing African countries to adopt economic policies that are in direct conflict with the possibility of eradicating social ills - have actually worsened the situation. This is not to say that there is nothing the African countries could or should be doing for themselves or that their corruption is somehow worse than our own. The difference is that theirs is not backed up by horrific arsenals of weaponry which we dont hesitate to use to get our hands on - oil for instance. The success of the US is based on the slaughter of the native inhabitants, the enslavement of millions of black African people, the unsustainable rape of its own resources and because of which it is now bent on violent invasion of other nations to secure what it wants so it can continue on its destructive path. Far from genuflecting before the altar of this evild God, whe should be running as fast as we can in the opposite direction and reassessing everything which our way of life is currently predicated on.

Look around you at what is happening in the world - the exact policies that you prescribe as the remedy for Africa are causng catastrophic damage on a global scale - now begining to catch up with us at a terrifying speed. There is no such thing as endless growth in a world of finite ecological health and resources - so you are right population and consumption control are essential - especially among those nations who are consuming the most. Of course the opposite of that is the great lie on which western societies and capitalism are based. Sorry to refer to it again but all roads seem to lead back to the US physicist Professor Albert Bartletts urgent warning and the mathematical certainty he has identified about how we are going to have to completely abandon the principle of growth if we are to survive.

TBH, I don't understand how anyone could publically identify with Myers article - any possibility that he had anything of worth to say was destroyed by the deliberately insulting language and sentiment. As someone else has asked , when he refers to 'an entire continent of hyperactive sexual indigents' does he mean to include white South Africans and Zimbabweans for example? Or can we assume that his comments are strictly related to black people. I wouldnt want to be seen on the same side of the street as this guy.

The article was bed, even by Myers' standards. But the letter was pretty bad too. Apart from some spelling errors, the letter called Myers a screaming brat and then proceeded to pay attention to him. I would have thought that the correct response would be to ignore him. Also she seems to be appealing to the Indo's bottom line. I'm sure no one worries more about their profits than they themselves and they seem perfectly happy to humour Myers. I myself often buy the Indo on the strength of Myers or O'Doherty. I know I shouldn't but I do, I'm only human.

As for the points he raises, well it was too grossly generalising to be taken seriously for the most part. Whe people argue soemthing as badly as that I like to think that the argument needs no help in demolishing itself. I was under the impression that Ethiopia was relatively well-behaved, not full of kalashnikov-wielding rapists. Somalia is jam-packed with them, thanks in part to the Wesht's own policies in the area.

Edo wrote:

The more I look into it - the more depressed I get and once again ,like the middleeast I think its time for the West to find alternatives to the mineral commodities which keep these wretched despots and regimes alive - stop the money supply and cut and run and let the violent revolutions that should come the way of these archaic and crumbling ways of life and governmence finally happen.

The west has created a lot of the African problems for its own selfish ends and cannot wash its hands of the people while it benefits form their persecution. It is no wonder the AU is not kow-towing to British hypocrisy over Zimbabwe. I suspect that these countries would be happy enough if the western countries found alternatives to the minerals and shagged off with their guns, their corrupting dollars, their sanctions, their conditional trade agreeemnts, their notions of democracy and their hypocrisy.

In any event, it is hard to know what to do now but the west has a duty to assist. Mr. Myers should acknowledge that the money that has gone to Africa from Ireland is a pittance compared to the benefit we have reaped from the Governments and corporations that have abused them for so long.

I expect that the EU will actually beef up its borders hugely over the next 50 years to protect against immigration. I expect Ireland to be there with its hand out looking for assistance and explaining about its undefendable drug soaked coastline. I don't think we will have much option.

Freedom of expression etc. - should Myers be ignored if his writing can cause annoyance, upset or indignation? I chose to avoid Brendan O'Connor from the sunday version and I (used to) avoid the sunday Times for the same reason that the tone I found to be polemicist.

There will always be people who downright annoy you or piss you off in private or public life with their ignorance, prejudice and bigotry but it's another thing if an article in a public newspaper might abuse the freedom of expression to deliver a torrent of judgemental invective as it runs the risk of encitement to hatred. Generally I tend to ignore individuals with despicable, judgemental opinions so why can't the reader just not read Myers?

Is Myers opinion dangerous in this case and an incitement to racial hatred? Possibly. Unfortunately his tenor is also that of a lot of people in society though. Interesting question as to when emotional statements like he has expressed can be judged to be inciteful to hatred. The thing is, I think he'd be as quickk to say that we should deal with our own corruption instead of maintaining a supply line to corrupt regimes in

Quote :

an entire continent [almost] of sexually hyperactive indigents, with tens of millions of people who only survive because of help from the outside world.

A lot of that article was insensitive generalisation in the extreme at best and at worst possibly contains elements of incitement; whether he should be allowed to voice his opinion or not doesn't deny that he has drawn attention to a very serious issue despite the fact that he has packaged it up into an uncomfortable, if not ugly, little nut.

