Re:U.S. Discovers Est. $1 Trillion of Minerals in Afghanistan
by bokonist on Sunday June 13, 2010 @11:52PM
(#1428825)
The Belgian Congo did very well for itself. It had a very fast growing economy, the resources really helpd. Read about it: http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,866343,00.html The question is whether Afghanistan can find it's Governor Pétillon. My guess is no, because democracy does not produce men like Petlillon.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:U.S. Discovers Est. $1 Trillion of Minerals in Afghanistan
by fgf on Monday June 14, 2010 @02:08AM
(#1429034)
It would be interesting to see an estimate of how many lives the disappearance of men like him from africa cost. And have you, by the way, been reading mencius moldbug? (http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2009/08/from-cr...)
Re:U.S. Discovers Est. $1 Trillion of Minerals in Afghanistan
by bokonist on Monday June 14, 2010 @10:30PM
(#1431629)
Yes
Re:U.S. Discovers Est. $1 Trillion of Minerals in Afghanistan
by td on Monday June 14, 2010 @05:26AM
(#1429242)
One might say, the Belgians did very well for themselves in the Congo.
Re:U.S. Discovers Est. $1 Trillion of Minerals in Afghanistan
by bokonist on Monday June 14, 2010 @10:35AM
(#1429761)
That they did - they made money by growing the pie - http://www.paulgraham.com/good.html
Re:U.S. Discovers Est. $1 Trillion of Minerals in Afghanistan
by td on Monday June 14, 2010 @11:15AM
(#1429884)
Sure, growing the pie, and then eating it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgian_Congo#Colonial_economic...
I don't quite understand how pg's essay applies to the Belgian Congo, is there some specific paragraph you are referring to?
Re:U.S. Discovers Est. $1 Trillion of Minerals in Afghanistan
by bokonist on Monday June 14, 2010 @08:39PM
(#1431468)
You seem to imply that because the Belgians made a profit off the Congo natives that colonialism was bad for the natives. But when you make a profit by growing the pie, the result can be good for both the natives and the colonizers. The material quality of live for Congo natives has declined remarkably since the end of colonialism. As one native puts it: "Even if you go 1,000 kilometers down this river, you won't see a single sign of development. When the whites left, we didn't just stay where we were. We went backwards.
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1713275,00.htm... http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1713275,00.htm...
Re:U.S. Discovers Est. $1 Trillion of Minerals in Afghanistan
by td on Tuesday June 15, 2010 @04:11PM
(#1433739)
There is no doubt that, in large parts of Congo, people are worse off than they were ca. 1960. But do you seriously propose a return to colonialism as the solution? Because that is what your governor Pétillon remark seems to say... I don't believe such plan could get major support in Congo atm.
My objection is with the after the fact justification of colonialism. Charity was never an objective of colonial efforts, it would be very naive to think otherwise. The fact that the rapid decolonization (which was by no means the end of foreign intervention in Congolese affairs) did not lead to a stable and prosperous independant state, is no argument in favour of colonization either.
I'm honestly surprised of the upvotes these neo-colonial comments are getting.