[HN Gopher] Anarchy in Sudan has spawned the world's worst famin...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Anarchy in Sudan has spawned the world's worst famine in 40 years
        
       Author : WildestDreams_
       Score  : 227 points
       Date   : 2024-09-01 10:48 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.economist.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.economist.com)
        
       | RobertJaTomsons wrote:
       | https://archive.ph/6gFzL
        
       | Log_out_ wrote:
       | This is going to be the point where everyone blame the non
       | interventionist movements for murder for the next thirty years.
        
         | ben_w wrote:
         | Unlikely. That didn't happen in response to the failure to
         | intervene to prevent the Darfur genocide before it started
         | rather than just patrolling afterward to keep violence "to a
         | minimum", the "Effacer le tableau", the massacre of the Hutus,
         | the Rwandan genocide, the Gukurahundi, or the Cambodian
         | genocide.
         | 
         | I think this is closer to the Onion story about American mass
         | shootings: people shake their heads with sorrow while asserting
         | nothing can be done.
        
           | Log_out_ wrote:
           | But things can be done. The world can be forced to watch and
           | witness .weapons can be delivered to seld defense groups.
        
             | ben_w wrote:
             | Things can be done about mass shootings in the USA, too.
             | 
             | I speak of the observed responses, not to the actual limits
             | to those willing to champion for a better world.
        
       | banach wrote:
       | Ah yes, blame the lack of rulers and not colonialism or war.
        
         | plouffy wrote:
         | Have you read the article ? Where does it mention lack of
         | rulers ?
        
           | bogle wrote:
           | Seeing as the link is to a single paragraph and the actual
           | article appears not to exist, has anyone read it?
           | 
           | "This article appeared in the Briefing section of the print
           | edition under the headline "An intensifying calamity""
           | 
           | You have to use the 'archive.ph' link in the HN commens to
           | find it.
        
         | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
         | Why not all of the above?
         | 
         | I lived in Nigeria, when they had the Biafra War[0]. That also
         | killed a heck of a lot of folks. The problem, there, was sort
         | of too many rulers.
         | 
         | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigerian_Civil_War
        
         | cherryteastain wrote:
         | They have been independent since 1956. Other (majority non-
         | European) British colonies/protectorates as diverse as
         | Singapore (ind. 1965), Belize (ind. 1981), India (ind. 1947)
         | and UAE (ind. 1971) managed to build peaceful societies.
         | 
         | We need to recognize that the people of countries like Sudan
         | are not children who don't know any better, contrary to
         | European leftists' views. They are fully functioning adults who
         | made a series of choices that led to the present situation.
        
           | bogle wrote:
           | I don't think India is a great example here. The Partition of
           | India in 1947 resulted in over 1 million deaths.
        
             | richbell wrote:
             | On that note, reading about Bangladesh's split from
             | Pakistan was gut wrenching.
             | 
             | So much senseless violence.
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh_genocide
        
             | dartharva wrote:
             | That was before the country got its own constitution and
             | had formed its national identity.
        
               | bogle wrote:
               | Not relevant as the partition was outlined in the Indian
               | Independence Act 1947 which created the constitutions.
               | The Act was agreed upon by the legislature
               | representatives of the Indian National Congress, the
               | Muslim League, and the Sikh community with Lord
               | Mountbatten.
               | 
               | The point stands that decolonisation was a mess and the
               | colonisers played a large part in it.
        
               | odux wrote:
               | I think the point is in spite of decolonization being
               | orders of magnitude more messy countries like India have
               | established fully functioning peaceful societies.
        
           | bogle wrote:
           | On gaining independence in 1956 Sudan endured two civil wars
           | with up to a million deaths in the first civil war and
           | between one and two million deaths in the second civil war.
           | 
           | Colonial governments like the British often (almost always)
           | left a mess behind them.
        
           | Tade0 wrote:
           | > We need to recognize that the people of countries like
           | Sudan are not children
           | 
           | Nitpicking here, but Sudan specifically only passed the
           | median population age of 18 in the 2020s.
        
           | infrawhispers wrote:
           | Comparing Sudan to Singapore, India and the UAE is comical.
           | This level of analysis on HackerNews, that ignores the
           | realities of how different countries evolve / are influenced
           | is why we cannot have an honest conversation.
        
             | cherryteastain wrote:
             | Please enlighten us why it's comical. Economically, Sudan
             | was richer per capita than India in 1960 and even as
             | recently as 2017 [1][2]. It had, and still has, a more
             | homogeneous population ethnically and linguistically. Yet
             | India manages to keep things mostly calm while Sudan can't.
             | 
             | [1] https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=sudan+nominal+gdp+
             | per+c... [2] https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=india+nom
             | inal+gdp+per+c...
        
         | unnamed76ri wrote:
         | Sudan has been a sovereign nation for 70 years. How many years
         | must pass before you can no longer blame colonialism for their
         | choices?
        
           | sdenton4 wrote:
           | It's a bit like asking why we still blame lead for lead
           | poisoning 70 years after it was painted on the wall...
        
         | nemo44x wrote:
         | If anything I'd blame the lack of colonialism as being the root
         | cause of their problems.
        
           | rmbyrro wrote:
           | Are you perhaps assuming they have no chance of learning to
           | govern themselves peacefully?
           | 
           | I don't subscribe to this fixed mindset. I believe all
           | peoples can learn to do well. It's hard, but possible. So the
           | lack of conolialism isn't the answer, but lack of learning.
        
             | nemo44x wrote:
             | Perhaps they can, but there's 0 evidence for it. Regardless
             | my point was that they have had tremendous suffering since
             | being decolonized. Endless conflict with external meddling
             | from all over. I suspect that had they been under colonial
             | rule since then they'd have significantly less suffering
             | and stable. But what can you do because that ship sailed.
        
               | rmbyrro wrote:
               | > Perhaps they can, but there's 0 evidence for it.
               | 
               | Wouldn't this way of thinking prevent any improvement at
               | all?
               | 
               | If I must have accomplished something before believing I
               | may be able to accomplish, how am I even going to try?
        
               | nemo44x wrote:
               | They've had endless civil war essentially for 70 years.
               | Maybe "Sudan" isn't a real place and the people
               | inhabiting those lands need to sort it out and figure out
               | who rules what. The UN should stop recognizing Sudan as a
               | state as it's obviously failed. Remove itself from the
               | region and let the people there figure out borders. Rip
               | the Bandai's off instead of prolonging this idea of Sudan
               | that obviously isn't real.
        
               | rmbyrro wrote:
               | That's way different from something like 'what's missing
               | in Sudan is a colonial power to rule them'.
        
               | nemo44x wrote:
               | People need to be ruled to maintain order. The
               | alternative is chaos which leads to suffering until order
               | is restored. The colonists ruled competently and
               | maintained order even if your social justice reflex
               | doesn't feel good about it. What they left,
               | decolonization, is a soft colonization from afar, managed
               | by entities with no skin in it. This is why it's
               | disorderly and chaos reigns and suffering is a way of
               | life for the people of those lands.
               | 
               | Colonization is preferable to that. However, because
               | that's not a palatable form of social order today the
               | next best thing is complete abandonment and true self
               | determination to discover where the borders are and who
               | rules them. This will be bloody, yes, but have an outcome
               | that leads to order if not tampered with. That's
               | preferable to the last 70 years.
        
         | rmbyrro wrote:
         | Every single piece of land on Earth has been attacked and
         | colonized at least once. Why have some peoples managed to do
         | well and others so bad? I think there's something more to
         | learn.
        
       | throwaway3521 wrote:
       | At which point we admit that current approaches to helping these
       | countries does nothing and we reach out for other, radical,
       | approaches and ideas?
        
         | tetris11 wrote:
         | what are you suggesting
        
           | throwaway3521 wrote:
           | Bring back colonization for limited amount of time ie
           | 50years. During that time establish government, educational,
           | civil structures and start the economy. Re-educate the
           | society, instill the values of high-trust society. Pull out
           | of the country gradually replacing foreigners with local
           | population. The name 'colonization' might evoke some
           | sentiments, but we can call this some other name.
        
             | newsclues wrote:
             | If the west keeps allowing the best people from third world
             | countries to immigrate, it's removing the business,
             | political and social leaders who have the potential to
             | improve their country.
             | 
             | Come to the west, get trained and return home and build
             | something better. Doctors and engineers driving a cab in
             | New York is so broken.
        
               | AnimalMuppet wrote:
               | Doctors and engineers drive a cab in New York because,
               | for them, _it 's better than home_.
               | 
               | It's broken, all right, but what's broken is "home", not
               | the west. (All right, the west is broken too, but in this
               | situation the brokenness of the west is not the primary
               | issue.) And they didn't that they could fix "home", so
               | they left, and for the most part they aren't interested
               | in going back and trying to fix it. They probably have a
               | better perception of how hard it would be to fix than we
               | do.
        
               | newsclues wrote:
               | I understand why they do it, but I also understand it's
               | short sighted for both nations.
               | 
               | Best to ensure developing nations have their best talent
               | to DEVELOP the nation rather to deprive them of the best
               | people and hinder development and improvement. You take
               | out the best people and what's left, poverty, corruption
               | and conflict that forces more people to leave and
               | requires more outside aid.
        
             | bell-cot wrote:
             | What's the strategy for when the locals violently resist
             | colonization, with the aid of various countries which are
             | hostile to the colonizing power?
        
             | carlob wrote:
             | Democracy export? That has worked so well in Iraq and
             | Afghanistan...
        
               | crop_rotation wrote:
               | While I don't agree with the parent comment, 20 years is
               | just nowhere enough for his strategy. Mullah Omar himself
               | was alive for almost half of those. Something like 50
               | years where the old regime leaders completely vanish can
               | only work. Again I am not saying whether it is practical
               | or whether it is even a good idea at all.
        