I think Myers has a right to say what he has said. His ugly and dangerous opinions are symptomatic of other ugly and dangerous opinions. If we don't hear these things then we can't address them. If people address the issues and not Myers then he can become an irrelevance. If people address Myers but not the issues then the problems are not alleviated.

Normally he wouldn't bother me bu this article could tap into something stronger than he normaly deals with. The attitude he espouses will have a real and immediate effect in the coming years as the country struggles with the integration of immigrants and pressures to co-operate with the developing world in the interests of environmental and political stability.

I was slightly bothered by the tone of Kevin Myers' article. Even if the Ethiopian child does grow up to be a kalashnikov wielding rapist, he deserves the chance to grow up into something useful.

Other than that the basic message is correct. Aid to Africa is wasted. It provides a good living to the people who run the charity industry but that's about it.

The message that has been coming out of Africa for the last couple of weeks over the Zimbabwe crisis (or non-crisis as Mbeki would have us believe) is that the west should butt out of Africa's business. If that's what they want, that's fine by me. South Africa can negotiate between the MDC and ZANU-PF and while they are at it they can feed the Ethiopians as well.

Apart from his final paragraph, where the reference to immigration could feed the racist masses here, I think that Myers is right to write an article that is deliberately provocative and asks the hard questions - though maybe not necessarily the right ones.

This is a good one to start with

Quote :

So why on earth should I do anything to encourage further catastrophic demographic growth in that country?

The key word there is 'catastrophic'.

Dealing with the problems facing Africa is going to take far more than filling the begging bowl or building a well here or there. We bear huge responsibility for many of the issues that affect that continent.

I don't think Myers is critical of development aid - though it's hard to tell, but I do think he's asking why (a legitimate question) we are called on to provide emergency aid over and over and over again. He's asking if the time has come to expect African countries (and again he lumps them all, unhelpfully together) to take responsibility for their actions and the effects that those actions have on their people.

Sub-Saharan Africa is being decimated by Aids - he's not wrong in pointing out that the continent's greatest export is a fatal disease. Nor however, do I think he's glorying in a foetor of condescending superiority as he says it. It's a fact.

Another fact is that we do bear responsibility for that in making tacitly saying that it's okay for pharmaceutical companies to ignore their moral obligation to make medication more available. But so to do governments bear the responsibility who refuse to accept and implement sexual health strategies that will benefit their peoples.

So too does the Catholic Church which continues to naively promote abstinence in place of the use of contraception as it does its missionary work throughout Africa.

And Western governments who support corrupt regimes to suit themselves are also responsible for a myriad of problems faced by a myriad of African nations. And these are governments that ordinary people like us, who give our coppers to the collector on the street, vote into power. Have a look at Somalia here (I've quoted a piece from that article at the very bottom) or Swaziland here.

He is absolutely right to say that there are countries who have nothing to offer except Aids and those are the ones that have been pillaged by the west and by their own rulers. Now, we can smile and visit South Africa on our holidays - but most people wouldn't dream of an extended break in Chad or in a long weekend in Somalia. And we can buy our diamonds from the Ivory Coast (and forget the underpaid kiddies who lose their hands and the mercy of ruthless mine managers) and buy our sugarsnap peas from Kenya because it suits us. We take - as we always have done - what we want from where it suits us. We ignore, to a large extent, the troubles in countries we don't like to think of and salve our consciences with a direct debit to Trocaire or Concern.

What Myers is asking for - and once again, the message has been lost - is for a belt and braces re-evaluation of foreign and aid policy to the developing world. The current situation is utterly unsustainable. He's right about that.

Quote :

This dependency has not stimulated political prudence or commonsense. Indeed, voodoo idiocy seems to be in the ascendant, with the next president of South Africa being a firm believer in the efficacy of a little tap water on the post-coital penis as a sure preventative against infection.

This is a fair point to make.

I find his broad reference to a collective overactive African sex-drive unnecessary and counterproductive. It distracts from what could be a fine polemic that might just provoke the masses into thinking beyond the obvious.

On the otherhand, Miriam Cotton's letter is a travesty. She had a number of options. She could have read the article and left her personal agenda at home and looked for the message, she could have ignored the message and responded in a narrow fashion (as she did) only to the deliberate hyperbole that is expressly designed to provoke, or she could have done some research and actively rebutted what is to be rebutted or agreed with has substantive merit.

Her letter is worse than Myers' article, not only because it misses the point, but it does so in a way that will encourage those without the wit to think for themselves to read the article and NOT engage with the very legitimate issues that Myers is raising.

How much better would her response have been if she had given some thought to the substantive issues raise by populations out of control?

Quote :

So, how much sense does it make for us actively to increase the adult population of what is already a vastly over-populated, environmentally devastated and economically dependent country?

