Kevin Myers Action

Diogenes

Maximilian wrote: »

I take your point but even then, nobody other than those two tribes themselves decided to kill each other.

Those two tribes didn't decide to kill each other, one tribe set about the other. The Hutu's decided to kill the Tutsis.

Yes but you seem to take my point and just ignore it.

There's something like 22m people in Africa with HIV. That's an awful lot of truck drivers if you don't mind me saying.

Thats how it started. Because countries are burdened with unpayable western debt, they cannot invest in healthcare, education, and infrastructure the disease spread.

You're painting with very broad strokes.

As for the rest of it, I think the point Myers was making is that all the help Africa has received and continues to receive seemingly changes nothing and they themselves don't appear to do much to help themselves. Now to what extent that's true is open to debate but I don't see why Myers should be villified for saying it. Many people probably think it anyway.

And again they point that you seem unwilling to get is this. The help that Africa gets pails into insignificance against what we take from them. They are saddled with debt, they cannot pay off.

If they want loans to build infrastructure, they come with demands about "free trade" meaning they cannot build up their own industrial base, against cheaper foreign imports, so they're doomed into growing cash groups, to service debt, while their people starve.

Saying "Sure look at the money we give them, they waste it" it's a hopelessly simplistic view of the situation, and about as well reasoned an argument as you'd find in a transition year debate class.

bean

Diogenes wrote: »

And again, the spread of Aids in Africa started by mainly white European truck drivers going up and down the continent and sleeping with black prostitutes.

Probably doent help that the healthcare systems that might manage the spread of the disease and the education that might prevent it is unaffordable cause the GDP is being used to pay high interest rate of the aid to other governments

Diogenes

dsmythy wrote: »

I'm sorry, but you'll have to provide a link proving this.

Long distance truck drivers have been identified as a group with the high-risk behaviour of sleeping with prostitutes and a tendency to spread the infection along trade routes in the region. Infection rates of up to 33% were observed in this group in the late 1980s in Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania.

Link

Yes it's wikipedia, my original source was anecdotal, from a friend who attended this

e2a

The health ministry and HIV/AIDS groups are familiar with the problem of itinerate truckers. These drivers ply the routes from landlocked Swaziland to South Africa's Indian Ocean port of Durban and South Africa's industrial and commercial hub of Gauteng, who are at risk of contracting and spreading HIV.

http://ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=28543

Maximilian

Diogenes wrote: »

Those two tribes didn't decide to kill each other, one tribe set about the other. The Hutu's decided to kill the Tutsis.

Yes but you seem to take my point and just ignore it.

Hardly. My point was that the Belgians or the West didn't cause the genocide. That was the Africans themselves deciding to kill one another. Whether it was Hutus or Tutsis is beside the point.

Diogenes wrote: »

Thats how it started. Because countries are burdened with unpayable western debt, they cannot invest in healthcare, education, and infrastructure the disease spread.

You're painting with very broad strokes.

And again they point that you seem unwilling to get is this. The help that Africa gets pails into insignificance against what we take from them. They are saddled with debt, they cannot pay off.

If they want loans to build infrastructure, they come with demands about "free trade" meaning they cannot build up their own industrial base, against cheaper foreign imports, so they're doomed into growing cash groups, to service debt, while their people starve

Saying "Sure look at the money we give them, they waste it" it's a hopelessly simplistic view of the situation, and about as well reasoned an argument as you'd find in a transition year debate class.

Where have I said otherwise. Nobody disputes Africa is burdened with debt or what not. The point is that a lot of their problems are caused by themselves. Are you suggesting that exploitative multi-nationals and Western governments interfering serves to absolve the Africans of the horrors they inflict on themselves?

The simple point that you and others are determined to ignore is that the Africans share some if not most of the blame for their own troubles. It's as simple as that. Do not misinterpret my remarks as suggesting that we wash our hands of them.

Diogenes wrote: »

Saying "Sure look at the money we give them, they waste it" it's a hopelessly simplistic view of the situation, and about as well reasoned an argument as you'd find in a transition year debate class.

The point was that very little has changed despite all the aid given over the years. Perhaps we should be thinking about how better to utilise the money, if what has been done with it so far has had little effect. By the way, making condescending remarks doesn't serve to strengthan your arguments, rather it undermines them.

Maximilian

Diogenes wrote: »

Long distance truck drivers have been identified as a group with the high-risk behaviour of sleeping with prostitutes and a tendency to spread the infection along trade routes in the region. Infection rates of up to 33% were observed in this group in the late 1980s in Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania.