               | AnimalMuppet wrote:
               | We didn't do what throwaway3521 said, though. We tried to
               | do it "on the cheap", just occupying, not actually
               | transforming the society, and not staying for 50 years.
               | 
               | For context: We occupied Japan for, what, 12 years? We
               | technically occupied Germany longer, but practically it
               | was about the same (I think - from memory and not
               | researched). In that time, we transformed them from
               | violent, racially superior, conquer-the-world militarists
               | to more-or-less western-values democracies. But we put a
               | _lot_ of people in there, and we controlled every aspect
               | of their society.
               | 
               | Iraq and Afghanistan, we tried to do it with half-
               | measures rather than a complete rebuild. And it failed.
        
               | hobs wrote:
               | For context, one of those events started in 1945, and one
               | in 2003.
               | 
               | One started because we won a decisive war against the
               | nation, in the other we invaded the country on a flimsy
               | excuse.
               | 
               | We have entirely different cultures, times, mores, media
               | landscapes, and different series of occupations, modern
               | weaponry, 4th generation warefare (post vietnam) tactics,
               | the list goes on.
               | 
               | Why would "oh we didn't waste enough money occupying a
               | country that we gained little from" be the right choice?
               | How do we magically know that?
        
               | distances wrote:
               | I would assume a more important factor was that Germany
               | and Japan were both very organized, successful
               | industrialized societies long before facing their
               | respective downfalls in the wars. Iraq and Afghanistan
               | both had a very, very different starting position and it
               | would be unreasonable to expect a similar outcome.
        
               | Ekaros wrote:
               | One thing to consider is that you have to have very
               | functional central government to be able to execute types
               | of wars of conquest that likes of them and USA did... So
               | simply moderating them is often sufficient to keep
               | stability.
        
               | notahacker wrote:
               | Other relevant context includes the fact that it was
               | actually _West_ Germany, with the East providing strong
               | incentives to both the US and the West Germans to make it
               | work, and that this was not the first attempt to turn the
               | successful, industrialized and well educated Germany into
               | a democracy with peaceful relations with its
               | neighbours...
        
               | nkrisc wrote:
               | Japan and Germany were already powerful, industrialized
               | societies that rivaled the post-war occupiers in power.
               | They just lost the war.
        
             | abenga wrote:
             | Yeah, because this worked so great last time.
        
             | throwaway3521 wrote:
             | Just for a context here: I actually live in almost-third-
             | world country. Thankfully no famine and loss of live but
             | extremely dysfunctional state and society and with
             | educational system collapsing - probably no future. My
             | countrymen, we, could not govern ourselves. I wish this
             | country was occupied and someone built better society!
        
               | 185504a9 wrote:
               | Not even pretending to make a rational reply here, but
               | I've seen a lot of despicable stuff on the internet and
               | this comment may be the one that made me the angriest. I
               | really hope this is some sort of satire because my blood
               | is about to evaporate. Jesus fucking Christ
        
               | blackhawkC17 wrote:
               | I'm from a dysfunctional third-world country, too
               | (Nigeria), and I agree with the GP. Our population lacks
               | the ability to cooperate for the greater good. Politics
               | here is insanely tribal and corrupt. We're heading for
               | the tatters, except something miraculous happens.
               | 
               | If you've never lived in a poor, corrupt, dysfunctional
               | place, you'll not understand how bad life is that'll make
               | someone wish to be occupied.
        
               | throwaway3521 wrote:
               | It's actually not. I had no running water yesterday. Also
               | two days ago as well. I'm sorry my comment made you
               | angry. I hope you're doing well...
        
               | tazu wrote:
               | You should spend a few years in a third world country.
               | Your righteous liberal rage will evaporate as quickly as
               | your feeling of safety (which you take for granted).
        
               | infrawhispers wrote:
               | I am from a third-world country that has its own set of
               | problems. To believe that an outside party will come in a
               | build a "better society" for the inhabitants papers over
               | recent history and is almost comical.
               | 
               | "we could not govern ourselves" really belies how young
               | many countries are and the unique challenges they face
               | w.r.t. interference from developed nations. Nation
               | building takes _time_ and I would implore you to think
               | about the historical events that have shaped your nation.
        
             | christkv wrote:
             | Won't work. Loyalties are family, village, tribe, city,
             | etc. There is no "State loyalty" in these countries to
             | build democratic institutions on. One group will take power
             | and then use that power to benefit their group. Sudan is a
             | tribal war in everything but name. I think the best you can
             | hope for is a beneficent dictator.
             | 
             | In short term if you want to stop this particular war make
             | UAE and Egypt hurt as they are funding the groups.
        
             | Qem wrote:
             | Because colonists are totally expected to do a good job
             | this time, not just pillaging resources, setting new
             | apartheid systems, generating even greater famines like
             | what UK did in India and doubling down on the lazy job of
             | drawing straight line borders not taking in consideration
             | the human gropings in the land, what generated a lot of the
             | current conflicts, by splitting affine people in different
             | countries and bunching together rival groups under the same
             | borders. As example of colonist promoted famine, if the one
             | currently unfolding in Gaza not enough, see
             | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_famine_of_1943
        
               | christkv wrote:
               | Let's not pretend India was some sort of well run
               | paradise before the British showed up.
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deccan_famine_of_1630-1632.
               | 
               | The previous colonial/imperial regime of the Mughal
               | Empire was just as much a burden on the population.
               | 
               | The main reason India is able to feed its population
               | today is the green revolution post WW2, especially the
               | work of Dr. Swaminathan in India. Without it I think we
               | would still see massive famines in India.
        
             | mrweasel wrote:
             | Wasn't that basically what Ian Smith suggested for
             | Rhodesia? His argument was that the native Africans didn't
             | have the education level or the experience required to run
             | a "civil" society. So the white Rhodesians should do it for
             | a number of years. I believe his target was the late 1980s,
             | after which everyone would have the same rights.
             | 
             | Hard to say if it would have worked, Ian Smiths comments
             | was mostly made after Mugabe took over, so it was never
             | tested if it would work, or if Smith was even sincere in
             | his statements.
        
               | Earw0rm wrote:
               | That is, to some extent, what happened in South Africa.
               | Of course, the whites didn't give power over easily, and
               | the road since has not been smooth. There's no reason to
               | think the Rhodesians would have handed it over any
               | easier, when the time came.
               | 
               | South Africa today is simultaneously a troubled place and
               | yet doing well compared to many of its peers. Violent
               | crime is very high, for example, but similar to
               | 19th/early 20th century USA.
        
             | nkrisc wrote:
             | I find this idea perplexing. Even if you were to put
             | emotions and politics aside, colonization doesn't have a
             | very good track record for the colonized people.
        
               | crop_rotation wrote:
               | I am not advocating for colonisation, but most of human
               | history has no good track record for the ruled people.
               | Colonisation was able to uproot some very bad social
               | evils by fiat which would be just very hard to remove in
               | a democratic society (for good or bad). Colonisation
               | might be a very bad idea maybe even the worst, but when
               | no solution is working and none in sight, people might
               | want to throw anything they can on the table and restart
               | debating all approaches.
               | 
               | I think the parent comment has shared their experience
               | which makes them think this idea might be better than
               | status quo in their country.
        
             | throwaway48476 wrote:
             | Colonization was negative ROI. No one would sign up for
             | that.
        
         | alephnerd wrote:
         | Sudan is in a civil war that is being used as a proxy war by
         | Iran, UAE, Egypt, Saudi, Ethiopia, and other regional states is
         | NOT caused by issues with donors
        
           | Eumenes wrote:
           | Can't forget Russia and the US/NATO in that group of swell
           | nation-states
        
             | alephnerd wrote:
             | Nowhere near as significant of a presence.
             | 
             | There are Russian/Wagner troops present and most likely a
             | USSOF detachment as well, but the actual enablement,
             | training, and impetus is driven by regional states now.
             | 
             | The era of "superpower" is over, and there are multiple
             | proxy wars now like this (Syrian Civil War, Yemeni Civil
             | War, Ethiopian Civil War, Myanmar Civil War, Libyan Civil
             | War, etc)
        
         | mensetmanusman wrote:
         | Ummm, western led economic and technological development
         | efforts have massively lowered poverty rates the last century.
         | See China, India, etc.
        
           | crop_rotation wrote:
           | China was doing pretty poorly though before they lucked out
           | on good leadership in Deng. But gambling on that luck doesn't
           | work for most countries.
        
         | eej71 wrote:
         | You suggestion below is getting downvoted which isn't that
         | surprising given the general tilt of HN. But I think there is a
         | related question that's a bit better to ask.
         | 
         | What are the social, political, cultural and intellectual
         | preconditions of a free society? What ideals and values does
         | the culture need to hold before you can have a stable
         | government that in a general way - values liberty for its
         | citizens?
         | 
         | While I'd love to see many parts of Africa and the mideast
         | embrace the enlightenment values that have created our modern
         | governments built around such ideals as individual rights, rule
         | of law, checks and balances, multiple political parties, free
         | speech, independent court systems, a secular state, etc. I
         | don't think those cultural values are in place. And yes, you
         | can shake a finger at your choice of western country and point
         | out the many ways they fall short of those ideals and you'd be
         | right, but I think you're missing the forest for a diseased
         | tree.
         | 
         | So what to do? Provide free resources until they figure it out?
         | Not sure that's worked out. Ignore them? Lecture them?
         | 
         | How do you change a culture that in some ways doesn't want to
         | change?
        
           | octopoc wrote:
           | My take is that we should leave them alone and try to keep
           | others from meddling. They have to figure this out on their
           | own. The idea that European enlightenment values are the only
           | path to success is part of the problem though: they have a
           | different culture and success will look different for them
           | than it does for us. Look at China, Japan and other
           | successful Asian countries: they are each different and it's
           | hard for people of European cultures to judge them without
           | judging them for not being European enough. They have to
           | evolve out of the aftermath of imperialism just like Europe
           | did after the Roman Empire collapsed. We were able to do it
           | on our own and thinking they need us to help them is pretty
           | demeaning IMO.
        
