What Are the West's Duties to the Third World? (school, education, retired)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Poverty is an ordinary and eternal condition of humanity. There will be plenty more of it as we leave the industrial age, especially in the West as it declines while the East rises. Managing our own affairs will be more than enough of a challenge.
On tuberculosis, overuse of antibiotics, especially in livestock to stimulate growth, is pushing bacteria to evolve and become antibiotic-resistant. We could start with stopping that overuse, but that won't happen anytime soon, since that would lower the profits of big pharma and raise the price of meat.
I often wonder why there are so many obese people in US,do you think the growth hormone in food is being passed on to us?
400 lbs plumber/electrician going up to your attic break the attic ladder ,end up injuring themselves and break your ladder?back in old days a man weighing 220 lbs now weigh 300-400 lbs?
I believe that most, if not all, of the Biblical verses you quoted apply to how individuals treat other individuals, not necessarily how nations treat other nations. To answer the OP's question, I believe that the first and most fundamental duty that the government of the United States has is to the citizens of the United States. We should not be sending foreign aid to other countries when we have so many pressing needs right here at home. We have citizens sleeping in the streets. We have bridges and roads that are functionally obsolete and even approaching the point of failure or collapse. We have schools that are not adequately educating our children. We have rising crime. And so on. Our government fails us when they prioritize other nations over our own. The fact that other countries may have it worse is not an excuse or a justification for our government to fail to prioritize our own needs.
Our obligation to other nations is largely to stay out of their way. Don't oppress them. Don't inflict violence against them. Don't disrupt their governments or their societies or their economies. To the extent that we help them, it should be based on helping ourselves. For example, it's in our interests to protect the right of free passage upon the high seas, because free trade benefits us, as well as other nations. I'm not at all against helping other countries, but it should not be at our own detriment.
1. But shouldn't a nation's values reflect the value's of its citizens...in this case a nation supposedly made up primarily of christians?
2. From the Brookings Institute: "Opinion polls consistently report that Americans believe foreign aid is in the range of 25 percent of the federal budget. When asked how much it should be, they say about 10 percent. In fact, at $39.2 billion for fiscal year 2019, foreign assistance is less than 1 percent of the federal budget." https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/w...s-foreign-aid/
3. For the sake of discussing your post, are you saying that if we stopped spending that $39.2 billion on foreign aid, that we would then transfer the funds to solving homelessness, infrastructure issues, the needs of the education system, and so on? Really? You believe that?
4. Do you think that if we stopped giving foreign aid that countries like China and Russia would stop providing support to other countries, as well.
5. Do you realize that some of our foreign aid is a carrot to provide us with locations for our military to use in various ways?
There are tremendous biblical foundations for helping third world peoples . . . which parts of the USA seem to resemble these days, from downtrodden rural areas, inner cities, and along our southern border.
What bugs me greatly is that we have tens of millions of people running around claiming they are "christians" but when it comes to "heal the sick" it was 80% of these "christians" who voted, twice, for a man who said that if elected then on day one he was taking health care away from 20 million of our fellow citizens. How can those two polar opposite stances be reconciled and how can these people still call themselves "christians"?
You missed the verses which discuss such things as having forms of godliness, but denying its' true source and power. The bottom line is, most claiming this faith do not want to give up the world as Jesus instructed; so their faith is worthless...Jesus discussed that as well. Paul did too!.
Back on topic, my apologies OP for being off-topic.
The problems we face in assisting third world countries is how we've been going about it.
A prime example being that huge earthquake in Haiti a decade ago. Plenty of money was donated, and corporations were allowed to disperse the funds. This resulted in beautiful parks being constructed, while residents still never received sewer lines or safe drinking water.
Indeed, the East Asian Sinosphere as you referred to (Japan like areas), plus parts of Arabic Islamic Middle East.
I totally forgot about Japan, and that's the clearest case. These countries' "leaders'" don't even bother to verbalize an excuse for not being open to outsiders. Their culture is the very definition of racism but they are never called out on it.
