Comments on: Arend Jan Boekestijn – The price of a bad conscience http://www.liberatethemind.com/2009/05/26/arend-jan-boekestijn-the-price-of-a-bad-conscience_002/ Current Affairs with a twist! Tue, 06 Oct 2009 19:04:42 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8 hourly 1 By: KonstantinMiller http://www.liberatethemind.com/2009/05/26/arend-jan-boekestijn-the-price-of-a-bad-conscience_002/comment-page-1/#comment-201 KonstantinMiller Mon, 06 Jul 2009 18:26:26 +0000 http://www.liberatethemind.com/?p=207#comment-201 Hi. I like the way you write. Will you post some more articles? Hi. I like the way you write. Will you post some more articles?

]]> By: Samuelis Uztikrintasis http://www.liberatethemind.com/2009/05/26/arend-jan-boekestijn-the-price-of-a-bad-conscience_002/comment-page-1/#comment-54 Samuelis Uztikrintasis Thu, 28 May 2009 10:43:31 +0000 http://www.liberatethemind.com/?p=207#comment-54 Originally I meant to reply to Carlos a simple... if I had the solution I'd probably be giving out a speech at Oslo. However, giving a second thought, and challenging myself here I am. I strongly agree with Mark... to use my own version of a good oldie from the Clinton era... it's human dignity, stupid! Microeconomic projects serve precisely that end and impact the daily lives of people in a more direct way than dull macroeconomics of stable prices. That solves the issue of development but not the issue of approaching and looking at Africa. Perhaps, another old principle enshrined in the UN holds practical with a slight modification... regard other as you would have them regard you. Meaning to avoid the simplistic explanation of 'it's just 'cuz they are primitive, close, ...' and to understand that governments/States are not the end but the means for any society to their common goals. A constructive engagement will do to address these needs, not a primordialist one. Originally I meant to reply to Carlos a simple… if I had the solution I’d probably be giving out a speech at Oslo. However, giving a second thought, and challenging myself here I am. I strongly agree with Mark… to use my own version of a good oldie from the Clinton era… it’s human dignity, stupid! Microeconomic projects serve precisely that end and impact the daily lives of people in a more direct way than dull macroeconomics of stable prices. That solves the issue of development but not the issue of approaching and looking at Africa. Perhaps, another old principle enshrined in the UN holds practical with a slight modification… regard other as you would have them regard you. Meaning to avoid the simplistic explanation of ‘it’s just ‘cuz they are primitive, close, …’ and to understand that governments/States are not the end but the means for any society to their common goals. A constructive engagement will do to address these needs, not a primordialist one.

]]> By: Mark Prins http://www.liberatethemind.com/2009/05/26/arend-jan-boekestijn-the-price-of-a-bad-conscience_002/comment-page-1/#comment-53 Mark Prins Thu, 28 May 2009 09:47:09 +0000 http://www.liberatethemind.com/?p=207#comment-53 Direct monetary aid may even harm a country's GDP growth, at best, the majority of the evidence loses its statistical significance if robustness checks are conducted. (Roodman, The anarchy of numbers: Aid, development, and cross-country empirics in The World Bank Economic Review). Whether the Rwandese people are in the end better off with, or without the (Dutch) development aid remains a question. Reading this article, I think that critically reviewing the 'type and form' of the development aid won't hurt canyon. The main problem is that finacial aid is fungible in the sense that even conditional aid can increase spending on weapons or end up in the pockets of the rich, because increased aid on e.g. eduction might well decrease domestic spending on education. In the end, buying development with large flows of money is an utopy. [b]My solution:[/b] Development should be initiated by people in the developing countries, and the best we (the developed world) can do is facilitiating development with microeconomic projects that facilitate borrowing, insurance, investment and learning. From an economic view, donating money often does not provide the proper incentives to secure long-term development. Whereas this might look harsh, I strongly belieft that the outcome is far more favorable than the direct financial aid outcome. Direct monetary aid may even harm a country’s GDP growth, at best, the majority of the evidence loses its statistical significance if robustness checks are conducted. (Roodman, The anarchy of numbers: Aid, development, and cross-country empirics in The World Bank Economic Review).
Whether the Rwandese people are in the end better off with, or without the (Dutch) development aid remains a question.
Reading this article, I think that critically reviewing the ‘type and form’ of the development aid won’t hurt canyon.
The main problem is that finacial aid is fungible in the sense that even conditional aid can increase spending on weapons or end up in the pockets of the rich, because increased aid on e.g. eduction might well decrease domestic spending on education. In the end, buying development with large flows of money is an utopy.