             | crop_rotation wrote:
             | Your take sounds reasonable and might be the best idea, but
             | it means change will be very very slow (if at all) and
             | millions of lives will be lost to famine and civil wars.
             | 
             | > China, Japan and other successful Asian countries:
             | 
             | Japan was kinda occupied by the Americans post WW2 and had
             | an American dictated constitution, with a very American
             | influenced society and everything.
             | 
             | The Chinese after years of socialism copied western
             | capitalism (and lots of other things) with a very strong
             | government being the only difference. And before that
             | change they too kept having their share of extreme poverty
             | and famines.
             | 
             | > just like Europe did after the Roman Empire collapsed.
             | 
             | Sadly this might mean waiting for a millennia which might
             | have an unacceptable cost.
             | 
             | > We were able to do it on our own and thinking they need
             | us to help them is pretty demeaning IMO.
             | 
             | Yes but in a millennia in which rest of the world made much
             | less industrial progress than happens in less than a
             | century now.
             | 
             | I have no solutions in mind here. Just highlighting some
             | points to think about.
        
           | crop_rotation wrote:
           | You raise some excellent points.
           | 
           | > What are the social, political, cultural and intellectual
           | preconditions of a free society?
           | 
           | I think societies don't become free before they get
           | prosperous. Having lived in dirt poor societies and posh
           | societies, individual freedoms culturally seem to have a
           | strong tie to prosperity. When you are so inter dependent for
           | survival on your social network, the concept of freedom or
           | individual dignity seems so distant. When everyone has more
           | than enough resources for their own prosperous survival, the
           | individual freedoms come to the forefront.
           | 
           | Another problem is that countries and societies are almost
           | always resistant to change in absence of a large event. It
           | took WW1 to get women voting rights (and several other social
           | changes) in the west for example.
           | 
           | Sadly there is no magic potion to transform societies in
           | absence of large scale events or them lucking out on a good
           | dictator (LKY, Deng)
           | 
           | > How do you change a culture that in some ways doesn't want
           | to change?
           | 
           | I think across history I find only two ways this happens,
           | either very very slowly, or strongly pushed top down by an
           | authority with the power and willingness to enforce.
        
             | Dalewyn wrote:
             | >I think societies don't become free before they get
             | prosperous.
             | 
             | Put more bluntly: Freedoms don't put food on your table,
             | but killing the bastard next door so you can use his land
             | might. Guess what hungry people will do.
             | 
             | So you are quite right; freedoms only become a concern once
             | the people have most if not all their immediate needs
             | satisfied. People need to enjoy life first before they will
             | start caring about freedoms.
             | 
             | Of course, the vicious cycle is that being poor is
             | expensive. It's not easy to break it and start accumulating
             | societal prosperity.
        
             | throwaway48476 wrote:
             | This is simply untrue.
             | 
             | The aspects of modern 'free society' evolved from the
             | complex legal environment of rights and privileges in the
             | middle ages.
        
           | feedforward wrote:
           | > While I'd love to see many parts of Africa and the mideast
           | embrace the enlightenment values that have created our modern
           | governments built around such ideals as individual rights,
           | rule of law, checks and balances, multiple political parties,
           | free speech, independent court systems, a secular state, etc.
           | I don't think those cultural values are in place.
           | 
           | Anyone who knows the history of the past decades and
           | centuries of western interaction with the Middle East and
           | Africa knows what a laugh this is.
           | 
           | The US is currently paying Egypt's current rulers billions a
           | year to prevent and violently crack down on anyone who wants
           | "modern governments built around such ideals as individual
           | rights, rule of law, checks and balances, multiple political
           | parties, free speech, independent court systems, a secular
           | state". I watched former Meet the Press host Chuck Todd
           | question whether it was wise for Obama to allow the Arab
           | Spring to push out the violent dictator Mubarak. Speaking of
           | capability for "enlightenment values" - the citizens risk
           | their bodies and lives to go out in the street and fight for
           | free elections and such, while the US arms the dictator
           | fighting against those values.
           | 
           | And what would a free Egypt do? It certainly would not be as
           | cooperative of these people "making aliyah" and then
           | slaughtering Palestinians on Egypt's border in Gaza, that's
           | for sure.
           | 
           | As you mention Africa, I think back to when I watched Reagan
           | cooperating with the apartheid South African government,
           | again fighting against those who wanted "modern governments
           | built around such ideals as individual rights, rule of law,
           | checks and balances, multiple political parties, free speech,
           | independent court systems, a secular state, etc."
           | 
           | I could go on and on over the past decades - speaking of rule
           | of law and all of that, I won't even go into what Israel is
           | doing right now - they're showing Israeli soldiers raping
           | Palestinians on Israeli TV now (and on Twitter too, for now
           | at least) - nor will I go.into the US support of all of this.
        
             | yyyk wrote:
             | Yeah, the Muslim Brotherhood was such a swell brand, just
             | tell the Copts that. Transnational Islamism doesn't make
             | any trouble either. And to be frank, the US didn't want
             | communism to take over after apartheid. One Mugabe was bad
             | enough, and an even more badly mismanaged SA would be a
             | disaster. On all issues you mention, the choices were often
             | unpleasant, but always had their reasons.
        
               | feedforward wrote:
               | So what you're saying is the West wanted (and funded and
               | armed) tough governments that kept a lid on things as
               | opposed to "modern governments built around such ideals
               | as individual rights, rule of law, checks and balances,
               | multiple political parties, free speech, independent
               | court systems, a secular state".
               | 
               | People can be on your side or not, but at least you are
               | rooted in the real world and actual history.
        
               | blackhawkC17 wrote:
               | Egypt elected the Muslim Brotherhood into power. There's
               | nothing about the Muslim Brotherhood pertaining to
               | "modern governments built around such ideals as
               | individual rights, rule of law, checks and balances,
               | multiple political parties, free speech, independent
               | court systems, a secular state".
               | 
               | Better to deal with a secular dictator than an elected
               | religious extremist. Elected Islamists always crap on
               | democracy once they're elected.
        
               | feedforward wrote:
               | > There's nothing about the Muslim Brotherhood pertaining
               | to "modern governments built around such ideals as
               | individual rights, rule of law, checks and balances,
               | multiple political parties..."...Better to deal with a
               | secular dictator
               | 
               | The Muslim Brotherhood has no appreciation for multiple
               | political parties in Egypt. Nor do you, as you are openly
               | supportive of a dictatorship.
               | 
               | You and yyyk both support my point - the West does not
               | support for Egypt what the original poster called "modern
               | governments built around such ideals as individual
               | rights, rule of law, checks and balances, multiple
               | political parties, free speech, independent court
               | systems, a secular state".
        
           | AdrianB1 wrote:
           | I am confused. In the past decades free society is not the
           | direction of the governments, things like free speech are
           | regressing a lot in Anglophone countries (UK, Canada,
           | Australia, New Zeeland) and even Germany. Are you talking
           | about free society in terms of classical liberalism or modern
           | governments that look more like China? Because Europe and
           | down under are going in the direction of China, not freedom.
           | So what do you want to see in Sudan, a China-like "democracy"
           | or an US-style with 1st, 2nd and 4th amendments?
        
             | willyt wrote:
             | What do you mean by free speech is regressing in anglophone
             | countries? That seems like a weird opinion to have? Do you
             | have a particular example?
        
               | AdrianB1 wrote:
               | Random: https://nypost.com/2024/06/29/world-news/german-
               | woman-given-...
               | 
               | https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c15gn0lq7p5o (Misogyny
               | to be treated as extremism by UK government)
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Act_to_amend_the_Canadia
               | n_H...
               | 
               | One can easily find examples in all countries. These
               | countries do not have a free speech right in their
               | Constitutions, for example, and no plans to include it.
        
               | bawolff wrote:
               | Canada does indeed have free speech (expression) in its
               | constitution.
               | 
               | There are limits to speech, but that is true in every
               | country, including the USA (if you dont believe me, try
               | yelling "i have a bomb" in an american airport and see
               | what happens next)
        
               | VancouverMan wrote:
               | Section 1 and Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of
               | Rights and Freedoms guarantee that it's useless in
               | practice.
               | 
               | This was confirmed by how the Charter did nothing to stop
               | the abuses that Canadians endured from 2020 through 2022.
        
               | bawolff wrote:
               | Which abuses specificly do you think section 33 enabled
               | between 2020 to 2022?
               | 
               | Or if its all section 1, do you feel that any country at
               | all has freedom of speech? I can't think of any country
               | that doesn't have something equivalent to section 1, even
               | if only implicitly. Different countries draw the line
               | somewhat differently, but there are none that dont have
               | some sort of similar limited limits to freedom of speech.
        
               | archgoon wrote:
               | > What do you mean by free speech is regressing in
               | anglophone countries? That seems like a weird opinion to
               | have? Do you have a particular example?
               | 
               | In the US at least, I'd say for most of the existence of
               | the web, the prevalent idea was that the best way to
               | counter 'bad' speech was more speech.
               | 
               | The concern over 'misinformation' has resulted in a lot
               | of people, whom previously had advocated for unrestricted
               | speech, calling for regulation or removal of section 230.
               | 
               | https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/02/opinion/misinformation
               | -di...
               | 
               | Like many Zeitgeist trends, it is difficult to measure
               | concretely and objectively, especially if it hasn't been
               | tracked in the past. Especially when people's
               | understanding of what constitutes "free" speech shifts
               | over time.
        
         | jksflkjl3jk3 wrote:
         | How about going in the other direction? Completely stay out of
         | their business and let whatever emerges from the chaos develop
         | on its own?
         | 
         | Central planning of societies doesn't have a good track record,
         | especially when there are competing external interests. Look at
         | the horrific consequences of the American meddling in
         | geopolitics of the third world over the last 100 years. The CIA
         | and war industry is responsible for the destruction of
         | countless traditional cultures and the lives of hundreds of
         | millions worldwide.
        
           | crop_rotation wrote:
           | Central planning has a very good record in countries like
           | China/South Korea. Non central social changes are just very
           | very slow.
        
             | jajko wrote:
             | Maybe but its doesn't work in democracies well. Main reason
             | why EU won't ever compete with US economically, while being
             | also very rich and actually more populous.
             | 
             | You should also compare it to situation where those
             | countries wouldn't be centrally planned. Not so possible
             | without time machine, so let's leave out measuring of
             | efficiency of such systems. Ie when in Eastern Europe
             | communism and central planning failed and fell down
             | overnight, literally all those economies experienced
             | massive boosts. I know I've lived through such transition
             | there, hard to describe with words.
        
