The Case of Gay-Aid Economics

Poverty and Aid show an interesting aspect of slave and master relationship. The west has always used aid to get what they want from the poor. This is the case in point of what I will call Gay-Aid!

Gay-Aid is western aid tied to homosexuality in the recipient countries. It is fully endorsed by the USA that is, President Obama and David Cameron, the Prime Minister of Britain. 

"Gay rights appear to have become a new frontier in diplomatic relations between Western powers and African governments, with the US and UK warning they would use foreign aid to push for homosexuality to be decriminalised on the socially conservative continent.(Gay rights: Africa, the new frontier)" 

The idea is, countries needing aid, will need to support gay 'rights' to receive that aid. A simple do this to get this. The bate here being aid. To me thats a typical slave-master relationship.

This is clearly an indication that one needs to lose their ability to decide on issues of their 'being' and ask the master for a way forward. And I think this is what we need as Africa. To see that Aid really does nothing for the well-being of our nations. Its an investment from a partner who may never mean well at times. The way out is to look at the issues that affect our poor performance in an economy that rely on aid which maybe Gay-Aid or dead-Aid! Imagine trading off the Gay-Aid for good taxes in the mines! That in place will see nations that can decide their future and can decide on what they think is right or wrong. Though this looks more a political issue that an economic one, the moment you allow someone to dictate what is right or wrong for your nation or economy, you lose your destiny. 

Aid has little contribution to Africa's development. This is a tool used to make Africa states dependent on the West for them to use it any time to impose their values and beliefs. This is the only thing that can make great nations go down on their knees and beg for them to implement what the West want.

Why I hate Aid

There is a saying "A beggar is not a chooser". When you beg, the person giving help will determine what you do and how you do it. Ban Ki Moon went to Africa Summit and told the leaders to respect gay rights.(here). He clearly did not care who was there and what belief they hold on the issue. He is the secretary General. Would he do the same at an Arab summit? No! They have wealth as countries and that black gold - oil. They determine their destiny. Africa had almost all leaders on Aid payroll, they dare not react to such statements, the master was talking. That's why I hate aid - it makes you a slave!

The gay rights issue has problems in the USA, some states are fighting for it. Others are not even thinking about it. Does Obama wake up and say the Federal government will not provide services in those states? Of course not! But when it comes to giving aid to poor nations, it is "Central to the United States’ commitment to promoting human rights".

Be Rich and Control

Central to this Aid issue is not of a helping hand, but control. No wonder every one (except a few of us) hate China. The west has painted such a bad picture on China because they can't control it. It has money and hence power to decide what it wants. If those are transferred to Africa, the west loses grip on everything they have been trying to bring to Africa to continuously step on Africa. That is the big issue.

Africa now needs to work on the issues that continuously disadvantage it (aid included). They need to work on multinationals that steal from Africa through not paying due taxes (they actually declare loses but profits are declared in tax havens). They should demand what is due to them, if need be, nationalizing some of the companies would actually make some countries better off! I know a lot refuse that, but has anyone looked at China? If a country is only getting 10% of the returns on natural resources in foreign hands, it would be good to run it on a state level if that company will bring in 20% after a poor investment from an African government. Besides, all returns will be in the country and not sent to their countries.

You can't have all companies run by multi-nations and their governments say bring gay-rights to receive aid and you think you decide your destiny! That is the tool of control you can only avoid by being rich enough to live without aid or multi-nationals running your economy.

What Democracy on Economy?

There is a cry for democracy in everything that is done. If that democracy means doing away with gay-rights, you are not "democratic", but if you ahve oil and oppress women you are a friend to the west, then what is democracy? I have noticed on matters of economic importance, the west will ignore issues of democracy if it will lead to what they like. Unfortunately, there is no control on this issue as it even affects the UN. It will not protect the people if the returns will not amount to anything for the west. Countries that have stood up to such forces, have grown by following their independent paths. China and Russia are a good example. They don't care what the west does now as they have power to define their destiny.

If oil will be gotten through regime change, it will be supported and even leadership made to pay for refusing change. But if it will come through the current regime, people's deaths will not matter. Economics does! Libya and Syria are cases in point. and the key element was the oil.

Economics Matters, Rights Don't!

Gay-Aid is tied to 'rights' for gays! Regardless of the people's beliefs or stance on the issue (like colonial masters deciding for the village). But women in some Arab countries can't even drive a car. Have you ever heard Ban Ki Moon talk about them? He talks about gay-rights. I have not even heard him address Syria. There is oil there!

Africa's New Fight - Economical

The new fight for Africa should be economical, not political. Africa must unite and fight all aspects of the oppressor. If it means leaving the UN, you may have to. What has it done for the continent economically? It would be easier to make Africa stand economically if the UN supported its cause. Do you think Africa has a chance to fight Gay-Aid being promoted by USA and UK backed by Ban Ki Moon? Which nation will stand and say, we are Africans and don't believe in this. Mugabe did, where is he on the economic map? Malawi's economy is a sorry sight - Mutharika spoke about the displeasure of gay activities and the court sentenced some people.

We need to get rid of this Aid issues in Africa and believe we can do it without the west. We can do it. The problem is that we are constantly blocked in our thinking by the west through schemes like aid, human rights grants, etc.