How much morality is there in saving an Ethiopian child from starvation today, for it to survive to a life of brutal circumcision, poverty, hunger, violence and sexual abuse, resulting in another half-dozen such wide-eyed children, with comparably jolly little lives ahead of them? Of course, it might make you feel better, which is a prime reason for so much charity. But that is not good enough.

He's right. It's not good enough. But to think about that requires more than the ten minutes it takes to write, full of ire, to the editor of the paper and feel that you've done a good job in taking the columnist to task while avoiding the issue. That's not good enough either.

But it's a pity he doesn't make a distinction between development and emergency aid. I believe in the logic that teaches a man to fish rather than feeding him for a day. Anyone who looks at their website will see that they have a fantastic programme of development aid and a look at their annual reports will show how much of their money goes on real work as opposed to posturing.

I don't pretend to have a solution, but like Myers, I think we should start by asking the questions.

Quote :

The West Compounds Somalia's Problems
Barre then turned to the United States. The Carter administration promised to help if Somalia would cut ties to Moscow. Barre did so, and on August 22, 1980, Somalia and the United States signed an agreement that permitted the United States to use military facilities at the port of Berbera. In exchange, Washington agreed to provide Barre with $20 million in credits for the purchase of military equipment, $5 million in budgetary support, and $20 million in general credits that year. But the change in its geo-political alignment did not save Somalia, which was already beyond redemption.
In July 1976 the Revolutionary Council was disbanded and replaced with the Revolutionary Socialist Party, the sole legal party. Socialist policies, however, failed to engineer economic development. Although Somalia did become a major supplier of bananas, the economy was in tatters by 1979. The International Monetary Fund, summoned in 1980, called for market-oriented economic policies, devaluation of the Somali shilling, and sale of unprofitable state enterprises. After eight years of government policy zigzagging and posturing, in June 1986 a frustrated IMF pulled out, declaring Somalia ineligible for further borrowing.
Over the period 1965-87 living standards remained stagnant. Even though Somalia received substantial amounts of foreign aid, its gross national product per capita grew at a miserable 0.3 percent a year, earning Somalia the title "the Graveyard of Aid."(1) Over $800 million poured in from the United States during that time.
Between 1981 and 1990 Italy alone spent more than $1 billion to sponsor 114 projects in Somalia. According to Wolfgang Achtner, an Italian journalist, "With few exceptions, (such as vaccination programs carried out by NGOs [nongovernmental organizations]), the Italian ventures were absurd and wasteful." He wrote:
Approximately $250 million was spent on the Garoe- Bosaso road that stretches 450 kilometers across barren desert, crossed only by nomads on foot. More than $40 million was spent to build a brand new hospital equipped with sophisticated machinery and operating rooms, in Corioley, south of Mogadishu. Since the Somalis were unable to run it, the hospital was allowed to fall to pieces. The Italian government paid about $95 million for a fertilizer plant in Mogadishu that never became operational. The Italians even established a University of Somalia--despite the fact that 98 percent of the population is illiterate. The Italian professors received salaries between $16,000 and $20,000 per month.(2)
Piero Ugolini, an agronomist who worked for the technical unit of the Italian Embassy in Mogadishu from 1986 to 1990, revealed that a majority of Italian cooperative projects were carried out without considering their effects on the local population. "[The] Italian aid program was used to exploit the pastoral populations and to support a regime that did nothing to promote internal development and was responsible for the death of many of its people," Ugolini said.(3)
Corruption increasingly became a problem, and foreign aid simply went to replace capital outflows. In 1984, for example, $15 million flowed out of Somalia. Misguided socialist policies did not help food production, either. It declined by 2.7 percent per capita over the 1975-80 period and a further 1.3 percent from 1980 to 1985. By 1987 consumer prices had risen 1,000 percent over their 1980 level.

Kate P wrote:

Apart from his final paragraph, where the reference to immigration could feed the racist masses here, I think that Myers is right to write an article that is deliberately provocative and asks the hard questions - though maybe not necessarily the right ones.

This is a good one to start with

Quote :

So why on earth should I do anything to encourage further catastrophic demographic growth in that country?

The key word there is 'catastrophic'.

Dealing with the problems facing Africa is going to take far more than filling the begging bowl or building a well here or there. We bear huge responsibility for many of the issues that affect that continent.

I don't think Myers is critical of development aid - though it's hard to tell, but I do think he's asking why (a legitimate question) we are called on to provide emergency aid over and over and over again. He's asking if the time has come to expect African countries (and again he lumps them all, unhelpfully together) to take responsibility for their actions and the effects that those actions have on their people.

Sub-Saharan Africa is being decimated by Aids - he's not wrong in pointing out that the continent's greatest export is a fatal disease. Nor however, do I think he's glorying in a foetor of condescending superiority as he says it. It's a fact.

Another fact is that we do bear responsibility for that in making tacitly saying that it's okay for pharmaceutical companies to ignore their moral obligation to make medication more available. But so to do governments bear the responsibility who refuse to accept and implement sexual health strategies that will benefit their peoples.