               | crop_rotation wrote:
               | > Ie when in Eastern Europe communism and central
               | planning failed
               | 
               | I am not saying central planning is a cure all. Trying a
               | bad economic system with any kind of planning will fail.
               | 
               | > Maybe but its doesn't work in democracies well.
               | 
               | Correct, in the absence of strong top down rule (whether
               | democracy or not), social changes are just going to be
               | very slow (this doesn't mean strong top down rule will
               | result in good changes, just that otherwise it is slow).
               | The US needed a civil war to abolish slavery and two
               | world wars for many other social changes (similar to most
               | of western Europe).
               | 
               | I am not saying A or B is better. But without central
               | planning the chances of any big cultural changes in Sudan
               | type countries happening in the next 50 or even 100 years
               | is very remote.
        
               | joker99 wrote:
               | That is not the main reason. Not even close. Here's a
               | list of main reasons, in no particular order:
               | 
               | - 8 different currencies across EU member states - 24
               | languages - 27 sovereign countries with wildly different
               | economic, social, foreign, military ... policies - laws
               | and regulations are only slowly harmonised across the
               | board - deep seating historic prejudices (which lead to
               | major wars in the past) - unfriendly and downright
               | hostile neighbours - a smaller amount of natural
               | resources to exploit - etc etc
        
               | walthamstow wrote:
               | The EU has existed for less than a lifetime. Before that
               | we were competing against each other, with bloody
               | consequences.
               | 
               | How many wars were fought on European soil between 1776
               | and today? I couldn't even begin to answer that.
        
               | feedforward wrote:
               | With regards to central planning, neither China nor the
               | US is fully in or out of it.
               | 
               | China still has Five Year Plans and some central
               | planning, but Deng Xioping took steps away from it in the
               | 1980s.
               | 
               | There's a mythology the US has no central planning, but
               | it has had a lot of central planning since 1932 and
               | certainly since 1941. Market makers watch for the
               | presidentially nominated Powell to come out and announce
               | the fed funds rate for our fiat currency, and the economy
               | either speeds up or slows down in response. We are typing
               | on a network the government paid BBN and other companies
               | to create, on chips descended from the Fairchild chips
               | that Air Force contracts funded. For various historical
               | reasons, much of the central planning in the US is done
               | via its very well funded military (then well funded
               | military contractors pay think tanks and politicians to
               | go out and say they're not so well funded)
        
             | giantg2 wrote:
             | I'm not sure China is a good example of it working, unless
             | you limit it to the past couple decades and ignore the
             | human rights issues. South Korea may be a decent example,
             | but also has some possible indirect negative effects, given
             | all the protests, urban/rural divide, and social/birthrate
             | issues. Sure they have the whole not starving thing
             | handled, but so do the majority of countries regardless of
             | central planning or not.
        
               | crop_rotation wrote:
               | Do you realise you are commenting in the context of a
               | massive famine and millions of lives lost? All the
               | countries in Africa and almost any non developed country
               | will gladly take post Mao Chinese leadership and there
               | current status quo over their current lives.
               | 
               | Human rights don't come before people have a certain
               | dignity to live. Trying to preach human rights to a
               | starving population is just .....
        
               | giantg2 wrote:
               | Do you realize we're talking about approaches that work?
               | What stages did China and South Korea go through to get
               | to today? The 40s and 50s were pretty bad in either
               | country. Show me a prosperous centralized government that
               | didn't have some ethnic or political cleansing at it's
               | roots.
               | 
               | Or you could not red herring me and supply a proposed
               | solution that could work instead of painting my
               | opposition to central planning as an opposition to fixing
               | famine in an emotional appeal.
        
             | logicchains wrote:
             | >Central planning has a very good record in countries like
             | China
             | 
             | It's got a very terrible track record in China; the
             | government caused tens of millions of its own people to
             | starve to death, and set the economic development back
             | decades. The GDP per capita in Taiwan is more than double
             | that of China currently, but both started at a similar
             | position. If China had had a similar political system to
             | Taiwan, its people's standard of living would be much
             | better.
        
               | crop_rotation wrote:
               | > If China had had a similar political system to Taiwan,
               | its people's standard of living would be much better.
               | 
               | This is just absurd. Taiwan's entire economy is TSMC +
               | some small things. Copying political systems doesn't get
               | you per capita standard of living.
               | 
               | Yes Mao's China did stupid things but post Mao China has
               | done well economically atleast. They had an enviable job
               | of bringing so many people out of extreme poverty and
               | have done well.
        
               | Ray20 wrote:
               | >They had an enviable job of bringing so many people out
               | of extreme poverty and have done well.
               | 
               | Literally zero work is required for this. You just need
               | to stop keeping people in extreme poverty - and that's
               | it.
        
             | albertopv wrote:
             | China had an empire lasting about 2000 years, truly
             | something different
        
             | yorwba wrote:
             | Central planning has an extremely bad record in China,
             | _especially_ when it comes to famine.
             | 
             | During the Great Leap forward, the central planners
             | demanded the implementation of new Lysenkoist farming
             | practices that were reportedly a great success and on track
             | to deliver a record harvest. The central planners then
             | dispensed generous daily rations from the granaries, so
             | that everyone could eat their fill, causing farmers to
             | spend less effort on the side crops they had been growing
             | in addition to working on the state farms. The central
             | planners decided that they didn't need quite so many
             | agricultural workers, so they redirected the labor surplus
             | to increasing steel production in order to catch up with
             | the British Empire and overtake the United States. And they
             | also increased food exports to other countries.
             | 
             | Then it all came crashing down: the reports of huge
             | productivity increases were made up, the record harvest was
             | a record low, the surplus was a deficit, tens of millions
             | of people starved. (Steel production did not meaningfully
             | increase either.)
             | 
             | You could argue that it was just a very expensive
             | beginner's mistake because they'd only been doing the
             | central planning thing for about a decade at that point,
             | but then after Mao's death less than two decades later, the
             | first big economic reform was the Household Responsibility
             | System where farmers would decide for themselves what to
             | grow, and the state would just buy it from them.
             | 
             | So I think the verdict from the world's greatest experts in
             | agricultural central planning is clear: don't do it.
        
               | crop_rotation wrote:
               | I have mentioned this elsewhere as well, no kind of
               | planning saves one from bad economic policy. Post Deng
               | China has a very very good record of bringing prosperity
               | (and China still central planning).
        
               | Jensson wrote:
               | > and China still central planning
               | 
               | Every country has some central planning, China doesn't
               | have much more central planning today than your average
               | European country. Or do you believe some CCP central
               | planner decided to put in scantily clad anime girls in
               | games from China?
               | 
               | China today is very capitalist, they lack democracy, not
               | capitalism.
        
               | lazyasciiart wrote:
               | I would probably focus on the government-mandated
               | construction of new cities and control over which
               | citizens go to university and where they can live, and
               | that there is a wide spectrum of control between the USA
               | and central planners managing the graphics in video game
               | production.
        
               | Jensson wrote:
               | > control over which citizens go to university and where
               | they can live
               | 
               | I am pretty sure Chinese citizens are allowed to live
               | where they can afford and they are allowed to go to
               | university if they score well enough on the public tests.
               | Just like in Europe.
               | 
               | If you are talking about the random arrests that happens
               | in China, that is due to the undemocratic authoritarian
               | regime and corruption, not due to central planning.
        
               | lazyasciiart wrote:
               | No, they aren't. Look up the hukou residence permit
               | system.
        
               | Jensson wrote:
               | That has already ended, there is no such discrimination
               | any longer, the Hokou now is just a way to track people.
               | Loosening that up is a big contributor to the Chinese
               | miracle.
               | 
               | Edit: Also class based societies are typically not called
               | central planning, it is lack of human rights.
               | 
               | Western nations do similar levels of planning just by
               | deciding how many new houses are allowed to be built, you
               | need a permit for every business to ensure you don't take
               | too much electricity etc, tons of central planning
               | everywhere.
        
               | thaumasiotes wrote:
               | Having worked at a school in China in which a large
               | number of the students were there because their nonlocal
               | hukou didn't entitle them to attend local public schools,
               | it's pretty surreal to see someone claiming that the
               | hukou controls where people are allowed to live. How are
               | you imagining that happens?
        
               | thaumasiotes wrote:
               | > I am pretty sure Chinese citizens are allowed to [...]
               | go to university if they score well enough on the public
               | tests. Just like in Europe.
               | 
               | China implements a comprehensive system of geographic
               | affirmative action to prevent universities from being
               | taken over by southerners. A school participating in this
               | system will publish a plan stating how many students it
               | will enroll on a province-by-province basis. (It's also
               | divided by whether the students will major in science or
               | humanities.)
               | 
               | Once the tests are scored, the students in a particular
               | province are assigned in top-down order of score to the
               | school of their choice, as long as that school's quota
               | for accepting students from that province is not yet
               | full. If your school of choice has filled its quota,
               | technically you can have listed a second-choice school,
               | but this is widely viewed as a disaster for the student.
               | You need to get in to your first-choice school, or take a
               | year off and try again next year.
               | 
               | What's happening in admissions cells for other provinces
               | at the school you apply to is not relevant to you. You
               | can outscore 90% of students who get admitted that way
               | and it won't matter.
               | 
               | And this is not an especially unlikely scenario, because
               | Chinese policy is that schools have much larger quotas
               | for local students than otherwise. I think you need to
               | score at about the 1 in 60 level, top 1.66%, to get into
               | a top Shanghai university from Shanghai; you need to do a
               | lot better than that to get in from outside Shanghai.
               | 
               | Sanity checking that, the admission table for Fudan
               | University in 2018 is here:
               | https://ao.fudan.edu.cn/a7/19/c36333a435993/page.htm .
               | This contains some annotations that I don't understand,
               | but let's say you want to be admitted as a math major.
               | The score threshold if you're coming from Shanghai
               | appears to be 586 ("Xuan Kao Ke Mu 999"?); 586 on the
               | Shanghai 2017 gaokao is top 1.1%, or in perfect detail
               | the top 473 people out of 43,103 who took the test. (
               | https://news.koolearn.com/20170623/1127786.html )
               | 
               | The score threshold if you're coming from Fujian appears
               | to be 680 on the science test. A 680 on the 2017 science
               | test in Fujian means you were one of the top 72 scorers
               | out of 86,368 people who took the test, or the top
               | 0.00083%. ( https://max.book118.com/html/2021/0817/810400
               | 4033003135.shtm )
               | 
               | That admissions table for Fudan is divided into two
               | categories, Ti Qian Pi  ("advance admission"?) and Ben Yi
               | Pi  ("freshman admission"??). I'm not sure what they
               | mean; I used the Ben Yi Pi  numbers, which are stricter.
               | 
               | Relevant here, I knew someone who attended a high school
               | affiliated with Fudan (a lot of Chinese universities have
               | these), and she informed me that before taking the
               | gaokao, she had an interview with someone at Fudan, and
               | their approval of her meant that she needed a lower score
               | for admission to Fudan than would otherwise have been
               | necessary. I suspect that this may be related to the
               | difference between "advance admission" and "freshman
               | admission".
               | 
               | (There is also affirmative action given for non-
               | geographic reasons. Sometimes they combine in interesting
               | ways. A friend of mine who was admitted to Shang Hai Cai
               | Jing Da Xue  benefited from a program for minorities. She
               | was a Mongol, and would have been given a direct bonus to
               | her gaokao score for that reason, but this program
               | additionally involved (1) attending a special high school
               | in Beijing, and (2) counting as a resident of Beijing,
               | and therefore also benefiting from the geographic scheme,
               | for admissions purposes.)
        