Link

Yes it's wikipedia, my original source was anecdotal, from a friend who attended this

e2a



http://ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=28543

22m HIV infections and you say its the truck drivers? But hey, don't take my word for it - from the second article you linked:

But it is unfair to single them out, and inaccurate to say truckers are a principal cause of infection,'' said AIDS activist Sempiwe Hlope.

dsmythy

Diogenes wrote: »

Long distance truck drivers have been identified as a group with the high-risk behaviour of sleeping with prostitutes and a tendency to spread the infection along trade routes in the region. Infection rates of up to 33% were observed in this group in the late 1980s in Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania.

Link

Yes it's wikipedia, my original source was anecdotal, from a friend who attended this

e2a



http://ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=28543

It proves the problem of truck drivers contracting and spreading HIV but i'd imagine the numbers of people who live in Africa hugely outnumbers truck drivers. Therefore their role is miniscule compared to actual Africans spreading it amongst themselves.


'Truckers do contribute to the spread of the disease, but they are not the principal cause of Swaziland's HIV prevalence rate, which at about 40 percent of the adult population is currently the highest of any country in the world. But it is unfair to single them out, and inaccurate to say truckers are a principal cause of infection,'' said AIDS activist Sempiwe Hlope.

I'd imagine the same thoughts could be applied to other regions.

xOxSinéadxOx

I remember reading his article about suicide and thinking wtf? I don't normally read his articles. Don't know why I decided to read it but I've come to the conclusion that he's a bit of a retard

XJR

bean wrote: »

Mr Myers comment that the only thing to come out of africa is aids is appaling, his clumsy muddled point about mis management and governance not with standing..

You're still misquoting his article ; again I point out that he says

Africa, with its vast savannahs and its lush pastures, is giving almost nothing to anyone, apart from AIDS

It's very easy to take a single point from an article misquote it and make an argument from it, doing so however is disingenuous. As I pointed out in a previous post this comment is tempered by other thoughts and is part of a larger argument.

The article should be evaluated in it's entirety not on the selective misrepresentation of a single sentence or headline.

bean

Maximilian wrote: »

Hardly. My point was that the Belgians or the West didn't cause the genocide. That was the Africans themselves deciding to kill one another. Whether it was Hutus or Tutsis is beside the point.




Where have I said otherwise. Nobody disputes Africa is burdened with debt or what not. The point is that a lot of their problems are caused by themselves. Are you suggesting that exploitative multi-nationals and Western governments interfering serves to absolve the Africans of the horrors they inflict on themselves?

The simple point that you and others are determined to ignore is that the Africans share some if not most of the blame for their own troubles. It's as simple as that. Do not misinterpret my remarks as suggesting that we wash our hands of them.




The point was that very little has changed despite all the aid given over the years. Perhaps we should be thinking about how better to utilise the money, if what has been done with it so far has had little effect. By the way, making condescending remarks doesn't serve to strengthan your arguments, rather it undermines them.

That aid you speak of comes as loans with high rates of interest. Most of their GDP is spent paying this back. Repeating myself again

bean

XJR wrote: »

You're still misquoting his article ; again I point out that he says

Africa, with its vast savannahs and its lush pastures, is giving almost nothing to anyone, apart from AIDS

It's very easy to take a single point from an article misquote it and make an argument from it, doing so however is disingenuous. As I pointed out in a previous post this comment is tempered by other thoughts and is part of a larger argument.

The article should be evaluated in it's entirety not on the selective misrepresentation of a single sentence or headline.

This "larger arguement" is full of over simplifications and is disingenuous to the African nations. The notion that it has given nothing to anyone, apart from AIDS is unfair

XJR

bean wrote: »

This "larger arguement" is full of over simplifications and is disingenuous to the African nations. The notion that it has given nothing to anyone, apart from AIDS is unfair

Lets not forget that the exhortation of your original post was to make a complaint to the press ombudsman. I think from the tenor of the posts here that's not too likely to happen.

Myer's article is an opinion piece and it makes a number of good relevant points, and it has of course achieved its main goal in that we are now having a discussion about the topic. Whether we agree about it's content is in some respect irrelevant.

bean

bean wrote: »

This "larger arguement" is full of over simplifications and is disingenuous to the African nations. The notion that it has given nothing to anyone, apart from AIDS is unfair

My point still stands. Myers telling folk that they have squandered so called "aid" when 48% of GDP goes to financing this debt is not a good point, for goodness sake most of these countries have only been independent for 40 years sometimes less, they have not been given a squandered chances. They havent really been given a chance at all.