So too does the Catholic Church which continues to naively promote abstinence in place of the use of contraception as it does its missionary work throughout Africa.

And Western governments who support corrupt regimes to suit themselves are also responsible for a myriad of problems faced by a myriad of African nations. And these are governments that ordinary people like us, who give our coppers to the collector on the street, vote into power. Have a look at Somalia here (I've quoted a piece from that article at the very bottom) or Swaziland here.

He is absolutely right to say that there are countries who have nothing to offer except Aids and those are the ones that have been pillaged by the west and by their own rulers. Now, we can smile and visit South Africa on our holidays - but most people wouldn't dream of an extended break in Chad or in a long weekend in Somalia. And we can buy our diamonds from the Ivory Coast (and forget the underpaid kiddies who lose their hands and the mercy of ruthless mine managers) and buy our sugarsnap peas from Kenya because it suits us. We take - as we always have done - what we want from where it suits us. We ignore, to a large extent, the troubles in countries we don't like to think of and salve our consciences with a direct debit to Trocaire or Concern.

What Myers is asking for - and once again, the message has been lost - is for a belt and braces re-evaluation of foreign and aid policy to the developing world. The current situation is utterly unsustainable. He's right about that.

Quote :

This dependency has not stimulated political prudence or commonsense. Indeed, voodoo idiocy seems to be in the ascendant, with the next president of South Africa being a firm believer in the efficacy of a little tap water on the post-coital penis as a sure preventative against infection.

This is a fair point to make.

I find his broad reference to a collective overactive African sex-drive unnecessary and counterproductive. It distracts from what could be a fine polemic that might just provoke the masses into thinking beyond the obvious.

On the otherhand, Miriam Cotton's letter is a travesty. She had a number of options. She could have read the article and left her personal agenda at home and looked for the message, she could have ignored the message and responded in a narrow fashion (as she did) only to the deliberate hyperbole that is expressly designed to provoke, or she could have done some research and actively rebutted what is to be rebutted or agreed with has substantive merit.

Her letter is worse than Myers' article, not only because it misses the point, but it does so in a way that will encourage those without the wit to think for themselves to read the article and NOT engage with the very legitimate issues that Myers is raising.

How much better would her response have been if she had given some thought to the substantive issues raise by populations out of control?

Quote :

So, how much sense does it make for us actively to increase the adult population of what is already a vastly over-populated, environmentally devastated and economically dependent country?

How much morality is there in saving an Ethiopian child from starvation today, for it to survive to a life of brutal circumcision, poverty, hunger, violence and sexual abuse, resulting in another half-dozen such wide-eyed children, with comparably jolly little lives ahead of them? Of course, it might make you feel better, which is a prime reason for so much charity. But that is not good enough.

He's right. It's not good enough. But to think about that requires more than the ten minutes it takes to write, full of ire, to the editor of the paper and feel that you've done a good job in taking the columnist to task while avoiding the issue. That's not good enough either.

But it's a pity he doesn't make a distinction between development and emergency aid. I believe in the logic that teaches a man to fish rather than feeding him for a day. Anyone who looks at their website will see that they have a fantastic programme of development aid and a look at their annual reports will show how much of their money goes on real work as opposed to posturing.

I don't pretend to have a solution, but like Myers, I think we should start by asking the questions.

Quote :

The West Compounds Somalia's Problems
Barre then turned to the United States. The Carter administration promised to help if Somalia would cut ties to Moscow. Barre did so, and on August 22, 1980, Somalia and the United States signed an agreement that permitted the United States to use military facilities at the port of Berbera. In exchange, Washington agreed to provide Barre with $20 million in credits for the purchase of military equipment, $5 million in budgetary support, and $20 million in general credits that year. But the change in its geo-political alignment did not save Somalia, which was already beyond redemption.
In July 1976 the Revolutionary Council was disbanded and replaced with the Revolutionary Socialist Party, the sole legal party. Socialist policies, however, failed to engineer economic development. Although Somalia did become a major supplier of bananas, the economy was in tatters by 1979. The International Monetary Fund, summoned in 1980, called for market-oriented economic policies, devaluation of the Somali shilling, and sale of unprofitable state enterprises. After eight years of government policy zigzagging and posturing, in June 1986 a frustrated IMF pulled out, declaring Somalia ineligible for further borrowing.
Over the period 1965-87 living standards remained stagnant. Even though Somalia received substantial amounts of foreign aid, its gross national product per capita grew at a miserable 0.3 percent a year, earning Somalia the title "the Graveyard of Aid."(1) Over $800 million poured in from the United States during that time.
Between 1981 and 1990 Italy alone spent more than $1 billion to sponsor 114 projects in Somalia. According to Wolfgang Achtner, an Italian journalist, "With few exceptions, (such as vaccination programs carried out by NGOs [nongovernmental organizations]), the Italian ventures were absurd and wasteful." He wrote:
Approximately $250 million was spent on the Garoe- Bosaso road that stretches 450 kilometers across barren desert, crossed only by nomads on foot. More than $40 million was spent to build a brand new hospital equipped with sophisticated machinery and operating rooms, in Corioley, south of Mogadishu. Since the Somalis were unable to run it, the hospital was allowed to fall to pieces. The Italian government paid about $95 million for a fertilizer plant in Mogadishu that never became operational. The Italians even established a University of Somalia--despite the fact that 98 percent of the population is illiterate. The Italian professors received salaries between $16,000 and $20,000 per month.(2)
Piero Ugolini, an agronomist who worked for the technical unit of the Italian Embassy in Mogadishu from 1986 to 1990, revealed that a majority of Italian cooperative projects were carried out without considering their effects on the local population. "[The] Italian aid program was used to exploit the pastoral populations and to support a regime that did nothing to promote internal development and was responsible for the death of many of its people," Ugolini said.(3)
Corruption increasingly became a problem, and foreign aid simply went to replace capital outflows. In 1984, for example, $15 million flowed out of Somalia. Misguided socialist policies did not help food production, either. It declined by 2.7 percent per capita over the 1975-80 period and a further 1.3 percent from 1980 to 1985. By 1987 consumer prices had risen 1,000 percent over their 1980 level.