           | shadowgovt wrote:
           | That's what the world tried with Germany after World War I.
           | 
           | There's a reason we stopped believing "just let sovereign
           | nations sort themselves out" is the best approach. It's a
           | pretty selfish reason.
        
             | 1oooqooq wrote:
             | that's too wrong to even behind to address.
        
             | ericd wrote:
             | Other countries didn't exactly stay out of their business -
             | the WW1 allies were demanding unsustainably large war
             | reparations _paid in gold_ , rather than a currency they
             | had control over the supply of. My understanding is that
             | this directly led to their hyperinflation, massive amounts
             | of resentment, and the eventual fall of the Weimar
             | Republic. And everyone knows the rest.
        
           | AdrianB1 wrote:
           | This is an excellent option if you are willing to accept
           | hundreds of millions of people will die in the process and
           | that it will take a hundred years or more for that to happen.
           | Development does not happen overnight and it takes a toll.
           | 
           | That being said, my impression is that the people leaning
           | left in politics are strongly against non-interventionism.
           | This means it will become a political issue in the countries
           | that can help (or intervene), especially because most of
           | these countries have a very strong left leaning. Sudan will
           | become ammunition in electoral fights in elections, politics
           | will win and interventions will happen just because of that,
           | not because the interventionists care in any way about people
           | of Sudan, they are just simple pawns on their chess board.
        
             | marxisttemp wrote:
             | I think you'll find it is the right wing who find
             | themselves invariably attracted to war.
             | 
             | Unless you're using "the left" to mean "neoliberals", as
             | seems to be common among the American right, in which case
             | let me refer you to the first paragraph (since the American
             | Democratic Party is by all measures a right wing party).
        
               | Jensson wrote:
               | > since the American Democratic Party is by all measures
               | a right wing party
               | 
               | Only fiscally, if you look at social issues they are very
               | left.
        
               | AdrianB1 wrote:
               | I find the left wing in general (not just US) to be
               | etatist. That makes it interventionist in everyone's life
               | by definition.
        
           | cen4 wrote:
           | "Security" as provided by the Pentagon/MIL complex is an
           | evolution of what the Brits used to do to maintain order
           | across the Empire. After the Empire fell, the Americans
           | basically cut and paste that policy, where the goal is mainly
           | about protecting the flows of capital and trade. Colonial
           | legacy and thinking needs a total reboot. Will die out
           | naturally as boomers trained in that kind of thinking pre-
           | globalization die out.
        
             | bawolff wrote:
             | > Will die out naturally as boomers trained in that kind of
             | thinking pre-globalization die out.
             | 
             | I don't think it will. There will always be powerful people
             | who want to maintain that power, and wannabe powerful
             | people who want to get that power.
             | 
             | So long as that way of thinking leads to power, there will
             | be people who will follow it.
             | 
             | The problem is not that people are tainted by colonial
             | thinking - its that humans are tainted by ambition.
        
               | cen4 wrote:
               | Look at the Brits. The current gen can't play the same
               | games their grand parents did even if they are well
               | programmed and super ambitious. They have to invent new
               | games. And agree mindless ambition is a big issue.
        
           | yunohn wrote:
           | > Completely stay out of their business and let whatever
           | emerges from the chaos develop on its own?
           | 
           | This simply never happens. The developed world is constantly
           | putting its nose into everyone else's business, and through
           | globalization and industrialization, there's nothing on this
           | world that the Western economy doesn't touch.
        
             | csomar wrote:
             | > This simply never happens.
             | 
             | China did well after their cultural revolution. Took time
             | but the page has been turned on that episode.
        
               | golergka wrote:
               | It did well because of Kissinger and relationship with
               | US.
        
               | carapace wrote:
               | "episode"? You're casually dismissing the _Cultural
               | Revolution_ to argue for non-interference. I don 't think
               | you're making the point you hope to make.
               | 
               |  _Absolutely_ somebody should have intervened if possible
               | to halt that madness.
               | 
               | Things got so bad that people actually ate human flesh,
               | not because they were starving, but to demonstrate
               | unquestionable loyalty to the party. Students literally
               | ate their teachers.
        
             | EasyMark wrote:
             | Or China or Russia or .....?
        
               | yunohn wrote:
               | I'm not actually sure which universe you're referring to,
               | in which the West does not constantly try to interfere
               | with China/Russia and their activities.
        
               | Jensson wrote:
               | He meant China and Russia are meddling with the world as
               | well.
        
           | EasyMark wrote:
           | Because humans feel compassion for their fellow human beings
           | and if we don't then what's the point? It doesn't cost that
           | much to feed a famine to be honest, much less than blowing up
           | the same country when it's starts hosting a terrorist org
           | that makes you the next great Satan to blow up because you
           | exist?
        
             | asdf6969 wrote:
             | Have they asked you for help? Mind your own business
        
               | px43 wrote:
               | Maybe that's something. Maybe goodwill would be more
               | effective when laundered through existing family
               | connections. Surely someone in the midst of the famine
               | has family in the US. Maybe support groups should be
               | working directly with family members in wealthier
               | countries, and then resources hand delivered to family
               | members living in impoverished areas who can then
               | distribute the resources through their local networks.
               | Rather than just drop shipping a bunch of boxes full of
               | food or whatever.
               | 
               | Let the heroes be local heroes, not just some abstract
               | alien organization that no one has any social connection
               | to.
        
               | lazyasciiart wrote:
               | https://mutualaidsudan.org/
        
               | lazyasciiart wrote:
               | Yes. https://www.yesmagazine.org/social-
               | justice/2024/08/02/food-k...
               | 
               | https://mutualaidsudan.org/
        
               | asdf6969 wrote:
               | This has a diagram showing the funding structure with 5
               | layers of bureaucracy between donors and the recipients
               | of aid. This organization reduces that to 3 (The
               | "coalition" that owns the website -> financial service
               | providers -> mutual aid societies -> actual people in
               | need).
               | 
               | So I ask again, have these people actually requested your
               | help? How do you know what they actually need? Maybe the
               | best solution is a way to gtfo of Sudan and let it
               | collapse. Maybe they want weapons or chickens. I don't
               | know!
        
           | keiferski wrote:
           | Not to excuse the various bad decisions and bungled coups
           | supported by the US during the Cold War, but - had they just
           | "completely stayed out of their business" then the Soviets
           | merely would have intervened (as they actually did in many,
           | many places). In real life, geopolitics is a complex game
           | theory problem.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_interventions_by_the_S.
           | ..
        
             | jksflkjl3jk3 wrote:
             | I suppose the status quo is an inevitable consequence of
             | technology expanding the practical spheres of influence of
             | world powers. It sure would be nice though to have a world
             | without globalization, still full of cultural diversity.
        
           | 0xbadcafebee wrote:
           | Works for natural ecosystems because we accept that mass
           | casualties is "normal" in the natural world; if some species
           | doesn't survive a mass fire/drought/etc, welp, that's nature.
           | When millions of people starve to death, we don't accept
           | that.
           | 
           | (lol, well, we _do_ accept it, as history has shown us time
           | and time again, but we tend to not _want_ to do nothing)
        
             | ethbr1 wrote:
             | Agreed. Parent is ignoring the positive effects of
             | intervention while highlighting the negative.
             | 
             | USAID funds USD$50b / year, and the US funds UNICEF to the
             | tune of USD$1.4b / year.
             | 
             | Which, among other things, supports the polio vaccination
             | campaign being rolled out in Gaza, to prevent a public
             | health catastrophe and possible resurgence of polio in the
             | Middle East.
             | 
             | It's easy to say "Let them eat cake" when one is sitting in
             | the palace and opining about CIA boondoggles.
             | 
             | In the real world, that means people are starving and
             | children are crippled.
             | 
             | We can (and should) strive for better than nasty, brutish,
             | and short lives, regardless of a person's nationality.
        
           | doikor wrote:
           | The current chaos is a result of UAE and Saudi having a proxy
           | war there. Basically the developed world stepping out to let
           | these countries figure shit out for themselves just led to
           | another group of countries stepping in.
        
           | pfdietz wrote:
           | In practice that becomes, "they are genociding themselves,
           | how convenient".
        
           | oezi wrote:
           | If we look at the havoc of any conflict region (Syria,
           | Afghanistan, Sudan, Somalia,...) we can see that both
           | engaging in the conflict and staying out of it is
           | tremendously expensive.
           | 
           | Paying Turkey to hold the Syrian refugees back and housing
           | those that passed through costs Europe tens of billions each
           | year. Engagement would have been hard, but one is left to
           | wonder if we shouldn't try harder for own benefit.
        
