Are westerners the evil of the world?

sleepy

Western lands have gleefully exploited the worlds resources over the past 200 years.Most of us have taken advatage of what our economies have offered to us.But has and does our life style not only ruin the earth but ensures that other countries remain pour.

The goods we demand and are used to having ,have a cost to the environment .We want them cheap , this ensures low wages where big western companies can get cheap labour.The size and power of western business means that pourer countries cant grow economically.The big western business are so powerful that they earn more money than entire countries.

Suvival of the fittest has taken its toll on mankind while we live in comfort the majority of earth inhabitants don't.How much is our fault?

Simon

Most people don't plan to do it ...

... but I think you are right.

Simon

From a website (so I don't know how accurate it is):

Here's the demographics for our planet in a nutshell, and it's not a happy story. If you can read this, you are already a member of the elite classes of this planet. Next time you worry about not getting the pay rise you'd been banking on, try to keep things in context. This is not a wealthy planet and it is badly mismanaged by a self-serving class of selfish, greedy and incompetent fools who really ought to know better.

If you have never experienced the danger of battle, imprisonment, torture or starvation, you are ahead of 500 million people in the world.

If you have food in the fridge, clothes on your back, a roof over your head and a place to sleep, then you are richer than 75% of the world's population.

If the world was a village with only 100 people...

57 would be Asians, 21 Europeans
14 would be Americans, 8 Africans
52 would be Female, 48 Male
30 would be White, 70 Non-white
89 would be Heterosexual, 11 Homosexual
30 would be Christian, 70 Non-christian
6 people would have 59% of the wealth
80 would live in sub-standard housing
70 would be illiterate
50 would suffer from malnutrition
1 would be near death
1 would be newly born
1 would have a higher education
1 would own a computer

Simon

Another one ... very bleak

Cows Are Better Off Than Half the World: the Growing Chasm Between Rich and Poor is Threatening Global Security. The average European cow receives US$ 2.20 (pounds 1.40) in subsidies a day while 2.8 billion people in the world live on less than US$ 2 a day. The richest 25 million Americans have an income equal to that of almost 2 billion people, while the assets of the worlds three richest men is greater than the combined income of the worlds least developed countries. Sierra Leone, at the bottom of the United Nations human development index has a per capita income of US$ 130 per year - less than the dollar-a-day level considered subsistence level. The average Sierre Leonian has a life expectancy of 37 while 30% of the children die before their fifth birthday. As television, now available to the poor, brings home the enormous income gap, the rich may have to lock themselves in gated enclaves to keep out the dispossessed and angry masses. The brightest from the developing world migrate to seek better opportunities elsewhere. With borders increasingly sealed against economic migrants, the trafficking of people has become more lucrative than drug smuggling. The goals of the UN millennium summit 2 years ago - halving global poverty over the next 15 years, eradicating hunger, reducing under-five mortality by two-thirds and getting every child of primary school age into a classroom - can be accomplished with 40-60 billion dollars over current aid spending - about a sixth of what the west currently spends on subsidising its farmers. 33 countries, most in Africa, totalling a quarter of the worlds population, are likely to miss half these targets. It make take 130 years to rid the world of hunger if living standards don't raise faster than the current snail's pace. Halving poverty in sub-Saharan Africa would require a per capita growth of 4% in the next 15 years. It can be done: in 1990 24% of the world's poor lived in poverty, compared to 20% today - due to rapid growth in east Asia. Compare Senegal to South Korea. Both countries had a GDP of US$ 230 in 1960. South Korea is now a hi-tech leader supplying components for Americas computer industry and sees a per capita GDP of $US 8,910. Senegal, on the other hand, has barely improved, with GPD now at US$ 260. Blighted by debt, conflict and unfavourable geography, Africa's future seems to be at a disadvantage compared to east Asia. In addition, while South Korea was allowed to protect its infant industries from being overwhelmed by more mature competitors, Africa is being required to open up its markets by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

sleepy

Maybe I can have the 4 extra women.See western greed.

Robdar

There is no doubt about it, the opulence of the west (including some European countries) is causing all manner of problems for other people in the world. The article posted doesn't even mention the pollution that we are causing. It's little wonder that so many hate us.

Robyn

Simon

(doh! posted another that had the same stuff in it!)

Edited by - Simon on 26 August 2002 14:19:59

Crazy151drinker

The goods we demand and are used to having ,have a cost to the environment .We want them cheap , this ensures low wages where big western companies can get cheap labour.The size and power of western business means that pourer countries cant grow economically.The big western business are so powerful that they earn more money than entire countries.

Well, if you look at Southeast Asia, the 'Cheap Labor' has transformed many countries into booming economic mights. Look how far CHINA, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore have come along in the past 30 years. CHINA will soon have the same economic output of the US. Economic history has shown that 'Cheap Labor' countries eventually transfrom in to high wage economies. The problem with all the poor countries, ie Africa, Eastern Europe, some S. American, is mainly Government Related. Any government that promotes poor trade, pilfrers from its own people, is corrupt, and basicly doesnt give a rats ass about its people- is going to give you a poor starving country. This in no way is the Wests fault. How many millions have we given to AFrican countries??? All the money has gone into the Leaderships Swiss Bank accounts!! Now granted, alot of the Leaders in Africa the west supported during the cold war for political reasons (the USSR did the same thing) so we are partially at fault. But, the Cold war is over so those dipshits can leave! Zimbabwe is a classic example. The dumbass dictator is kicking all the farmers out so he can keep the land for himself and his cronies (while playing the race card!). The country is now starving!!! Poor countries will always be poor as long as you have bad government and bad economic policy. Now I would recommend we go in there and take the governments out, but then you have people whinning that the 'West' is being a bully! Its a no win situation! What Africa should have done was let the West (ie britian, netherlands, france, etc) continue to rule and build infrastructure before they revolted! Look at India! British rule helped them out economicly. Now granted bad things happened, but in the long run it is better for the country and succeding generations. Ok , this post is way to long.......

jst2laws

Sleepy,

You are one busy little critter. You have started many thought provoking threads lately. Drink less coffee!

While in England I debated E-man about how selfish the U.S. and the Brits have been in the past. Not to say they are the only western world countries to be perceived as selfish. E-man says it is just an 'independent spirit' of the Brits. That may be but my impression of Americans is that of ME FIRST. When it comes to tariffs or trade agreements, natural resources or restraints imposed by NATO or the UN the average American's first concern seems to be 'how will this impact on me?'

But is this any different from individuals in poor nations? Probably the western nations stand out as selfish because they presently have the POWER.

Does this make them EVIL? I can't say it does blanketly. But some policies designed to benefit an exclusive group to the harm of others could be evil policies. This needs to be addressed some day if the worlds frustrated and discontent will ever be expected to get along with the wealthy west.

Jst2laws

Silverleaf

I'm sure I'm opening up a can of worms here, but I don't think the west should be blamed entirely for the problems of the rest of the world. Societies that segregate classes, sexes and religions are also to blame, governments and religions that prevent followers from seeking health care and higher education, and cultural mores that devalue education, birth control, medicine and technology are responsible for some of the world's problems too.

Silverleaf

Edited by - Silverleaf on 26 August 2002 16:29:3

Are westerners the evil of the world?

Share this