[b]My solution:[/b]
Development should be initiated by people in the developing countries, and the best we (the developed world) can do is facilitiating development with microeconomic projects that facilitate borrowing, insurance, investment and learning. From an economic view, donating money often does not provide the proper incentives to secure long-term development. Whereas this might look harsh, I strongly belieft that the outcome is far more favorable than the direct financial aid outcome.

]]> By: Carlos Quiroz Sánchez http://www.liberatethemind.com/2009/05/26/arend-jan-boekestijn-the-price-of-a-bad-conscience_002/comment-page-1/#comment-52 Carlos Quiroz Sánchez Thu, 28 May 2009 02:31:48 +0000 http://www.liberatethemind.com/?p=207#comment-52 Do you have any suggestions or brainstorming ideas about better approaches that could be adopted by policy makers? Or at least the desired principles that would lay a foundation to better approaches? Which descriptions would better fit Rwanda or other African countries? It is kinda difficult to assign general descriptions to all of Africa, since different regions and states are advancing in different directions and different paces. Do you have any suggestions or brainstorming ideas about better approaches that could be adopted by policy makers? Or at least the desired principles that would lay a foundation to better approaches?

Which descriptions would better fit Rwanda or other African countries? It is kinda difficult to assign general descriptions to all of Africa, since different regions and states are advancing in different directions and different paces.

]]> By: Samuelis Uztikrintasis http://www.liberatethemind.com/2009/05/26/arend-jan-boekestijn-the-price-of-a-bad-conscience_002/comment-page-1/#comment-51 Samuelis Uztikrintasis Thu, 28 May 2009 02:01:17 +0000 http://www.liberatethemind.com/?p=207#comment-51 I'm sorry for making hasty generalisations. However, my point is not that I know the records of all parlamentarians, Dutch, American, you name it (this leads me to another topic... how de we construct knowledge and know the 'real' world but I'm not going into that). My point is to highlight an underlying issue in the discourse of the article. In 1978, Edward Said talked about Orientalism and how it affects the way we define our own identity based on how we perceive the 'other'. Said argued the West define itself in terms of the exotic, backward, and weak Orient and so Orientalism became the dominant paradigm (check Kuhn for a definition of paradigm). What I meant to constructively criticise, indeed in a vicious way, was the associations Mr Boekestijn makes. If you happened to notice, primitive, feudal, closed society, dictator, authoritarian, ... are just some of these tags attached to Rwanda and Africa in the article whereas the Dutch are an open society, preoccupied with development and aid, donors, helpers, and so on. These associations are similar to what Said described for the Orient but applied in this case to Rwanda and more in general to Africa. My hasty generalisation meant not to deterministically categorised the Dutch parlamentarians but to call on them to critically assessed the dominant paradigm when approaching Africa and Rwanda. Up to 2003, Kagame was a hero. The gacaca courts, estabilising Rwanda, economic boom in Kigali, and so on were some of his attributes. Now he is a dictator and warlord. How is this different to the approach undertaken to deal with Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe? How is this different to the approach for dealing with Muhammad Gaddaffi? In no way I pretend to condone the abusive behaviours of any of these leaders, but there is a need in general (and I'm making a hasty generalisation indeed) to reexamine the 'unalienable truths' which sustain our actions and thoughts. At the end, the intentions may be really good ones, but the externalities may be VERY counterproductive. Cheers! I’m sorry for making hasty generalisations. However, my point is not that I know the records of all parlamentarians, Dutch, American, you name it (this leads me to another topic… how de we construct knowledge and know the ‘real’ world but I’m not going into that). My point is to highlight an underlying issue in the discourse of the article. In 1978, Edward Said talked about Orientalism and how it affects the way we define our own identity based on how we perceive the ‘other’. Said argued the West define itself in terms of the exotic, backward, and weak Orient and so Orientalism became the dominant paradigm (check Kuhn for a definition of paradigm). What I meant to constructively criticise, indeed in a vicious way, was the associations Mr Boekestijn makes. If you happened to notice, primitive, feudal, closed society, dictator, authoritarian, … are just some of these tags attached to Rwanda and Africa in the article whereas the Dutch are an open society, preoccupied with development and aid, donors, helpers, and so on. These associations are similar to what Said described for the Orient but applied in this case to Rwanda and more in general to Africa. My hasty generalisation meant not to deterministically categorised the Dutch parlamentarians but to call on them to critically assessed the dominant paradigm when approaching Africa and Rwanda. Up to 2003, Kagame was a hero. The gacaca courts, estabilising Rwanda, economic boom in Kigali, and so on were some of his attributes. Now he is a dictator and warlord. How is this different to the approach undertaken to deal with Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe? How is this different to the approach for dealing with Muhammad Gaddaffi? In no way I pretend to condone the abusive behaviours of any of these leaders, but there is a need in general (and I’m making a hasty generalisation indeed) to reexamine the ‘unalienable truths’ which sustain our actions and thoughts. At the end, the intentions may be really good ones, but the externalities may be VERY counterproductive. Cheers!