         | bawolff wrote:
         | Most of the time the current approach does work (for famines at
         | least). Famines used to be much more common than they are
         | today.
        
         | giantg2 wrote:
         | Would the other approaches be any better, or just a trade off
         | of evils. Sounds like white savior complex to think we can go
         | in and just fix everything.
        
         | VoodooJuJu wrote:
         | >radical, approaches and ideas?
         | 
         | Like colonialism? Can't get much more radical than that, and
         | some implementations actually worked pretty well to build up
         | some countries, to the point where those countries are now
         | major players in the world, like India. In others, it failed,
         | either due to the brutality of the colonists or the pride of
         | the colonized.
         | 
         | Could just leave these people alone though.
         | 
         | Many of these peoples have deeply-embedded cultural traits that
         | prohibit them from establishing the standard of living that
         | many of us take for granted. These debilitating cultural traits
         | are likely a product of the harsh climates these people reside
         | in, but only in part. Much more effective cultural traits could
         | be introduced to and imposed on them (colonialism), and in
         | exchange they'd receive the opportunity to participate in and
         | contribute to the regional and even global economy, as well as
         | benefit from mitigations against things like famine.
         | 
         | But maybe we should just leave them alone. _Tikkun olam_ is
         | noble indeed, but many peoples are just completely unreceptive
         | to it, and many adherents of this ideal have no business
         | worrying about other people 's trash when their own backyards
         | are a mess.
         | 
         | So, maybe just leave these people alone.
        
       | grecy wrote:
       | I am very sad to watch this situation.
       | 
       | I spent 3 weeks driving my 4x4 through Sudan in early 2019 [1],
       | just a month before they finally got rid of Al-Bashir, and it was
       | incredible.
       | 
       | The people of Sudan were some of the kindest and friendliest I
       | have ever encountered on the planet. When I asked for directions
       | to buy bread and it turned out to be complicated, the following
       | morning locals brought a bag of fresh-baked bread to my campsite
       | and refused to let me pay for it no matter how much I insisted.
       | Their currency was already falling so fast I was getting a better
       | rate for USD cash every day.
       | 
       | Gas at the time was $0.35USD / gallon - though the lineups were
       | days long. The locals never let me wait in line and insisted I
       | skip it every time.
       | 
       | Later in the North I met a very kind man who invited me for
       | delicious coffee every day just to sit and talk. He again refused
       | to let me pay for it and was clearly very proud of his country
       | and people. On the second and third day I brought pastries to
       | share. He said for decades it would have been unthinkable to talk
       | out loud about getting rid of Al-Bashir, but during my visit it
       | was starting to _almost_ be acceptable. He did warn me to keep my
       | voice down and leave my big camera in my 4x4 - people were edgy.
       | 
       | Sudan is on the list of 5 "evil" countries, just because I
       | visited for three weeks I can never again get an ESTA (visa
       | waiver) to enter the USA. It makes crossing the border much
       | harder, especially when I live in Canada (not yet a Canadian
       | citizen).
       | 
       | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pqtfwlfDAw
       | 
       | or text if you prefer (hit next article at the bottom of each
       | post) http://theroadchoseme.com/to-khartoum
        
         | AdrianB1 wrote:
         | This ESTA thing is weird. I had to go through Syria many times
         | in transit to Jordan when it was cheaper to drive than to fly,
         | but I never thought this will cause problems in the future.
         | Same for Iran and Iraq, lots of Romanians used to work there in
         | electricity projects. Iran is still a destination for
         | motorcycle rides, I have a friend who was married to an Iranian
         | woman and we had plans to go there with the bikes, he was
         | traveling regularly to visit his wife's family. But I guess
         | these exceptions are rare enough to be ignored.
        
         | csomar wrote:
         | While your experience sounds exceptional, tourism used to be
         | like that before it went mainstream. Essentially, normal people
         | (not traders) will travel with very little resources. There are
         | no credit cards or international banking. So they had to rely
         | on strangers for food and housing.
        
         | throwaway48476 wrote:
         | I don't think I've heard of a single group that was _not_
         | described as the  'kindest and friendliest'.
        
           | ainiriand wrote:
           | Germans.
        
             | Freestyler_3 wrote:
             | And speaking of kind individuals, you are no longer in the
             | competition.
        
               | ainiriand wrote:
               | It was meant as a joke. I live in Germany and I'm very
               | happy here, and they even joke about that.
        
           | seper8 wrote:
           | Dutch (as a Dutch guy I think I'm allowed to say it). Not
           | exactly known for our hospitality or generosity
        
           | grecy wrote:
           | I was very happy to see Ethiopia in my review mirror.
           | 
           | I've driven through 55 countries in the undeveloped and
           | developing world. Many were friendly or kinda neutral. Sudan
           | is a very clear standout.
           | 
           | Sudanese were way more friendly than Australians, Canadians,
           | Brits
        
           | briankelly wrote:
           | Seattleites.
        
       | boomboomsubban wrote:
       | >It is official: for only the third time in the past 20 years,
       | the un has declared a full-blown famine.
       | 
       | Looking into this, it's because the UN will only declare a famine
       | if there's no functioning government. If there is one, they have
       | the government declare a famine.
       | 
       | Presumably that's why the UN declared a famine at the refugee
       | camp, not the country or region.
       | 
       | This story from last month discusses this aspect.
       | https://www.npr.org/sections/goats-and-soda/2024/08/21/g-s1-...
        
         | Narretz wrote:
         | As per the submitted article, famine is also only declared in
         | the refugee "camp" (which houses about 500.000 people as per
         | this article https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cqv5nvq69lwo)
         | because the UN doesn't have enough information about other
         | parts of the country.
        
         | begueradj wrote:
         | The article you linked to says famine was declared in Sudan on
         | 2017. But the situation on 2017 is different from nowadays (to
         | keep it short, at least on 2017, Sudan had a president, and
         | that means a lot in such a country)
        
         | moffkalast wrote:
         | "I just wanted you to know that you can't just say the word
         | "famine" and expect anything to happen."
         | 
         | UN: "I didn't say it. I declared it."
        
         | dredmorbius wrote:
         | NYT ran a recent 'splainer on the who and why of declaring
         | famines as well:
         | 
         |  _Food insecurity experts working on the Integrated Food
         | Security Phase Classification, or I.P.C., an initiative
         | controlled by U.N. bodies and major relief agencies, identify a
         | famine in an area on the basis of three conditions: 1. At least
         | 20 percent of households face an extreme lack of food. 2. At
         | least 30 percent of children suffer from acute malnutrition. 3.
         | At least two adults or four children for every 10,000 people
         | die each day from starvation or disease linked to
         | malnutrition._
         | 
         | <https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/25/world/middleeast/what-
         | is-...>
         | 
         | Archive / paywall: <https://archive.is/Hf5f5>
         | 
         | The classification was created in 2004, and has been used to
         | identify two famines: Somalia (2011) and South Sudan (2017).
        
       | Aeolun wrote:
       | > only the third time in the past 20 years
       | 
       |  _Only_ the third time in the last 20 years? I thought we were
       | firmly past this...
        
         | jksflkjl3jk3 wrote:
         | War and conflict and the resulting devastation is part of human
         | nature, as it has been for all of our species' history. Why
         | would you expect that to have changed in the last 20 years?
        
           | squigz wrote:
           | We've managed to generally stop doing lots of things that one
           | might say are 'part of human nature' - because the most
           | important part of human nature is our ability to reflect on
           | our nature and improve it.
        
             | lnxg33k1 wrote:
             | It is not that we've stopped, we've made it harder in some
             | parts of the world, by adopting a liberal form of
             | government and splitting powers. Remember what happened
             | just few years back with Trump and the assault on congress.
             | 
             | Or extremists gaining power, it's not that we've improved,
             | it's that people had enough to eat. But it's slowly changed
             | also here, you can be pragmatic or starving, but not both.
             | 
             | But other democracies and governments are not as strong,
             | and of course, in the west we're enjoying some level of
             | stability that also is a result of exploitation of other
             | parts of the world that is then fighting over a limited
             | amount of remaining resources
        
           | drivebycomment wrote:
           | https://ourworldindata.org/famines
           | 
           | Humanity has reduced famine dramatically over the past 100+
           | years. If Sudan famine ends up having the higher end of the
           | estimate for deaths, it will likely reverse the clear
           | downward trend, which should be alarming.
        
       | hggh wrote:
       | That's not anarchy, obviously
        
         | kibwen wrote:
         | It may not be _anarchism_ as professed by _anarchists_ (which
         | is itself a broad and fractious array of philosophies generally
         | having to do with abolishing involuntary hierarchies, related
         | to classical libertarianism), but it is a form of anarchy, at
         | least as it is popularly understood. Terminology fails here; at
         | this point any serious anarchists need to come to grips with
         | the fact that this sort of  "chaotic anarchy" is what people
         | think of when they hear "anarchy", and that trying to reclaim
         | the word is pointless.
        
           | NewJazz wrote:
           | On the contrary, the article's use of the word is what is
           | pointless.
           | 
           | At no point, besides the title, does the article make mention
           | of anarchy or chaos. Rather, the article pretty clearly
           | states that the famine is a result of a civil war between the
           | government and a paramilitary group that was previously given
           | weapons by the government.
           | 
           | Liberal politicians (and less commonly journalists) like to
           | latch onto the words anarchy and chaos to fear monger and
           | dramatize, but often the so-called anarchy and chaos they
           | call out is a direct result of their own ruthless attempts to
           | keep order.
        
             | Jensson wrote:
             | Civil wars tend to create anarchy, it is the anarchy that
             | causes the famine wars themselves doesn't inherently do it.
             | 
             | For example the American civil war didn't create anarchy,
             | the states continued to function on both sides so there
             | were no mass starvation events.
        
               | NewJazz wrote:
               | Anarchy is when two factions try to govern instead of
               | one? It is an interesting take. I can't say it makes
               | sense.
        
               | Jensson wrote:
               | Yes, if nobody currently governs then it is an anarchy.
               | That some people try to establish order doesn't change
               | that currently there is none.
        
               | NewJazz wrote:
               | Neither the article author, nor you, have shown that the
               | situation here is caused by a lack of government. In fact
               | the article explicitly states that an important
               | agricultural region is governed by one of the warring
               | factions.
        