It's time for "world opinion" to reform itself. The other option is for the U.S. to ignore bogus "world opinion" and pursue its own interests, the way most countries do.
I would suggest that foreign aid is not, for the most part, borne out of generosity. I would suggest that it's a bribe to see and do things our way. Part of a competition between the West and the communist world, with third world countries being the pawns in a global chess game. This was perhaps best demonstrated by the Vietnam War...a war of proxy.
The question the review (and quite possibly not the book) addresses are:
Should the West bear the responsibility of ending "medical apartheid"? and
From where do the resources come to solve all the problems of the Third World?
At the time of liberation of the colonies (other than the First World liberations of Canada, Australia and like countries) during the years after the end of WW II, there was a fair argument to be made that these countries were literally bled dry. More than seventy years later, how extensive are our responsibilities?
Some, such as Singapore, South Korea and Israel have "made it." Is the West responsible for the cultural organization of Third World countries that encourage population explosions, desultory methods of agriculture, and endemic corruption?
Of course, we all feel badly for these countries' plight, including, yes, prevalent tuberculosis. Does that mean we have to solve these problem? And equally to the point, do we have the right to attach strings to aid that is given so it doesn't get wasted in corruption?
It shouldn't just be "the West" duties to the Third World, it should be every nation's duties to each other.
I am thinking of the recent votes in the United Nations condemning Russia for invading Ukraine. 140 or so nations stood up but 30-40 nations abstained, including India and China. I ask if these 30 or so nations cannot even stand for a most basic International law, you should not invade your neighbor, why should anyone give two cents to them?
It shouldn't just be "the West" duties to the Third World, it should be every nation's duties to each other.
I am thinking of the recent votes in the United Nations condemning Russia for invading Ukraine. 140 or so nations stood up but 30-40 nations abstained, including India and China. I ask if these 30 or so nations cannot even stand for a most basic International law, you should not invade your neighbor, why should anyone give two cents to them?
Exactly. And where are they, or for that matter Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, or Singapore in taking penniless migrants? (silence)
Well, that's the job of the U.S, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Great Britain, "Europe", Sweden and Israel, right? I am tired of sanctimonious lectures.
Countries squarely on the equator can never be huge agricultural success because they have no winter to kill off the insects.
South Sudan has almost nothing of its own. No food. No fuel. Poverty is permanent in South Sudan.
So what is the answer to the question, "What are The West's Duties to the third world?"
None. We have no duty at all beyond keeping all markets open to all participants. That does not mean we should not help if we can, because we should - and we do! But it is not our "duty".
I have to disagree re countries on the equator. We retired to Ecuador which is a great agricultural entity, providing roses, bananas, coffee, chocolate, rice, corn and other crops to the world, as well as sustaining itself food-wise.
California's breadbasket also experiences no frost, so I don't think lack of frost is a deal-killer for agriculture.
However, Ecuador has sold its soul to China who has "helped" the country immensely. China's money has built hospitals, shopping malls, supermarkets, bridges, road infrastructure, schools, provided vaccines, etc. The trade-off is China now controls Ecuador's oil production. To what degree, I don't know, but it is kind of scary.
In my opinion, the biggest "help" the West could provide, is with education. That's the first step. There is still a lot of illiteracy down here, and that holds the people back from bettering themselves. They don't suffer from a lack of self-esteem though. They all seem pretty content and happy in their lives---family first, and all that. Somehow, no homelessness. No one seems to be starving, either.
Sanitation and education are most important, but not accomplished by just throwing money at a country. Then the locals have to support and continue the efforts, which is where these good intentions seem to fall apart. I'm thinking about Bill Gates' sanitation projects....
... California's breadbasket also experiences no frost, so I don't think lack of frost is a deal-killer for agriculture.
I grew up in a family of migratory farm workers and sharecroppers in San Joaquin Valley [the Central Valley of California]. I assure you that they do experience freezing temps every winter.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