Like Marcus Garvey said:

We are going to emancipate ourselves from mental slavery because whilst others might free the body, none but ourselves can free the mind. Mind is your only ruler, sovereign. The man who is not able to develop and use his mind is bound to be the slave of the other man who uses his mind ..

I end saying...

Africa, Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, None but ourselves can free our minds

Economic Inequality in Zambia

I have been told that almost all our problems in Zambian economics (from a maximum of 3 possible problems that I wanted narrowed down) are Inequality, Duality and Non-diversification. I will try and address these issues and see where we stand in Zambia on these aspects.

I will start with Inequality as I believe it is not only vital, but an aspect of Zambia's economy which has received a fair share of screams in the political arena. So a look at this will have a much more needed avenue to the problems of Zambia.

Economic Inequality
Defined as: Wealth and Income differences. This is differences in the distribution of economic assets or resources among the people (mainly between the rich and the poor). Street-wise definition would present a better understanding as it simply says "the gap between the rich and the poor".

Of course we can't call for an absolute equality in economic status, where all citizens are economically equal, as that is not only impossible but the mere existence of such a situation would present difficulties in running the economy itself. But a situation of a smaller gap between the rich and poor, would present a good economy as it will mean, resources are at least equitably distributed - under those cirmstances. The bigger the gap between the rich and the poor however, the more the resources are unequally distributed. As dramatically put "no citizen shall be rich enough to buy another and none so poor as to be forced to sell himself." (Rousseau?)

I have noticed (with sadness) that most Zambian politicians are always taken by ideas of Economic growth. What will this translate into? How will they define Economic growth?

This has little to do with the inequalities that face its people. It is in its crudest possible sense, mere politiking. I would appreciate a look and addressing issues of economic inequalities before we address issues of economic growth. As this will create a situation where the benefits of economic growth will be equitably distributed among the people. Under the existing structures, the more Zambia's economy grows, the wider the gap between the poor and the rich grows (unless specific measures are taken). I think it will make sense to aim at reducing inequalities in the economy also as it will translate into better living, if it's accompanied by meaningful changes in income distribution. No sense in having a growing economy with more than 70% of the people in absolute poverty. Or having a very rich elite benefiting from the economy and the majority of the people in absolute poverty. So we should aim at having a growth, with specific distributional policies aimed at making the gap between the rich and poor smaller and ensuring everyone benefits from the endorements of the country. Any other direction will result in bad and non-benefitial growth - if that is even achieved.

Ideas of empowering citizens will produce better results, if there is political will to achieve equitable distribution of resources in the country. Such sad statictics make me think we need to re-visit the planning aspects of our economy:

"80 percent of the population in terms of earnings were reported to have acquired only 31.3 percent of the total income, while the top 20 percent of the population claimed 68.67 percent of the total income" (April 2008, CSO monthly).

A good economic idea, would be to have policies which will encourage and move the poorest of the poor, to a more meaningful economic standing. This would greatly improve the living standards of the people, encourage them to aim higher, educate their children, and live a moderate life. Under the prevailing situation, the poor are seriously trapped in the poverty trap. Where movement to any meaningful economic life is not only limited, but in some cases even impossible. And so they end up taking their children out of school, abuse them through child labour, prostitution and early marriages. Their children will either go through the same path or even worse.

On the other hand, the rich keep getting richer. Corruption is the order of the day. It gets so bad that you even expect all government workers to be corrupt in one or the other. If there are policies which would get some of this money enjoyed by the rich and ploughed into education and health, we will have a better people living a better life.

Where Do We Start From?
This is easy. Leave it to the economist to design, you will produce a good product. Add politicians to the equation, eveything is a mess! And yet, its the politicians who ultimately decide what to do. I believe having a very honest political team, could even do better than the economist. Unfortunately, politics in Zambia is all about getting rich and not providing a service! Every project has to be looked at with 'benefits for me' or 'blocking X's party or X himself from enjoying this'. The politics of the belly as one once coined the phrase!

The African Problem
Africa would move fast than most places on this planet. It has the resources to do it. From oil to Uranium. It can ultimately live with no worries about tomorrow as its endorements have whatever the African people need. However, Africa is always hurt and destroyed by it people. The selfish politician running the country, and the people close to him. Sometimes you wonder if we got our independence to early before people could understand the true meaning of a 'States Man' or maybe the colonial masters trained the wrong people to start with. Our freedom fighters had a vision of the continent. They sacrificed alot to achieve what we have achieved now.

But the worse group came after these left. In some cases, the ideas they had before independence died with the new found power of being a President of such a country! Corruption, brutality, rigging, self-enriching method of governance has spread in all corners of Africa. Inequality came like wild fires.

So maybe to rid this continet of inequality is to start with leadership. We need to put in motion a system that will favour systems and governements that strive to address inequalities of the people. Then we can set in motion, economics which addresses these problems. Its not a one country problem, its an African problem.

Solutions!
Besides the mere fact of changing the politics of any one country, the solution of inequality is to put in place 'Pro-Poor' Economic pathways. An economy must recognise the problems of the poor, find simplest possible ways of addressing these problems, setup mechanisms which will address these and any problems which will result from the elimination efforts.

Over the next blogs, I will look at the remaining problems and address possible 'Pro-Poor' solutions.