]]> By: Carlos Quiroz Sánchez http://www.liberatethemind.com/2009/05/26/arend-jan-boekestijn-the-price-of-a-bad-conscience_002/comment-page-1/#comment-50 Carlos Quiroz Sánchez Thu, 28 May 2009 00:53:38 +0000 http://www.liberatethemind.com/?p=207#comment-50 Samuel, Keeping in mind your complaints on "otherness," yet respecting your opinion, wouldn't you agree the line "the Dutch parlamentarians [sic] should also reflect on the way they look at and approach Africa in general" is an overgeneralization based on inductive reasoning? Mind you, but how many contemporary Dutch parliamentarians are you familiar with? How many have you studied or interviewed regarding African policy? In fact, how familiar are you with Boekestijn's thinking? Have you followed closely his track record on African issues? I believe it's unfair to target past and present Dutch parliamentarians without knowing where they stand first. There is only so much you can know about the author and fellow public officials from one single article. I hope you take this into consideration to prevent yourself from committing logical fallacies in the future. If you wish to learn more, you can read the following short article from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasty_generalisation . Samuel,

Keeping in mind your complaints on “otherness,” yet respecting your opinion, wouldn’t you agree the line “the Dutch parlamentarians [sic] should also reflect on the way they look at and approach Africa in general” is an overgeneralization based on inductive reasoning? Mind you, but how many contemporary Dutch parliamentarians are you familiar with? How many have you studied or interviewed regarding African policy? In fact, how familiar are you with Boekestijn’s thinking? Have you followed closely his track record on African issues?

I believe it’s unfair to target past and present Dutch parliamentarians without knowing where they stand first. There is only so much you can know about the author and fellow public officials from one single article.

I hope you take this into consideration to prevent yourself from committing logical fallacies in the future. If you wish to learn more, you can read the following short article from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasty_generalisation .

]]> By: Rodrigo Estrada http://www.liberatethemind.com/2009/05/26/arend-jan-boekestijn-the-price-of-a-bad-conscience_002/comment-page-1/#comment-49 Rodrigo Estrada Wed, 27 May 2009 15:41:07 +0000 http://www.liberatethemind.com/?p=207#comment-49 European concerns in African events are legitimate since this neighbor resources-abundant region represents both a cheap source of energy and ill-payed labor quarry. The article accurately mentions guilt as the motor behind European actions in Africa. On the one hand, Europeans and Americans both claim to support the development of African nations and give large donations to their governments whilst they keep a an evolved form of economic and cultural colonialism in the region. The US goverment has being contemporarily associated with the concept of an interventionist State whose primary goal is to preserve its international hegemony. Nonetheless, Americans took this path after their European predecessors, whose large intervention in the Americas, Asia and the Middle East supported authoritarian regimes contrary to the principles proclaimed by Europe. Nowadays, the Europeans appear to feel guilty, so they can preach again their values on Human Rights and their commitment to economic and social development. However, they only pretend, as they only keep on supporting governments favorable to their economic interest and cultural hegemony. If they intend to revert their previous ill-driven actions towards Africa, they should let the African peoples rule themselves and decide on their resources. European concerns in African events are legitimate since this neighbor resources-abundant region represents both a cheap source of energy and ill-payed labor quarry. The article accurately mentions guilt as the motor behind European actions in Africa. On the one hand, Europeans and Americans both claim to support the development of African nations and give large donations to their governments whilst they keep a an evolved form of economic and cultural colonialism in the region.
The US goverment has being contemporarily associated with the concept of an interventionist State whose primary goal is to preserve its international hegemony. Nonetheless, Americans took this path after their European predecessors, whose large intervention in the Americas, Asia and the Middle East supported authoritarian regimes contrary to the principles proclaimed by Europe.
Nowadays, the Europeans appear to feel guilty, so they can preach again their values on Human Rights and their commitment to economic and social development. However, they only pretend, as they only keep on supporting governments favorable to their economic interest and cultural hegemony. If they intend to revert their previous ill-driven actions towards Africa, they should let the African peoples rule themselves and decide on their resources.

