Cause of Third World poverty

Post #76,170 by tseliot 1/22/03 12:59:43 PM Reply	Cause of Third World poverty There are four social institutions: economics, kinship, politics, religion. The U.S. is economic-centric. Kinship, politics, and religion are dominated by economics. The wealthy rule. The "Third World" is either: 1. Kinship-centric. Latin America. There are no economics (or politics or religion) outside of kinship. The "best" families control society. 2. Politic-centric. China. There are no economics (or kinship or religion) outside of politics. Politicians hold all the cards. 3. Religion-centric. Islam "states". There are no economics (or kinship or politics) outside of religion. Religious leaders control society. Not everybody cares as much about "poverty" as we do. Many fears are born of stupidity and ignorance - Which you should be feeding with rumour and generalisation. BOfH, 2002 "Episode" 10
Post #76,174 by tseliot 1/22/03 1:26:49 PM Reply	Oh. Forgot to say thanks to Bruce Malina ...for the above categories. Many fears are born of stupidity and ignorance - Which you should be feeding with rumour and generalisation. BOfH, 2002 "Episode" 10
Post #76,180 by Arkadiy 1/22/03 2:19:50 PM Reply	Not everybody cares to eat 3 times a day as much as we do. Yeah. Right. -- We have only 2 things to worry about: That things will never get back to normal, and that they already have.
Post #76,182 by inthane-chan 1/22/03 2:21:12 PM Reply	No, he's got it right. After all, the leadership in many (all?) countries doesn't really seem to care if everybody else eats 3 times a day... Or even at all. Any deity worthy of a graven image can cobble up a working universe complete with fake fossils in under a week - hey, if you're not omnipotent, there's no real point in being a god. But to start with a big ball of elementary particles and end up with the duckbill platypus without constant twiddling requires a degree of subtlety and the ability to Think Things Through: exactly the qualities I'm looking for when I'm shopping for a Supreme Being.
Post #76,184 by tseliot 1/22/03 2:36:50 PM Reply	Besides the obvious.. The obvious: Not everyone cares to eat three times a day. I eat 6 or 7 times a day, personally, none very large. I could jsut as easily survive on 2. Many peoples survive on one. 3-square is a cultural concept, not specifically an isolated medical one. The not-so-obvious: The point is that you can't understand "Third World poverty" until you realize that many people-groups care more about kinship/religious/political poverty than economic poverty. Rumbling stomachs are not an economic issue to them; they are a kinship/religious/political issue. The prevailing worldview in much of the world, for example, is that nobody generally dies from starvation. When this happens, it's an exception due to drought/famine (a religious issue to most), theft and greed (a kinship/honor issue) or war (a political issue). Many fears are born of stupidity and ignorance - Which you should be feeding with rumour and generalisation. BOfH, 2002 "Episode" 10
Post #76,463 by Arkadiy 1/23/03 5:17:45 PM Reply	So, it's still bad when somebody dies of famine... I really can't see a father who says: "I don't care that my kids have nothing to eat second day in a row - we're following the best religion/political philosofy/first family in the world". In the hierarchy of needs, life sustaining and physical security come first. I can't see hungry people as being satisfied with their situation. It may be a religious or political failure, but failure nonethless. (as someone coming from "political" society, I can tell you that the "political" outlook on the world is good for one or two generations at the most. After that, everyone reverts to "economic" one, while continuing to spew political verbiage left and right. If you really suppose that in contemporary China or North Korea people still think in terms of "one more push in the worldwide class struggle", you need to have your brain checked.) -- We have only 2 things to worry about: That things will never get back to normal, and that they already have.
Post #76,557 by a6l6e6x 1/23/03 10:22:29 PM Reply	Well said, Arkadiy! [link\|http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/regsys/maslow.html\|Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs]. At the base of it is 1) Physiological: hunger, thirst, bodily comforts, etc.; If these needs are not met, forget the rest. Alex "No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session."\t-- Mark Twain
Post #76,565 by deSitter 1/23/03 10:34:54 PM Reply	Re: So, it's still bad when somebody dies of famine... What was it like in school? Did you harbor illusions? Russians always seem so free when they are away from Russia. -drl
Post #79,085 by Arkadiy 2/3/03 10:42:41 PM Reply	Seem so free... "Seem" indeed. Yes, I did have illusions before I came here. Now I know for sure that no just society is possible on this Earth. At best, we can hope for a less obtrusive one. -- We have only 2 things to worry about: That things will never get back to normal, and that they already have.
