The Next Breadbasket: Will the coming foreign-funded industrial agricultural boom in Africa benefit the poor more than the rich?

Asked by: ramramgeorge
  • No responses have been submitted.
  • Read the article on this by Nat Geo for more information

    Many would think that industrialization would be nothing but mostly positive to this war ravaged and poor continent. However, my two points below will essentially summarize how this would mainly benefit the wealthy.

    1. I consider this to be like the rapid industrialization (or "industrial-boom) in China. Where a corrupt government began to grow its country's GDP at experiential rates thanks to industrialization. However, most can see today that such rapid growth was paid for by a plutocratic, money-fixated government that devastated the health of their working class and environment by years of aggressive consumption and exploitation. Most of the agricultural corporations (mostly foreign but some domestic) buying land in Africa for industrial farming are already manipulating the corrupt and plutocratic governments to suit their own needs. There are countless incidents of governments turn a blind eye as bulldozers from a Chinese agricultural company bulldoze some poor man's house then enslave him on their farm promising him everything but not keeping their word.

    Thats the fundamental difference between the industrial revolution in America and the coming industrialization in Africa; America's government was nowhere as nearly corrupt or dysfunctional (they actually cared about property rights and liberties- back then).

    2. Many of the industrial farming operations already emerging in Africa practice aggressive and unsustainable farming methods. They use pesticides that are banned and considered toxic in North America and Europe, they have no consideration for wildlife reserves, and (most importantly) the farming operations are drying up countless streams and aquifers that locals rely on with no consideration for the villagers and workers they promised to help and support. The "western practices" they use are simply unsustainable in areas bordering the Sahara desert yet they still practice them with no regard for the locals!

    In conclusion this may bring a somewhat better life for the poor. Bring in infrastructure and allow access to global markets. However, this prosperity is being unsustainably generated. With large scale industrial operations uprooting farmers and local communities (sometimes without their consent) promising schools, hospitals etc... But giving nothing but poor quality jobs. Along with drying up the resources so future generations will have less than before.

    This is not the way industrialization should be.

  • Africa has Africans

    The one major flaw with Africa is that it is home primarily to Africans. They have one defining characteristic: they will keep breeding with absolute certainty until there is a famine and their population is culled by nature. Already, Africa is estimated to have seven hundred and fifty million people who depend on foreign aid one way or another. If Africa starts to produce more food, it will simply result in more children, which will result in more strife, struggles for land and infrastructure and control of the state, and more mass migration to Europe (and, according to new trends, China).

    Simply put, an agricultural boom in Africa would simply perpetuate the 'pyramid scheme of population growth' already going on in Africa, and it would just make the inevitable population crash as a result of famine much more dramatic.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
LittleBallofHATE says2014-06-28T00:02:23.403
The poor always get the sharp end of the stick. Enough said.