What is Reddit's opinion of The White Man's Burden: Why the West's Efforts to Aid the Rest Have Done So Much Ill and So Little Good?
From 3.5 billion Reddit comments

By popularity on Reddit, this product is:

#45 in Economic Conditions books

#16 in International Economics books

#15 in Systems & Planning books

Check price on Amazon

11 reviews of this product found across Reddit:

I actually agree that foreign aid is extremely fucked up (I read this back when it came out).

I was trying to argue the secular charity= angels, religious= toxic was an unfair dichotomy.

There's a whole book, and a good one, about how efforts to help using foreign aid have frequently gone awry.

Do you agree with William Easterly's theory that all international aid, including the Gates Foundation, is bad?

on the surface I know my stance sounds absurd but it's actually something I'm involved with and very passionate about. I direct you to some accessible reads from William Easterly White Man's Burden and The Tyranny of Experts or there's a recent popular documentary, Poverty, Inc, which I'm a fan of. Things like the Gates Foundation do not help long term.

A really good book about this effect is:

"The White Man's Burden".

http://www.amazon.com/White-Mans-Burden-Efforts-Little/dp/0143038826/ref=sr_1_1/183-8551735-1108002?ie=UTF8&qid=1461948793&sr=8-1&keywords=the+white+man+burden

>And once again, why does this arbitrary boundary of continents matter?

The oceans are not an "arbitrary boundary". They are actual boundaries.

>Because you are racist, I know, but give me the supposedly legitimate version.

You keep pulling out that race card, as if anyone gives a damn. OK, you must hate white people then, that's why you want to push Europeans out of their continent. See how easy that is to flip around?

>Which is why you totally ignored everything else I said. The fact that those billions were put into only two countries. The fact that they were militarily occupied for decades. The fact that their economies were directed by that occupying force for years and both were made favored trade partners.

Actually, the Marshall plan went to allied countries, not to Germany and Japan, and the rest of Europe recovered too didn't they? It wasn't just Germany and Japan. So much for your straw-clutching.

> You ignore all of that and pretend that the entire continent of Africa somehow dropped a ball it was never given.

?? WTF.... Africa had all the advantages Europe did. They certainly weren't short of resources. And even after independence, countless billions were spent on development. Countless billions were spent on corruption, palaces, gives to cronies, etc too. I highly recommend the book White Man's Burden by William Easterly.

Another problem too, of course, is that Africa's population has skyrocketed, faster than the continent can absorb new people. And that's another example of how they have sabotaged their own development.

>Except when they didn't and established themselves in businesses across the US, throughout the colonies, in Hong Kong, in Australia, in Canada, and faced the same kind of xenophobic bullshit you are participating in here.

Yeah.... well, those refugees didn't get the generous handouts that they get today, so they were more invested in their new countries. Plus, they had an extra advantage. The advantage of not forcing women to wear the veil, or for that matter, not subjugating, assaulting, or groping women, and not blowing themselves up in suicide attacks! That makes a difference, whether you see it as "xenophobic bullshit" or not.

>This is such entitled bullshit from someone who clearly understands nothing whatsoever about the economic situation in poverty stricken countries of Africa

Give me one example in history of an economic problem solved by people fleeing from it. Good luck.

Erm, that studies doesn't mention black people. . . . though I get what you going for. However the idea black folk caused their own problems is in no way proven by one study. A note on methodology, only theoretical maths and physics are proven with one study. Secondly, it's always good to take the narrowest view possible on the applicability of studies, unless it's just another point in a stream of similar information that compose your argument. Speaking of streams of info -

Complicating your one culture to ruin them all narrative about black people (and all of development economics) are tons of research. For the general theoretical importance (backed by research of course) of institutions and history on economics, we got:

Easterly's white man's burden - don't be tricked by the title, he won't agree with you
Collier's The Bottom Billion
Sach's The End of Poverty Haven't actually read this one, because I think J.Sachs is a bit of a dumb-dumb.
Banerjee's and Duflo's Poor Economics
Fukuyama's Origin of Political Order -This one's a two-parter!
Acemoglu's and Robinson's Why Nation's Fail

Then their is the idea that poor black people are people and poor

Black people live in an America where they are assumed to be on drugs, recieve less callback for jobs despite have the same resume assumed to be older and less innocent than they are, have their wealth legally stolen from them more likely to be pulled over while following traffic laws, more likely to be arrested for the same crimes, are shown fewer homes by realtors, pay more than white men for cars, where one-third of the population would be upset of they married into the family, live in under a really fucked legal system in way other's don't, and this guy has a huge following. Us whites also believe that WE are the true putupons in society Hell, even the nicest blackman in the universe is scared of police in a way that I am not and as of 2013 13% of America wouldn't want their daughters marrying Mr. LaForge. I don't want to get siderailed to much, but surely you've been following the recent reports on how police forces are using their citizens as ATMS and how that burden falls heavily on the black community.

Then, there's the recent history of redlining and more redlining in an attempt to deny the black community access to homes, credit, and jobs.

Finally, a series of related question. Do you think that institutional barriers every played a role in America life? 1860's, surely? 1960's, probably? When did all that history disappear? A decade would be fine.

Edit: formatting and clarity

William Easterly (former world bank economist) has written several good books describing the patronising paternalism that you're talking about.

http://www.amazon.com/White-Mans-Burden-Efforts-Little/dp/0143038826/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1444870118&sr=8-2&keywords=william+easterly

http://www.amazon.com/Tyranny-Experts-Economists-Dictators-Forgotten/dp/0465089739/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1444870118&sr=8-1&keywords=william+easterly

From the charity navigatior web site

>We define accountability and transparency in assessing charities as follows: Accountability is an obligation or willingness by a charity to explain its actions to its stakeholders. Transparency is an obligation or willingness by a charity to publish and make available critical data about the organisation.

Source

Also from the site it gives the American Red cross a score of 89/100 for accountability and transparency and a 80.05/100 overall score Source

There is little incentive today for most NGOs/charities to make sure that the money spent on the ground is spent effectively. External organisation like Charity Navigator (which I happen to like) simply do not have the resources to check for effectiveness (nor do they even try). Rather they check to see if the NGOs/Charities spend to much on internal administration and/or fundraising and not enough on their programs.

I strongly recommend <strong>White Man's Burden</strong> by <em>William Easterly</em> for an in depth explanations on why so much money frequently accomplishes so little good.

> given the right aid.

All the evidence of half a century of aid strongly suggests that the west has no idea how to do effective foreign aid. To the contrary there is strong evidence that when aid is a large percentage of GDP this encourages corruption only makes thing worse.

I recommend the book White Man's Burden

> There's no reason on Earth that the West Bank shouldn't thrive as a free place under self-determination

I agree with this. Sadly I believe that Abbas an his kleptocrats stand in the way of such a vision.

So much for reasoned debate & facts & logic. Proving how ideology indoctrinated and compromised you are.

Here's just a FEW of my sources on agricultural policy. As you can see, none but 2 are from left wing sources.

https://www.heritage.org/agriculture/report/farms-and-free-enterprise-blueprint-agricultural-policy

https://www.heritage.org/agriculture/report/how-farm-subsidies-harm-taxpayers-consumers-and-farmers-too

https://www.cato.org/commentary/should-united-states-cut-its-farm-subsidies

https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/bringing-economic-sanity-agricultural-trade

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-8268.00020

https://www.amazon.com/White-Mans-Burden-Efforts-Little/dp/0143038826

https://www.cato-unbound.org/2006/04/02/william-easterly/why-doesnt-aid-work