Maximilian

bean wrote: »

That aid you speak of comes as loans with high rates of interest. Most of their GDP is spent paying this back. Repeating myself again

In fairness all you can do is repeat yourself. Aid is not all loans and the loans given were not forced upon them. About $600 billion in aid has been given to Africa in the last 40 years and yet there is virtually no increase in living standards with all of that. Whatever money they borrowed, they presumably spent themselves. We didn't do it for them

European countries, this one included, were horribly poor yet with help and hard work we became successful. Throwing money at Africa hasn't helped. Canceling debt probably wouldn't either but couldn't hurt.

Yet you can't bring yourself to admit that even a fraction of Africa's problems are of their own creation. It's all somebody else fault. Truck Drivers, perhaps.

bean

Maximilian wrote: »

In fairness all you can do is repeat yourself. Aid is not all loans and the loans given were not forced upon them. About $600 billion in aid has been given to Africa in the last 40 years and yet there is virtually no increase in living standards with all of that. Whatever money they got, they spent themselves.

European countries, this one included, were horribly poor yet with help and hard work we became successful. Throwing money at Africa hasn't helped. Canceling debt probably wouldn't either but couldn't hurt.

Yet you can't bring yourself to admit that even a fraction of Africa's problems are of their own creation. It's all somebody else fault. Truck Drivers, perhaps.

600bn in mostly loans, i repeat myself cause the points i have previously made answer your questions. Again 45% of GDP is being used to pay for that aid, most of the capital for most loans were paid and they are paying the extortionately high interest ever since. Those loans were not fair and they were desperate for money for food hospitals etc. they had to take them cause there was no where else to get money at the time.

As i already mentioned in a previous post there is a degree of responsibility that everyone must take but the tragic circumstances they are in can be traced back to abuses of the country by others.

Maximilian

What Africa needs is the elimination of dictators and corruption. Thats the real problem if you ask me. Africans do just fine for themselves, when they're not in Africa. When these countries sort themselves out, they will prosper. Look at Nigeria for example. What Africa needs, aid can't and won't deliver.

Diogenes

Maximilian wrote: »

22m HIV infections and you say its the truck drivers? But hey, don't take my word for it - from the second article you linked:

true, but on continent with the lowest car ownership men who travel vast distances in HVG vehicles are going to spread the virus further than say a woman who has to walk 5 hours to get water.

Ill education, and lack of availability of contraceptives may have been the major factors in the mass spread, but on africa, the spread of AIDs from one end of the continent to the other must be placed on truck drivers. Unless you think it's more likely someone walked the 2,000 km between Lagos and Kampala.

Hardly. My point was that the Belgians or the West didn't cause the genocide. That was the Africans themselves deciding to kill one another. Whether it was Hutus or Tutsis is beside the point.

See thats what we call an analogy.

The west have engineered the situation that lead to this racial tension. Claiming that these people decided to kill each other in a vacuum, while ignoring the broader historical aspect of why this happened. It like saying Germany is entirely to blame for the rise of Hitler, ignoring the treaty of Versailles and the manner of his rise.

Where have I said otherwise. Nobody disputes Africa is burdened with debt or what not. The point is that a lot of their problems are caused by themselves. Are you suggesting that exploitative multi-nationals and Western governments interfering serves to absolve the Africans of the horrors they inflict on themselves?

Again, vacuum. It's not like these people are sitting around in nice houses in the same circumstances as us. These people are starving, they are desperate, there is no government safety net, it's a situation where only the strong survive.

Consider the Somalia pirates. The somalia pirates started after the government of Somalia collapsed and fishing flights from around the region began fishing in their territorial waters. Pirates began hijacking ships as a punitive measure and then got carried away.

It's unacceptable to suggest that people in Mogadishu or Somali hold themselves to the same moral standard you hold yourself to.

Your essential argument is that Africans murder each other and I don't so why can't they hold themselves to the same moral standard I hold myself to, when your circumstances are radically different to the average african.

The point was that very little has changed despite all the aid given over the years. Perhaps we should be thinking about how better to utilise the money, if what has been done with it so far has had little effect. By the way, making condescending remarks doesn't serve to strengthan your arguments, rather it undermines them.

I've made the point several times now, you don't seem to understand it, so I was patronising. The question isn't how much aid we give it's in the debt relief, I've been involved in debt relief organisation on and off for the better part of decade and watched how each promise for debt relieve was broken.

The point of the Myers article was that we shouldn't bother with aid we should let them die. Because they will multiple and we'll end up having to save more and then they'll come here.