               | xboxnolifes wrote:
               | Anarchy is when two factions fail to govern. Thus, lack
               | of government.
        
               | paulddraper wrote:
               | Anarchy is lack of government.
               | 
               | That is one possible consequence of civil war.
        
           | igorkraw wrote:
           | 1. I agree that anarchists probably need to grapple with the
           | fact that people think of this as a first association...
           | 
           | 2. ...but terminology does not at all fail here, there is a
           | separate term https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anomie which
           | describes a breakdown in order and social function.
           | 
           | Notably, anarchists would probably claim that the fact that
           | there's a civil war of various warlord factions and wannabe-
           | states going on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudanese_civil_
           | war_(2023%E2%80...
           | 
           | is a good example why anomie and anarchy probably _should_ be
           | distinct concepts, as there's probably plenty of hierarchy,
           | localized state power and centralized decision making going
           | on in Sudan, while e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zapatis
           | ta_Army_of_National_Lib... appear to have done absolutely
           | fine keeping and improving a social fabric for the last 30
           | yeras (until recently, gangs arrived and brought the anomie
           | that comes with organized crime).
           | 
           | Again, I don't think it's a winning strategy for political
           | anarchists to try and convince people that "acshually it's
           | anomie, not anarchy", but I think on this page, peoples
           | professed self-identity makes sharing out this separation of
           | concept worth it
        
         | AndrewKemendo wrote:
         | Thank you.
         | 
         | I assumed the nuance there would be nitpicked (as the thread
         | proves) which is why I didn't post this but I'm glad you did.
         | 
         | This famine is the expected result of 20 years of post-
         | colonialist civil war, which the article goes on to explain
         | lightly.
         | 
         | The economist is a capitalist magazine, so they of course are
         | going to choose terms which resonate with capitalists.
         | 
         | The majority in this thread look at this situation as a failure
         | of "valid liberal government" rather than the results of
         | capitalist colonialism, which is what it is.
         | 
         | Colonialist resource extraction by Western powers, exemplified
         | by companies like Chevron, exacerbated ethnic and regional
         | tensions in Sudan and Darfur by prioritizing profits over local
         | communities.
         | 
         | Specifically Chevron's involvement in Sudan's oil industry
         | during the 1970s and 80s led to the displacement of populations
         | and the allocation of resources to specific ethnic groups,
         | heightening grievances and competition over land and wealth.
         | 
         | The infrastructure and political systems left by colonial
         | powers were designed to facilitate such extraction, rather than
         | fostering equitable development, creating a legacy of economic
         | disparity and weak governance. This upended centuries of
         | pastoral farming, and created conditions for this massive civil
         | war, as marginalized groups rebelled against a state that was
         | perceived as both complicit in and shaped by foreign
         | exploitation.
        
           | pvaldes wrote:
           | > This famine is the expected result of 20 years of post-
           | colonialist civil war
           | 
           | There are other actors playing here: See the Grain from
           | Ukraine program
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grain_From_Ukraine_program
           | 
           |  _" The blockade of Ukrainian ports by the Black Sea Fleet in
           | the first weeks of the invasion interrupted grain exports,
           | rapidly increasing global food prices and fueling food
           | crises, greatly increasing the risk of famine in the poorest
           | countries"_
           | 
           |  _" the Executive Director of the UN World Food Programme,
           | has estimated that the Russian invasion of Ukraine has pushed
           | around 70 million people to the brink of starvation
           | worldwide"_
           | 
           | The scope of the program includes Sudan
        
         | paulddraper wrote:
         | What is it?
        
           | hggh wrote:
           | Chaos, anomie
        
       | JohnMakin wrote:
       | Still cannot get the images of the Ethiopian famine out of my
       | head - truly horrific stuff. I'll let people smarter and more
       | powerful than me debate what could/should be done - I'd
       | personally hazard a guess nothing short of military intervention
       | can stop something like this but that has its whole slew of
       | unintended side effects. It seems like there are enough resources
       | in the world to prevent things like this, at least for now - and
       | if not, a conversation needs to be had very soon how this should
       | be handled because I don't think this will become a situation
       | that becomes less common.
        
         | bawolff wrote:
         | I guess the problem is nobody wants to "own" countries anymore.
         | Probably for good reason, colonization caused a lot of evil.
         | However if you want to make a country do what you want, you
         | can't just blow it up and then expect them to listen to you.
         | Controlling people requires actually controlling them, and that
         | is icky.
        
           | throwaway48476 wrote:
           | Debt bondage is much cleaner.
        
             | nirav72 wrote:
             | Yeah. The PRC has this process down. None of the long term
             | side effects of colonialism, but the benefits of immediate
             | access to resources.
        
           | tim333 wrote:
           | While the old prememant ownership thing has gone out of
           | fashion, maybe we could have something like a 20 year lease
           | where the Brits go in again and bring law and order? This
           | kind of thing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-
           | Egyptian_Sudan
        
             | dilawar wrote:
             | Meh. We had the great Bengal famine under British rule. And
             | none of it was due to lack of this and that.
             | 
             | Amrtya Sen "Nobel" in economics was related to this.
        
               | manishsharan wrote:
               | Several famines.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_major_famines_i
               | n_I....
        
             | bojan wrote:
             | The first step would have been leaving the African Union.
        
         | csomar wrote:
         | > I'd personally hazard a guess nothing short of military
         | intervention can stop something like this
         | 
         | Please don't guess, then? The famine started because of a
         | military intervention gone south. The reality is that the
         | Sudanese are a victim of circumstance. A war between some Arab
         | rulers over who controls the Sudan.
        
           | JohnMakin wrote:
           | Luckily my thoughts on this site don't dictate what
           | international governments do, but thanks for your input?
        
             | istinetz wrote:
             | If you don't want your opinion to be critiqued, you can
             | simply not post.
        
               | JohnMakin wrote:
               | There's no critique though - simply tone policing while
               | trying to push another argument entirely. I'm not even
               | making whatever argument is being "critiqued" here. It's
               | simply bad posting.
        
               | wolfram74 wrote:
               | but there was a critique, your proposal was "something
               | something let an army fix it" and they provided context
               | "something something various armies caused it."
        
               | stale2002 wrote:
               | Then that would be an unrelated critique/strawman that
               | doesn't accurately respond to what they said.
               | 
               | They did not propose to fix it via an army. Instead they
               | said "nothing short of military intervention can stop
               | something like this" That is not a recommendation.
               | Instead it is describing how difficult the problem is to
               | solve.
               | 
               | They then followed it up by saying "but that has its
               | whole slew of unintended side effects". This is
               | significantly hedging the claim, saying that the military
               | could actually make things worse!
               | 
               | Maybe one of the side effects that he is saying could
               | happen is exactly the issue brought up, meaning that the
               | famine would get worse. Therefore bringing this up as a
               | possibility is not a critique, and actually agrees with
               | the original statement.
               | 
               | And they also previously had said "I'll let people
               | smarter and more powerful than me debate what
               | could/should be done". That statement explicitly saying
               | that they aren't proposing things.
               | 
               | They even finished up the statement by saying "a
               | conversation needs to be had very soon how this should be
               | handled ", which only suggesting that this should be
               | talked about, because he quite clearly thinks that this
               | is a complicated and difficult problem to solve, for
               | which a military intervention could very well not be a
               | good idea!
               | 
               | If you actually read the original statement it is
               | extremely conservative in its statements, and you have to
               | almost intentionally be obtuse to attack such a hedging
               | non recommendation that merely describes how bad and hard
               | it is to solve!
        
               | DangitBobby wrote:
               | Instead of being an asshole, people could just respond to
               | the idea.
        
           | sorokod wrote:
           | You make it sound as if it is not a civil war waged by the
           | Sudanese on the Sudanese.
        
             | jazzyjackson wrote:
             | I don't know anything about it but I would be surprised if
             | each side of the war manufactured their own guns. Foreign
             | powers love to throw a fight.
        
               | sorokod wrote:
               | The vultures are there as they always are in such
               | circumstances, what is your point?
        
               | jazzyjackson wrote:
               | That the people shipping weapons to one side or another
               | are not merely vultures but foreigners who nonetheless
               | have an interest in the civil war's outcome, making it
               | not solely Sudanese vs Sudanese
        
           | mikrotikker wrote:
           | At it's heart it's a Christianity vs Islam thing and should
           | be a lesson in the failings of Multiculturalism and a vision
           | of Europe's future.
        
         | piva00 wrote:
         | > I'd personally hazard a guess nothing short of military
         | intervention can stop something like this but that has its
         | whole slew of unintended side effects
         | 
         | Military interventions most often fail to secure a country than
         | the opposite. Haiti had a long peacekeeping mission from the UN
         | and fell back into anarchy, Sudan has also had a military
         | intervention. Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, etc. are other examples
         | of interventions gone south.
         | 
         | Probably one of the few more successful interventions was the
         | Yugoslavian Civil War, nowadays the appetite of the world for
         | NATO bombing a country isn't really there.
         | 
         | No one has figured out how to do nation building from the
         | outside, that often has come from the people in those nations
         | themselves.
        
         | hanniabu wrote:
         | > It seems like there are enough resources in the world to
         | prevent things like this
         | 
         | There will always be more greed than resources
        
         | pvaldes wrote:
         | Ethiopian famine was linked with previous massive deforestation
         | projects. No trees = no water and no water = no food. War was a
         | logical consequence of that. After several decades they finally
         | grasp the idea, and are trying to bring the trees again with
         | the "green legacy" project.
        
           | mikrotikker wrote:
           | That project is really amazing I have seen it in a
           | documentary I just can't remember the name of it.
        
       | jmyeet wrote:
       | Just a reminder that all famine is political. The world, as a
       | whole, produces more than it consumes. Famine is a political
       | willingness to let certain people starve and die. It could be one
       | internal group in a country willing to starve another. It could
       | be entities external to the country willing to let it starve.
       | 
       | Functionally, famine is little different to death squads.
       | 
       | Further to this, we have a sanitized term in the modern era for
       | intentionally starving people to death. It's called "economic
       | sanctions" [1].
       | 
       | [1]: https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2022/3/25/lets-
       | remember-m...
        