I wonder if you could comfortably argue much of what you say in defence of Myer's artcle here to an African person. I totally disagree that there is any justification or worth in setting out to offend and insult and think that any possible worth his article might have had is lost because of it. You can only argue this if you are indifferent to the hurt and anger caused by this sort of behaviour. The African people I have forwarded this article to are disgusted - journalists, aid workers, black business people, medics and so forth - even those who recognise that Africa itself bears the responsibility for resolving its problems - if it were not constantly intefered with by external actors. To a person they are disgusted that anything argued in the context of such blatant racism could still be acceptable. That Hitler may have made valid points about Jewish people in no way justifies his comparably provoking and offensive solutions to what he saw as the problem of the Jews - whose inferior status and history of victimisation he equally saw as being something inherent to their way of thinking and behaving.

Aragon - I think you need to get out of your comfort zone (which seems to ,given your postings here ,to comprise completely of seeing the US and Britain as the source of all evil in this world) and start to reassess your worldview, which IMO, is about 10 years out of date , if it ever had the goldplated validity that you seem to ascribe to it.

Firstly on this topic - you need to go to Africa - have you ever been?

Im quite sure that the Africans you contacted were quite appalled at Myers' article - It was totally unPC and runs against the conventional grain that all Africas problems are western based and nobody likes to be told and reminded in such a brutual and direct fashion that their problems might be more to do with a refusal to look at themselves in the mirror than bleating on for more Western aid and access to Western Market - as valid as some of those arguements are - also most Africans here in Ireland are scions of the elites back home - there are not many shit poor illiterate Africans who can afford the aircraft fare to Ireland! - or getting educated here in Ireland - they are not going to damn their own.

My premise is that Africa needs to learn to stand on its own 2 feet and look after the problems that are within its remit to do things about. The Western Bogeyman is no longer a factor here. Here in Ireland ,over 80% of the investment in here (leaving aside the whole illfated property adventure) is from outside this juristiction , and over 75% of the value of our exports are produced by Multinationals and the profits of which are remited out of the state again - yet we dont appear to suffer unduly. Why - because we have a rule of law and low corruption ( in the grand scheme of things -its low) and our democracy functions and our government and civil service and elites dont sell the country out to the highest bidder. The analogy with Ireland is a good one in this context - in 1960 we were far poorer than Nigeria,South Africa ,Kenya, and a host of other African countries - They all got their independence then and in the intervening years and yet time after time , example after example - its always the same - independence, one party rule - a descent into some extreme right or left ideology to justify the end of democracy - widespread corruption, Black capital flight (there is probably more african wealth in Switzerland in the accounts of corrupted officials and leaders than there is in the whole of africa at the moment) ,The slowing down and ending of trade as the ruling cliques divide up the industrial,agricultural,extractive and service base of each state to produce revenue streams for their own extravagence - thus resulting in enforced monopolies ,and thus the withering away of private enterprise - thus resulting in a drying up of the taxbase, thus resulting in the withering away and rusting away of public services and infrastructure - thus resulting in the wholesale destruction of justice, law and order and this vital vital part of civic society being up for the highest bidder. it just goes on and on and on.