]]> By: Samuelis Uztikrintasis http://www.liberatethemind.com/2009/05/26/arend-jan-boekestijn-the-price-of-a-bad-conscience_002/comment-page-1/#comment-47 Samuelis Uztikrintasis Wed, 27 May 2009 14:13:58 +0000 http://www.liberatethemind.com/?p=207#comment-47 The article is very informative indeed and provides a legitimate version of the happenings in Rwanda. However, it is the basic assumptions Mr Jan Boekestijn makes that made this article extremely difficult to digest for me. Whereas I cannot neither deny nor ignore Mr Kagame's involvement in the DRC conflict and his descend into the shoes of a dictator, I would like to be provided theoretical information on this categories of open v. close societies which so much resembles a contemporary discourse of the 'otherness' which fed the mission civilatrice of Europe in the backward Africa during the 19th and 20th Century. Furthermore, his argument is backed by a complete ahistorical comparison of feudal europe to contemporary africa? Does this comparison assume that Africa is on the feudal phase of a historical continuum of European progress towards modernity? Additionally, isn't the existence of gatherers and hunters in a so-called primitive society an over specialization rather than a non specialization at all? Sadly, this article is full of primordialism and European hubris regarding the making of the African 'other'. Although I usually dislike the tones of Postcolonialism, I must admit it is useful in assessing the neocolonial overtones of the article. Perhaps, apart from denying money to Kagame's regime, the Dutch parlamentarians should also reflect on the way they look at and approach Africa in general, and Rwanda in particular. And despite all these reasonable doubts on the article's assumption, I do agree to the legitimate concern of how the Dutch taxpayers' money is being spent abroad The article is very informative indeed and provides a legitimate version of the happenings in Rwanda. However, it is the basic assumptions Mr Jan Boekestijn makes that made this article extremely difficult to digest for me. Whereas I cannot neither deny nor ignore Mr Kagame’s involvement in the DRC conflict and his descend into the shoes of a dictator, I would like to be provided theoretical information on this categories of open v. close societies which so much resembles a contemporary discourse of the ‘otherness’ which fed the mission civilatrice of Europe in the backward Africa during the 19th and 20th Century. Furthermore, his argument is backed by a complete ahistorical comparison of feudal europe to contemporary africa? Does this comparison assume that Africa is on the feudal phase of a historical continuum of European progress towards modernity? Additionally, isn’t the existence of gatherers and hunters in a so-called primitive society an over specialization rather than a non specialization at all? Sadly, this article is full of primordialism and European hubris regarding the making of the African ‘other’. Although I usually dislike the tones of Postcolonialism, I must admit it is useful in assessing the neocolonial overtones of the article. Perhaps, apart from denying money to Kagame’s regime, the Dutch parlamentarians should also reflect on the way they look at and approach Africa in general, and Rwanda in particular. And despite all these reasonable doubts on the article’s assumption, I do agree to the legitimate concern of how the Dutch taxpayers’ money is being spent abroad

]]> By: Dutch Member of Parliament says some African countries should not get financial aid http://www.liberatethemind.com/2009/05/26/arend-jan-boekestijn-the-price-of-a-bad-conscience_002/comment-page-1/#comment-45 Dutch Member of Parliament says some African countries should not get financial aid Wed, 27 May 2009 04:07:41 +0000 http://www.liberatethemind.com/?p=207#comment-45 [...] should not get financial aid I read this article and I thought it was really interesting Arend Jan Boekestijn - The price of a bad conscience - Liberate the Mind It is quite controversial so I thought it [...] should not get financial aid I read this article and I thought it was really interesting Arend Jan Boekestijn – The price of a bad conscience – Liberate the Mind It is quite controversial so I thought it

]]> By: Carlos Quiroz Sánchez http://www.liberatethemind.com/2009/05/26/arend-jan-boekestijn-the-price-of-a-bad-conscience_002/comment-page-1/#comment-43 Carlos Quiroz Sánchez Tue, 26 May 2009 20:36:42 +0000 http://www.liberatethemind.com/?p=207#comment-43 Wow, tough article. The aid-conscience-development-stability theme is interesting, considering it's also a debate applicable to Middle East issues (including Iraq in the future, perhaps?). I must admit I have not been up to date with Kagame and Rwanda. For the sake of balance, could someone please recommend me related sources, links to other editorials or to a point/counterpoint on the same subject? I'd like to learn more about it from additional points of view. Of course, I'll do some reading myself and if I find something useful I'll post it here. Thanks for the article! Wow, tough article. The aid-conscience-development-stability theme is interesting, considering it’s also a debate applicable to Middle East issues (including Iraq in the future, perhaps?).

I must admit I have not been up to date with Kagame and Rwanda. For the sake of balance, could someone please recommend me related sources, links to other editorials or to a point/counterpoint on the same subject? I’d like to learn more about it from additional points of view. Of course, I’ll do some reading myself and if I find something useful I’ll post it here.

Thanks for the article!

]]>