       | datavirtue wrote:
       | A philosophy of self-reliance, freedom, dignity and community has
       | spawned the world's worst famine in 40 years? Hmmm....
        
       | owenpalmer wrote:
       | Sam Kinison would have something to say about this.
        
       | hnpolicestate wrote:
       | There's this awful semi-famous photograph online of a previous
       | African famine that depicts a man walking past a child who he
       | stole U.N supplied foodstuffs from.
       | 
       | This might be naive but what's stopping the U.S, Russia, E.U,
       | China or any capable world power from just air dropping tons of
       | food onto Sudans population centers? You can't tell me Sudan's
       | military has the ability to shoot down advanced aircraft. Am I
       | missing something? The country has no government currently so
       | claiming it's a violation of sovereignty would also be
       | questionable imo.
        
         | PeterisP wrote:
         | Airdropping "tons of food" wouldn't move the needle.
         | 
         | Airdropping thousands of tons of food per day, every day, for
         | years on end would temporarily reduce famine. It wouldn't
         | prevent famine (armed groupings who would gain control over of
         | the airdrops wouldn't necessarily share), and would destroy
         | local farming, and would be horrendously expensive but it's
         | possible (see e.g. Berlin airlift) if someone major really
         | wanted to dedicate all their airforce (again, see e.g. Berlin
         | airlift for what it takes) to that.
        
         | bhouston wrote:
         | > just air dropping tons of food onto Sudans population
         | centers?
         | 
         | Super inefficient, but makes for great photos. Good piece on
         | NPR US airdrops of food into Gaza here:
         | 
         | "the first thing to understand about airdrops is they are
         | probably the most inefficient possible way to deliver aid. So
         | they're used very, very sparingly and only when there is truly
         | no other way to get aid in.
         | 
         | "...ballpark eight to 10 times as expensive logistically to
         | deliver by air as by overland transport"
         | 
         | https://www.npr.org/2024/03/06/1236019060/gaza-israel-airdro...
         | 
         | Basically because of the logistical nightmare it is to airdrop
         | food, there is no way that you can feed millions in famine with
         | it. You need trucks on the ground bringing in food.
        
           | jopsen wrote:
           | Air drops might be cheaper than boots on the ground, if
           | that's what it really takes.
           | 
           | I'm not seriously advocating anything. It's a pretty hard
           | problem to solve. Famine in itself, is not so hard, we can
           | solve that with money -- the civil war thing is difficult
           | though.
        
         | paulddraper wrote:
         | Thousands of tons if you intend to do it over a meaningful
         | time.
         | 
         | And this way of distributing food is virtually worthless
         | without corresponding ground operations.
        
       | logankeenan wrote:
       | I donate to UNICEF on a monthly basis. These sorts of things are
       | terrible, but I'd like to think donating helps a little.
       | 
       | https://www.unicef.org/
        
         | bhouston wrote:
         | I also donate regularly. It is a great organization. Also other
         | great charities in this space is Medecins Sans Frontieres and
         | World Food Program and of course the Red Cross.
        
           | insane_dreamer wrote:
           | MSF for sure. Less certain about the Red Cross, feels like a
           | lot of admin for the impact (low dollars-to-impact).
        
       | SaintSeiya wrote:
       | yet while people here debate the semantic meaning of this or
       | that, real people are starving and dying over there.
        
       | hereme888 wrote:
       | In the article's picture, zoom in to look at the white horse.
       | It's so famished it looks like it came from an apocalyptic
       | painting.
        
       | Yawrehto wrote:
       | It's odd how many people pay attention to a few big crises --
       | Ukraine, Gaza, etc -- when there are many other crises which are,
       | by most measures, more important.
       | 
       | For instance, current major crises are ongoing in (per Wikipedia)
       | the DRC, Central African Republic, Cameroon, Ethiopia, Myanmar,
       | Yemen, Sudan (of course), the Sahel, Somalia, Syria, Nigeria,
       | Afghanistan, Haiti, and South Sudan -- but most of those are
       | rarely mentioned in the media.
       | 
       | The Gaza war is of course a major humanitarian crisis, but it's
       | not as important as many of the other things. All of Gaza, for
       | instance, has around 2 million people; the whole of Palestine has
       | a population of under 6 million. Assuming a horrific genocide
       | with a death rate of 100 percent, the number of deaths is still
       | less than the optimistic scenario in Sudan of 6 million excess
       | deaths. I wouldn't be surprised if other regions (the Sahel,
       | Yemen, Nigeria, the DRC and Ethiopia, in rough order of
       | likelihood) also likely have expected number of deaths greater
       | than the population of Palestine; the first two because of major
       | crises, the last three because of crises but also because they
       | have so many people (all over 100 million).
       | 
       | I get why Ukraine gets more attention than Somalia (racism), but
       | why would Gaza get more attention than, say, Yemen, Afghanistan,
       | or Syria? All are somewhat Middle Eastern, after all, so it would
       | be hard for racism to be as much of a factor, if at all.
        
         | Log_out_ wrote:
         | the bulbbelt boiling over into permawar is scary.
         | 
         | also a major component in sudan is arab racism against black
         | africans and arab hate for jews. As soon as its muslim on
         | muslim violence its okay.
        
         | insane_dreamer wrote:
         | > why would Gaza get more attention than, say, Yemen,
         | Afghanistan, or Syria? All are somewhat Middle Eastern, after
         | all, so it would be hard for racism to be as much of a factor,
         | if at all.
         | 
         | The Palestinian crisis has always gotten more attention in the
         | US because of Israel's close political relationship with the US
         | and Jews having a strong cultural influence in the US
         | especially since WW2. It's similar to the reason why almost no
         | one in the US knows about the Nazi's oppression and genocide of
         | the Roma.
         | 
         | Also, tragically, the US has never cared about how many people
         | die in Africa. We're so used to hearing about "hundreds of
         | thousands dying of X" in Africa that we're completely
         | desensitized to it, whereas one American hostage dying will be
         | major headlines for weeks.
        
           | pvaldes wrote:
           | I guess that in part because only a small minority of the
           | Ethiopia citizens own phones.
        
             | Tuna-Fish wrote:
             | ~60% of Ethiopia's population have a cell phone contract.
             | Given how among the poorer parts of society, only one
             | person in a family has one, that's near 100% penetration.
        
               | pvaldes wrote:
               | Correct. I should have expressed myself better. They have
               | phones but don't use it to post on internet. 80% of the
               | population don't have internet, and of those that have
               | it, only 5,5% use social media. This is the people that
               | could be recording videos and sending it to the world.
               | 
               | https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2024-ethiopia
        
           | jazzyjackson wrote:
           | I don't know who we is but an enormous amount of aid makes it
           | from US to Africa so I don't know how you get by saying we
           | don't care, it's merely not news.
        
         | fractallyte wrote:
         | Ukraine gets attention because it's happening in Europe, next
         | to NATO countries, with nuclear weapons lurking in the shadows,
         | and it happened as a result of filthy policy decisions by four
         | of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council in the
         | 1990s and now. Nothing remotely related to 'racism'.
         | 
         | And turn this around: how much attention is Somalia, or Sudan,
         | getting on the African continent? Do events in either of those
         | two countries make it to national headlines?
        
           | aguaviva wrote:
           | Partly because it's happening in Europe and the nuclear
           | context, yes.
           | 
           | But not simply because of that. It gets attention because the
           | nature of the aggression is extremely clear, and highly
           | unusual (in its brazenness and openness); and due to the
           | clear and present threat to the (at least approximately)
           | rule-based world order that human beings have been trying to
           | keep in place since 1945. And it "happened" because the
           | regime currently installed in the aggressor country chose to
           | take the action that it did (and falsely calculated that the
           | invasion would be a brilliant success, and face very little
           | effective resistance).
           | 
           | Not because of anything that went down in the 1990s.
           | 
           |  _Nothing remotely related to 'racism'._
           | 
           | On the contrary -- this decision was intimately tied to
           | Putin's racist conception of Ukrainians as a people (and his
           | supremacist views of his own people, or what he believes to
           | be "his" people anyway). This is eminently clear from his own
           | statements and numerous other indications.
           | 
           | If you wish to explore this topic further, then I invite you
           | to consider the writings of e.g. Terrell Jermaine Starr:
           | 
           | https://www.oprahdaily.com/entertainment/a40137153/terrell-j.
           | ..
           | 
           | However you choose to ignore these indications and the openly
           | available history of the region, and build your narratives
           | accordingly -- that's up to you.
        
         | mikrotikker wrote:
         | I think it's because the Russia vs Ukraine is more
         | consequential for the country you live in as the outcome could
         | cause a switch to multi polar world.
         | 
         | As for Gaza, well it's good old fashioned anti semitism. People
         | love to hate the Jews. It's shown in the double standards, e.g.
         | the insane levels to which Israel has gone to reduce collateral
         | damage that no other country has ever tried to do vs an enemy
         | that deliberately seeks to increase collateral damage in both
         | targeting Israeli citizens and using it's own citizens in ways
         | that ensure their deaths.
        
       | geenkeuse wrote:
       | Such a lively (but mostly soulless, heartless and completely
       | cold) discussion.
       | 
       | People are dying. Their misfortune is that they were born there.
       | 
       | What if you were born there?Would you still be on your high
       | horse, or would your coding skills and upstanding morality have
       | saved you?
       | 
       | I do not take pride in accidents of birth.
       | 
       | And being born in a thriving society is one such example.
       | 
       | If you have it easy, enjoy it. But don't for a moment think you
       | have the receipts to engage in a conversation like this, with
       | your callous heart and supreme lack of empathy.
       | 
       | It just shows your face without the mask.
       | 
       | Those who know what suffering is, and have a heart for people are
       | obviously excused.
       | 
       | The rest of you can go change the world, because you are
       | obviously so awesome and amazing.
       | 
       | Typed from my internet enabled cellphone, in one of the poorest
       | and most dangerous places in Africa.
        
         | gosub100 wrote:
         | how much have you donated?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-09-01 23:01 UTC)