Steve Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 I had a private conversation a while back where I had a similar attitude about Africa but I would also suggest that if it is only applied to Africa then I would question the motives. If that view is going to be the norm, then NATO should have stayed out of Bosnia. I hate to admit but sometimes a little Darwinian and a dash of Malthusian check is in order sometimes. To be fair, would we then extend this view to the poor in our respective nations? Do simply write off Compton, California? Do we write off Brixton and the council estates in Liverpool? I sometimes think Africa has to hit its bottom before it can rise like a Phoenix out of the ashes. Things have to get so bad that the populace will change socially. The rule of law is the one common denominator that separates successful countries and those mired in endemic poverty. There may be an exception somewhere but I am hard pressed to find a 3rd world country that has a comparable rule of law to the developed countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh_Hoy Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 ...There may be an exception somewhere but I am hard pressed to find a 3rd world country that has a comparable rule of law to the developed countries. California? HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kamui Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 ...There may be an exception somewhere but I am hard pressed to find a 3rd world country that has a comparable rule of law to the developed countries. California? HH California is the opposite: It leading in some aspects like the Green movement and it's economy is the 8th biggest of the world. But it's bankrupt nevertheless. Will California become America's first failed state? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.