I took a trip in 1997 that not many would contemplate doing now - not sure if its even possible - from Abidjan in Cote D'ivoire to Yaounde ,Capital of Cameroon. just a simple road trip along the coast thru 5 countries - in lenght about the same as going from Malaga in Spain to Genoa in Italy - that trip takes 2 days max on the Grande Sud Train. the same journey in Africa took 2 weeks - and its a trip that will tell you all you need to know about Africa and the state it finds itself in - I needed 6 visas which cumatively cost 200 dollars up front and took 3 weeks to process before I left - I flew into a gigantic airport in Abidjan - far bigger than would be required - yet was already in a state of disrepair a few years after construction - the next 2 weeks consisted of going past the folly of white elephants constructions that cost a fortune and were just pointless , extravangant villas that would shame Paris Hilton in their opulence, tinpot shanty towns a checkpoint away from them that shamed and angered me , checkpoints every 20-30 miles depending how much money the police were earning and how much inflation was eating away at the native currency - bribes cost me 100 dollars in small bills , 5 bottles of whisky and 3 cartons of smokes - as I drove alongside acres and acres of fruit and veg being grown by the local elites for sale to Multinationals - its a two way street and it takes two to tango - Africa does not have a bullet put to its head over who it sells what to - it openly choses to sell and than the price that it charges - all in all an eyeopening and depressing trip

.I dont know what the solution is , but it will have to be an African one ,decided by Africans and funded by Africans - China will become Africas largest trading partner next year ,overtaking the US - given its simple policy of paying for the land for mineral rights and commodities,no questions asked regarding human rights and the easy sale back of cheap consumer goods and small arms weaponry - Im not massively confident about the future here.

Also forgot to say - the point of the letter above has been completely missed by a couple of people - it's about Myer's style of journalism not the article itself. Funny too how so much invective can be directed at the apparent crime of challenging intentionally unpleasant journalism - while bending over backwards to justify ideas contextualised in racist bilge - and claiming threby to have oh-so-cleverly discerned Myer's true purpose! 'Hyperbole' indeed! Other letter writers have made a complete fool out of Myers over this divisive and unhelpful article by pointing out the woeful inaccuracy in much of what he said. In fact Myers seems to make a habit of getting things wrong while routinely accusing others of that fault. Better to address points about researching things before writing about them to Mr Myers.

The letter from Miriam Cotton was cutting and insulting to Kevin Myers. I did not find it interesting though as it consisted of little more than name calling. Myers' article, for all of its inaccuracies and bile, was a lot more interesting and thought inspiring than Ms. Cotton's criticism of Myers.

Aragon wrote:

Also forgot to say - the point of the letter above has been completely missed by a couple of people - it's about Myer's style of journalism not the article itself. Funny too how so much invective can be directed at the apparent crime of challenging intentionally unpleasant journalism - while bending over backwards to justify ideas contextualised in racist bilge - and claiming threby to have oh-so-cleverly discerned Myer's true purpose! 'Hyperbole' indeed! Other letter writers have made a complete fool out of Myers over this divisive and unhelpful article by pointing out the woeful inaccuracy in much of what he said. In fact Myers seems to make a habit of getting things wrong while routinely accusing others of that fault. Better to address points about researching things before writing about them to Mr Myers.

I was waiting for someone to reply to someone else before I brought up the issue of style. It would be insulting to the idea of Jonathan Swift to compare but the general point is an interesting one in that how should style be used to deliver a message? Do you think Myers has a legitimate message Aragon? I would say it is representative of many opinions but as someone has already said, it is dangerous in that it might push other opinions over the edge of racial hatred. Especially if this type of incitement became more acceptable (at least we are addressing it now) as the indo has a wide circulation and the last thing we should be doing is inciting hatred against immigrants, which an article with this type of tone might be liable to contribute to.

Assuming many in our society are mature enough to make rational decisions about what they read (given good and balanced information), is it necessary sometimes to use a particularly shocking style in order to stimulate debate? Information on its own is often not enough to galivanise thoughts on something but neither do we want to galvanise adverse opinion. I would say there is a huge element of anger about both the article and the responding letter and anger can be an important emotion to address genuine indignation at genuine problems but we must be very careful with anger all round.

Is the issue then moreso about the outrage and anger involved in composing the style of such pieces and whether sometimes this is necessary to re-ignite interest in a dormant or inert debate and whether anger and such emotion is a valid device at all or where and when it should be used. The same article written without the sense of indignation might be a very different article indeed. And indeed, has the tone only served to stimulate a similar emotion in at least one reader who has responded with ferocity and outrage themselves only not at the nub of injustice in the piece but at the writer? Therefore has the writer overshot his audience by employing such emotion as a device? He certainly overshot Ms. Cotton.

The title of Myer's article - 'Africa gives absolutely nothing to anyone – apart from Aids' is a Big Lie. I can't believe that Myers can be really ignorant of the hoovering out by "developed nations" of Africa's of natural resources over the last hundred or so years. I just got my head out of "Globalism and its Discontents" that shows pretty clearly how more advanced economies have sucked out Africa's assets.

Any leader of a less developed country who tries to do anything constructive for his or her country and not just palace-building is excoriated by the Press. The leaders described so despisingly by Myers are presumably the compliant who oblige corporations and "development agencies".