Now my argument is that we won't change the system of IMF/World Bank loans because it's profitable for the west. The African countries can't pay back the loans, but they keep paying back the interest, they have to accept IMF/World Bank Loans for any kind of infrastructure investment, but these loans come with strings attached that mean they cannot inforce trade barriers, in order to pay for the loans they need to grow cash crops so there people starve.

Your other argument is that Africans kill each other and it's their own faults. I'm sorry standing judgement over people suffering the kind of deprivation that hasn't been seen on this Island in over a century is just arrogant.

Finally you say africa has given us aids. I've pointed out that they aren't able to invest in healthcare because they are bound by their loans, there is ignorance about AIDs because there is a lack of education facilities, and finally Western governments have defended pharmaceutical companies who have thwarted attempts to allow generic knock off anti Aids drugs in Africa.

I'm sorry Max but saying "well it's their fault" is just ignorant.

bean

Maximilian wrote: »

What Africa needs is the elimination of dictators and corruption. Thats the real problem if you ask me. Africans do just fine for themselves, when they're not in Africa. When these countries sort themselves out, they will prosper. Look at Nigeria for example. What Africa needs, aid can't and won't deliver.

Im sick of having to repeat myself. Everyone here has agreed that corrupt regimes are the issue. They were often installed propped up by external forces. Even since the independence which has only been 40 years often less.

My point remains, Kevin Myers article alludes to the idea that Africa has had chance after chance to get it together. Fact of the matter is that they havent had much of a chance at all; resources are in the hands of foreign nations, disease and enviornmental and political issues brought on by lack of education and infrastructure as well crippling debt and interference for external forces. Its not clear cut like the Myers article.

Húrin

Myers is an attention-seeker. And a Brit who complains about immigration where he himself is an immigrant. That's all there is to it.

Diogenes

Maximilian wrote: »

In fairness all you can do is repeat yourself. Aid is not all loans and the loans given were not forced upon them. About $600 billion in aid has been given to Africa in the last 40 years and yet there is virtually no increase in living standards with all of that.

The majority of aid comes with strings attached.

The Aid came in and was often abused by dictators either funded by the Americans and the Soviets.

Whatever money they borrowed, they presumably spent themselves. We didn't do it for them

You really don't have a clue. I'd recommend the last king of scotland as an example of how western 'Aid" (loans} werre squandered by greedy dictators and how the people of Uganda are forced to pay for the excess of their western supported dictator.

European countries, this one included, were horribly poor yet with help and hard work we became successful. Throwing money at Africa hasn't helped. Canceling debt probably wouldn't either but couldn't hurt.

yeah cause we had help. The kind of help Africa didn't get.

Yet you can't bring yourself to admit that even a fraction of Africa's problems are of their own creation. It's all somebody else fault. Truck Drivers, perhaps.

I'm not saying it's not. There is personal responsible. But this is a continent we've raped for centuries, installed puppets in Charge, and abuse for their natural resources, saying now how "well we should stop bother helping them" cause we chucked some cash at them, is just pontius polite nonsense.

Diogenes

dsmythy wrote: »

It proves the problem of truck drivers contracting and spreading HIV but i'd imagine the numbers of people who live in Africa hugely outnumbers truck drivers. Therefore their role is miniscule compared to actual Africans spreading it amongst themselves.


'Truckers do contribute to the spread of the disease, but they are not the principal cause of Swaziland's HIV prevalence rate, which at about 40 percent of the adult population is currently the highest of any country in the world. But it is unfair to single them out, and inaccurate to say truckers are a principal cause of infection,'' said AIDS activist Sempiwe Hlope.

I'd imagine the same thoughts could be applied to other regions.

No It's not the principle case, bad sexual education and lack of access to condoms is the biggest problem. While I don't doubt truckers aren't the principal cause of AIDs infection in a single country, on a continent were people will walk 5 hrs to get clean water, spreading the virus across a continent 30.2 million Sq kilometres, is the job of people with access to motorised transportation.

In short the people spreading the virus among the majority of the people were people with unsafe sexual practices. The people making sure the virus spread across the second largest landmass on the planet were most likely truckers.

Maximilian

Diogenes wrote: »

The majority of aid comes with strings attached.

The Aid came in and was often abused by dictators either funded by the Americans and the Soviets. .

So all the dictators, all the corruption is the West's fault?

Diogenes wrote: »

I'm not saying it's not. There is personal responsible. But this is a continent we've raped for centuries, installed puppets in Charge, and abuse for their natural resources, saying now how "well we should stop bother helping them" cause we chucked some cash at them, is just pontius polite nonsense.