Post #76,617 by tseliot 1/24/03 2:26:47 AM Reply	Hopelessly simplistic. So, it's still bad when somebody dies of famine... I really can't see a father who says: "I don't care that my kids have nothing to eat second day in a row - we're following the best religion/political philosofy/first family in the world". In the hierarchy of needs, life sustaining and physical security come first. I can't see hungry people as being satisfied with their situation. It may be a religious or political failure, but failure nonethless. I'm not arguing anything close to that, for or against. You seem to think I'm opposing food and politics. Not at all. I'm opposing food and economics. They are not the same thing. This has nothing to do with Maslow; it's an orthogonal discussion. At least my point was. Yours may not be. Yes, it's still bad. The bloody point was that the article took a particularly economic point of view, assuming an economics which is disembedded from politics, family, and religion. There is no such entity in the Third World. From the article: In non-poor countries, people tend to have greater personal liberty, property rights are protected, contracts are enforced, there's rule of law and there's a market-oriented economic system rather than a socialistic one. In [most] poor countries, there is no such concept as personal liberty (70 to 80% of the world's population live in collectivist cultures, where personal needs and even beliefs are subservient to group needs and beliefs), property rights are aggressively dominated by family and political groups, contracts are personal, not legal (think about it), and again, economics does not exist. A "market-oriented economic system" is redundant. A "socialistic economic system" is an oxymoron at best, an ethnocentrism at worst. The biggest Third World Poverty myth is that economics means anything to most of the world. Food, yes. Survival, yes. Fame, yes. Rise of the ingroup, yes. Economics, no. Rise of the individual, no. Collectivist cultures are, as the writer points out, usually combative to the outgroup and devoted to cultural norms to the exclusion of innovation ("they drive away talent"). That the U.S. was anything more than lucky in 1) being the most individualistic society in history and 2) focusing on economics to the exclusion of family, religion, and politics, is an untenable position. Walter Williams, esteemed economics prof, can't see past his own cultural blinders, where econ is God, State, and Father. Many fears are born of stupidity and ignorance - Which you should be feeding with rumour and generalisation. BOfH, 2002 "Episode" 10
Post #79,084 by Arkadiy 2/3/03 10:40:30 PM Reply	I'll refer you to a book I've read recently [link\|http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0394711955/qid=1044329952/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/104-8759364-5036731?v=glance&s=books&n=507846\|Here]. Describes (ampng other things :) ) how family/community values (Malaysia) and religion (Pakistan) come apart when confronted with greed. It does not say anything good about us as species, but there it is. -- We have only 2 things to worry about: That things will never get back to normal, and that they already have.
Post #79,134 by Ashton 2/4/03 5:37:52 AM Reply	Thanks for tip - pithy (other) review: 15 of 19 people found the following review helpful: 5 out of 5 stars Cold,hard,frightening truth, March 5, 2002 Reviewer: timothy hilliard (see more about me) from America In his travels throughout the Islamic world,Naipaul documented prevailing attitudes and a worldview that has finally hit home with the West. The point cannot be missed by anyone who reads this book that Islamic fundamentalism is essentially the longing for time to reverse itself so that the glory days of the old world may return again. This is symptomatic of many of the hellish regimes and political movements of the 20th century.In nazi Germany it took the form of reviving Norse gods,symbols and using pagan rituals to invoke power and fortune for the Aryan conquerors. As the constant flux of 20th century life began to set in,a large chunk of the world affected by such mass upheavel and endless change reverted to nationalistic fervor,religious fundamentalism and hopes for utopia based, oddly enough,on modern science and technology-the very means by which the modern chaos enveloped the world. Islamic fundamentalism is little more than a childish,confused,frightened,angry response to a world that doesn't any longer make sense to those who hold a medieval worldview.It has nothing positive,intelligent,useful or constructive in its ideology.It is bankrupt and doomed to bring more of the same misery,envy,hatred,poverty and warfare. This is a book everyone ought read to remind the West and any civilized people in the world what it is we are up against. Emphasis added. I too believe that we are nowhere near mature enough to decide Which - of the things we see we can 'do' via EZ techno - we ought to do. (Building ~40K nukes (worldwide est) was clearly one of the things we never should have allowed to happen.) Surely there are others and, imagine what is ahead -- as we place such MAD things in the hands of various bellicose village idiots.. Ashton Tip: sell short.
Post #79,427 by Arkadiy 2/5/03 5:45:57 AM Reply	Worldwide cabal regrets some of its decisions "...was clearly one of the things we never should have allowed to happen." So, Ashton, who else is "in"? Hey, what's that thing in the windo.............. -- We have only 2 things to worry about: That things will never get back to normal, and that they already have.

Welcome to IWETHEY!