The tendency to large families is associated with poverty and high infant mortality. Where people are employed and secure they reduce their family sizes. Africa has got poorer in the last two decades and the advanced economies through their agencies (IMF, World Bank and so on) have had a lot to do with that. And to what extent has African poverty been made worse by climate change that has been caused by the "developed nations".

I don't think charity is the answer to anything, in fact I think its part of the problem. I think that development of the African Union or a United States of Africa is the way to go. I'm not suggesting that existing aid should be cut off overnight, but that we should butt out and stop interfering politically. We should provide finance on fair terms and open up our markets. We should stop stealing their fish. Africa is much better placed to become self sufficent than Europe is, in the long term. Good enough for us if they told us to Eff Off when we come asking for their uranium and oil and solar resources.

Myers is a very odd man who seems to have some weird sexual obsession/fantasy going here too. Does the Indo have sub editors?/ editors?

Good luck to Miriam Cotton and anyone else who took the time and trouble to object to the Independent about that toxic piece of rubbish.

The tone and content of the article is racist and is the sort of material that left unchallenged will fuel further anti-African racism in the Irish media. Personally I suspect that this sort of journalism gives confidence to racists who go out and look for someone to hurt.

I don't find the piece racist but then again I could be a naive boy. It's angry and indignant and a generalising rant but it would be interesting to see what you find racist in it cactus.

Quote :

There is, no doubt a good argument why we should prolong this predatory and dysfunctional economic, social and sexual system; but I do not know what it is

There is a genocidal tinge to the whole thing, not just racism. I'm a bit out of time, and will get back to the thread later.

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

The letter from Miriam Cotton was cutting and insulting to Kevin Myers. I did not find it interesting though as it consisted of little more than name calling. Myers' article, for all of its inaccuracies and bile, was a lot more interesting and thought inspiring than Ms. Cotton's criticism of Myers.

And about the insults to Africans in Myer's article Zhou? Wasn't that the dominant factor from headline to conclusion? Doesn't that call into question the worth and intent of the article? Do you think any African person would not be offended that you should disregard the venomous insult to them and describe that piece as remotely 'thought provoking and inspiring'? Your own subconscious racism is showing through - and it is always the racism of which people are not conscious that is the most deadly and intractable. Wasn't the letter just a little bit of a taste of his own medicine? Or are we saying here that it is alright for Kevin Myers to endlessly insult and offend others, as he does, and unthinkable for anyone to do a 'right back atcha, mate'. If you dish it out...

Jesus, the number of people falling over themsleves to find some way of defending this mainfest ugliness is depressing. Put the same article in a student newsletter under a pseudonym and watch what would happen. But no, Mr Myers is establishment and so if we are to keep our sense of the world being the right way up, and if that means not questioning or criticising an establishment pillar on the same terms he deploys himself (is Myers really so much as an establishment pillar?) then let us go all the way to the further reaches of our moral logic and beyond in order to preserve the status quo. Ergo, Myers can behave like an absolute **** and anyone who challenges him be deemed outrageous for daring to do so. I think it is entirely possible that certain elements in our society would contemplate violence on African people on account of reading this article. If you can say that it is acceptable for millions of African children to die from preventable disease, how different is that from saying why dont we just kill them? A crime can be commited as much by a deliberate omission as by a positive act.

Kevin Myers wrote:

No. It will not do. Even as we see African states refusing to take action to restore something resembling civilisation in Zimbabwe, the begging bowl for Ethiopia is being passed around to us, yet again. It is nearly 25 years since Ethiopia's (and Bob Geldof's) famous Feed The World campaign, and in that time Ethiopia's population has grown from 33.5 million to 78 million today.

So why on earth should I do anything to encourage further catastrophic demographic growth in that country? Where is the logic? There is none. To be sure, there are two things saying that logic doesn't count.

One is my conscience, and the other is the picture, yet again, of another wide-eyed child, yet again, gazing, yet again, at the camera, which yet again, captures the tragedy of . . .

Sorry. My conscience has toured this territory on foot and financially. Unlike most of you, I have been to Ethiopia; like most of you, I have stumped up the loot to charities to stop starvation there. The wide-eyed boy-child we saved, 20 years or so ago, is now a priapic, Kalashnikov-bearing hearty, siring children whenever the whim takes him.

There is, no doubt a good argument why we should prolong this predatory and dysfunctional economic, social and sexual system; but I do not know what it is. There is, on the other hand, every reason not to write a column like this.

It will win no friends, and will provoke the self-righteous wrath of, well, the self-righteous, letter-writing wrathful, a species which never fails to contaminate almost every debate in Irish life with its sneers and its moral superiority. It will also probably enrage some of the finest men in Irish life, like John O'Shea, of Goal; and the Finucane brothers, men whom I admire enormously. So be it.