I never said cut off aid. I said it hasn't achieved much. If it hasn't achieved much then its not the solution to the problem. Hell, it's probably part of the problem. How much of all of this money get used to buy weapons I wonder.

Maximilian

Diogenes wrote: »

The people making sure the virus spread across the second largest landmass on the planet were most likely truckers.

Protip: Don't ever be a presenter on Top Gear.

bean

Maximilian wrote: »

So all the dictators, all the corruption is the West's fault?




I never said cut off aid. I said it hasn't achieved much. If it hasn't achieved much then its not the solution to the problem. Hell, it's probably part of the problem. How much of all of this money get used to buy weapons I wonder.

we have been over this, read the rest of the posts

The aid you keep on talking about is mostly in loans that they spend 45% of the countries income to repay just the interest. like we said before procured in desperate times for extortionate rate. This aid from governments is now just money that is owed. What part of this dont you get its been explained several times. Give it up bud.

RichMc70

Húrin wrote: »

Myers is an attention-seeker. And a Brit who complains about immigration where he himself is an immigrant. That's all there is to it.

A brit immigrant who has been living here since the sixties and most probably has paid far more in taxes, prsi, vat and other levies to the state than you or I together.

IMO opinion the best type of immigrant there is.

Diogenes

Maximilian wrote: »

So all the dictators, all the corruption is the West's fault?

A serious majority of it yes. The US and Soviets treated Africa like a chess board during the cold war. While at the moment the West seems indifferent or unwilling to deal with problems they caused.

I never said cut off aid. I said it hasn't achieved much. If it hasn't achieved much then its not the solution to the problem.

You've not been paying attention to anyone elses points have you?

Hell, it's probably part of the problem. How much of all of this money get used to buy weapons I wonder.

Wow a glib aside without any level of evidence to support it. And you're the mod of the legal discussion forum?

Protip: Don't ever be a presenter on Top Gear.

Protip, don't quit the day job to make it as a stand up comedian.

Diogenes

Maximilian wrote: »

What Africa needs is the elimination of dictators and corruption. Thats the real problem if you ask me.

Y'know gosh you're absolutely right. They need to follow the modern European model like us. I mean look at us, in Ireland we have had three decades of some of the most honest straight talking decent politicians, oh no wait... And y'know Europe has political leaders who don't subvert the course of law and engage in media monopolies and use their paramilitary police to beat political opponents, oh wait whats that? Silvio Berlusconi?

Agonist

Kevin Myers is a very intelligent man with a great facility with words.
1. He injects well researched articles with enough extreme right wing shock value to sell papers
2. He selects contentious issues and argues the unPC side with a view to offending as many people as possible, tempering the feature with dubious facts.
Both are true.

He entertained me as long as I agreed with him and infuriated me when his opinions differed from mine. That's why he's a good journalist. That's based on his Irish Times articles. I'd sit through Big Brother sooner than I'd read the Indo.

I said Fact and True so I win

bean

Agonist wrote: »

Kevin Myers is a very intelligent man with a great facility with words.
1. He injects well researched articles with enough extreme right wing shock value to sell papers
2. He selects contentious issues and argues the unPC side with a view to offending as many people as possible, tempering the feature with dubious facts.
Both are true.

He entertained me as long as I agreed with him and infuriated me when his opinions differed from mine. That's why he's a good journalist. That's based on his Irish Times articles. I'd sit through Big Brother sooner than I'd read the Indo.

I said Fact and True so I win

You are right he does have a way with words and is well educated.

Read the rest of the posts im sick of repeating myself

Amazing so that he could tell us that despite all the "aid" they cant get it together. This is not fact its a lie and a simplification .

That aid was in loans of extortionate amounts, genuine aid is so small by comparison.45&of the countries income goes to paying the INTEREST on the loans.
They have only been indepenent for less than 40 years. No money to spend on infrastructure to help heals its problems.
This was all said before and ignored by you and ignored by Myers

Maximilian

Diogenes wrote: »

Y'know gosh you're absolutely right. They need to follow the modern European model like us. I mean look at us, in Ireland we have had three decades of some of the most honest straight talking decent politicians, oh no wait... And y'know Europe has political leaders who don't subvert the course of law and engage in media monopolies and use their paramilitary police to beat political opponents, oh wait whats that? Silvio Berlusconi?

Yeah because its exactly the same thing isn't it? /facepalm

Zascar

His Wikipedia article is very interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Myers