But, please, please, you self-righteously wrathful, spare me mention of our own Famine, with this or that lazy analogy. There is no comparison. Within 20 years of the Famine, the Irish population was down by 30pc. Over the equivalent period, thanks to western food, the Mercedes 10-wheel truck and the Lockheed Hercules, Ethiopia's has more than doubled.

Alas, that wretched country is not alone in its madness. Somewhere, over the rainbow, lies Somalia, another fine land of violent, Kalashnikov-toting, khat-chewing, girl-circumcising, permanently tumescent layabouts.

Indeed, we now have almost an entire continent of sexually hyperactive indigents, with tens of millions of people who only survive because of help from the outside world.

This dependency has not stimulated political prudence or commonsense. Indeed, voodoo idiocy seems to be in the ascendant, with the next president of South Africa being a firm believer in the efficacy of a little tap water on the post-coital penis as a sure preventative against infection. Needless to say, poverty, hunger and societal meltdown have not prevented idiotic wars involving Tigre, Uganda, Congo, Sudan, Somalia, Eritrea etcetera.

Broad brush-strokes, to be sure. But broad brush-strokes are often the way that history paints its gaudier, if more decisive, chapters. Japan, China, Russia, Korea, Poland, Germany, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia in the 20th century have endured worse broad brush-strokes than almost any part of Africa.

They are now -- one way or another -- virtually all giving aid to or investing in Africa, whereas Africa, with its vast savannahs and its lush pastures, is giving almost nothing to anyone, apart from AIDS.

Meanwhile, Africa's peoples are outstripping their resources, and causing catastrophic ecological degradation. By 2050, the population of Ethiopia will be 177 million: The equivalent of France, Germany and Benelux today, but located on the parched and increasingly protein-free wastelands of the Great Rift Valley.

So, how much sense does it make for us actively to increase the adult population of what is already a vastly over-populated, environmentally devastated and economically dependent country?

How much morality is there in saving an Ethiopian child from starvation today, for it to survive to a life of brutal circumcision, poverty, hunger, violence and sexual abuse, resulting in another half-dozen such wide-eyed children, with comparably jolly little lives ahead of them? Of course, it might make you feel better, which is a prime reason for so much charity. But that is not good enough.

For self-serving generosity has been one of the curses of Africa. It has sustained political systems which would otherwise have collapsed.

It prolonged the Eritrean-Ethiopian war by nearly a decade. It is inspiring Bill Gates' programme to rid the continent of malaria, when, in the almost complete absence of personal self-discipline, that disease is one of the most efficacious forms of population-control now operating.

If his programme is successful, tens of millions of children who would otherwise have died in infancy will survive to adulthood, he boasts. Oh good: then what?I know. Let them all come here. Yes, that's an idea.

The editors or sub-editors missed the three bits in bold above - the first one is not so insulting or sweeping as the second and third which are cause for calling Myers all sorts of names in fairness. (well, lets's say he is being adolescent and very unprofessional with some of those phrases)

The rest of the article bar the final paragraph reminding us of immigration policies I'd have trouble disagreeing with although a lot of it is expressed in a crass enough manner (though is it done half deliberately to grab the attention?) What else can truly be done for African problems, Aragon? Other continents suffered upheavals and wars through history without a lifeline to another continent the way many African nations have. Do you doubt that warlords are taking advantage of the generosity of you and me? I'm one who has also felt they had to contribute financially (and have done so) but I'd rather go and visit the country anymore if I felt I wanted to contribute.

Do you really think unconditional Aid is a solution to the problems in Africa Aragon because that's what I think Myers is getting at. You know, it's quite a while since the idea of 'compassion fatigue' came into being - maybe we need to take a more truculent proactive approach to problems in Africa.

I heard an african woman on the radio some time ago criticising Western hypocrisy over corruption. She pointed out that historically all western countries had suffered from endemic corruption in the development of their state. She pointed out that African countries could hardly be expected to skip this phase and that AID should be directed to do good without reference to corruption, i.e. it didn't matter if they were corrupt as long as they were not stealing the aid.

I myself think that this thing about not giving money to countries with corrupt regimes is morally bankrupt. It is a bit like saying that we are not going to send social workers to houses where the father is a child abuser. I was going to say it was intellectually bacnkrupt but if course it isn't. It is a good soundbite that can be used to justify amoral policies directed at promoting one's own interests. It can also been thrown out the window in any given situation if it does not suit as people won't argue against helping the starving and one can always claim to see some progress.

There's all kinds of aid, Zhou and all kinds of ways of making sure that it gets to the people who should get it where that is possible. Concern and Trocaire are good at this kind of work. The difficulty arises - as far as I am aware- with intergovernmental aid, which sometimes isn't about the people at all.

Country by country and situation by situation the needs and the methods of giving and using aid are different. Nobody is advocating that those who are starving be left to starve - the question that's being asked is whether we can do it better, more efficiently and more fairly, with all parties taking their responsibility.