Thursday, 27 April 2006

Africa: the Chinese Takeaway


As always, with this particular writer, one always hears how bullying and oppressive Whites are, but not a word on how desperate to be bullied and oppressed Blacks tend to be. Nor of the fact that Blacks are unable to renounce Their tribalism while also not being able to repeat the technological nor political achievements of the West. Africa is a basket-case because of this and because most Africans possess a stone-age mentality coupled with the benefits of modern living that had to be purchased from the West because they couldn’t make them at home.

Blacks have a personality disorder because They want the advantages of modernism, but Their cultures tend not to be able to live with the inevitable consequences of such. They live in cultures that are simultaneously trying to retain the cultural traditions of the past while only feebly understanding what actions are necessary to ensure a sustainable future.

This is true in every country in the world. But on the continent of Africa the problem is writ large because cultural and political change is required much faster than it was in the West – which had centuries to evolve after the Industrial Revolution.

‘CHINESE PRESIDENT Hu Jintao is touring Africa, but is the continent being stripped of its natural resources to fuel China’s economic boom?’ In order to create wealth, resources must be exploited. There is no talk here of colonial theft, only of mutual trade to mutual advantage. Therefore, how else can Africa enrich itself? An economic illiterate poses the question!

I do not approve of anything that tampers with natural ignorance. Ignorance is like a delicate exotic fruit; touch it and the bloom is gone. Oscar Wilde (1854–1900), Anglo-Irish playwright, author. Lady Bracknell, in The Importance of Being Earnest, act one.

The fact is that anyone who allows themselves to be exploited deserves to be exploited since the experience is designed to teach lessons – as with all experience, otherwise what would be the point of experience? So long as African nations strike a mutually-beneficial deal with the Chinese there’s no ethical problem presented here, unless – as the author implies – the problem is with the very nature of capitalism, itself? However, there is no other means of generating wealth and sustaining economic growth other than capitalism so such a problem doesn’t really exist. The fear is that Blacks are innocents abroad who will be ripped-off by those more astute than Themselves. They will be ripped off, but these are learning experiences that will make Blacks as astute as everyone else and help end the endemic culture of dependence on foreign aid and bob Geldof-style racially-motivated so-called charity.

If, David Nyekorach-Matsanga (head of UK-based think-tank Africa Strategy) suggests, ‘terms of trade were unfair to Africa’, whose fault would that be but the Africans for not negotiating better deals? The Chinese are under no ethical obligation to pay more for African resources than they are worth to them or to bend over backwards to enrich Africans. The rule of business is that you want the best deal for yourself, not for the other guy. China can never be seen as being a neo-colonial power, therefore, unless it, for example, invades with military force.

Better be ignorant of a matter than half know it. Publilius Syrus (1st century BC), Roman writer of mimes. Sententiae, number 865.

When Whites bought Manhattan from the Red Indians for next-to-nothing this was only from the Whites’ point-of-view. To the Indians the baubles and trinkets they were paid were of inestimable value otherwise the trade would not have been made. To assume otherwise is to play the age-old White Racist Game of assuming that anyone who isn’t White is intellectually inferior. And that Whites are so superior in Their cunning that They will always find a way to screw you financially – which you can do nothing about. Believe that and you’re as inferior as the average White Racist is in His inherent cultural ethnocentrism!

If the Indians felt they were cheated, then that’s their lookout – they weren’t forced into the deal and, so, could’ve backed out. If China wants to impose political strings (such as not recognising Taiwan’s independence) to these deals, they can; those they deal with can easily back out of such deals if they’re not to their liking. They always have that choice.

In business, nothing is personal; it’s purely fiscal. Shoppers, for example, want the lowest prices and they don’t really care about sweatshop labour or so-called Fairtrade. Only those with more money than sense seek to buy off their guilt-ridden consciences by spending more for something that they could easily obtain for less. (These people are guilt-ridden because they know they achieved their affluence by hindering others – Blacks, Women, the Poor, etc – not buy any especial talent on their part. It’s guilt money that proves they have some difficulty looking themselves in the mirror every morning.)

There is natural ignorance and there is artificial ignorance. I should say at the present moment the artificial ignorance is about eighty-five per cent. Ezra Pound (1885–1972), US poet, critic. Interview in Writers at Work (Second Series, edited by George Plimpton, 1963).

‘Today Bob Geldof urged the West to speed up efforts to eradicate poverty before Beijing takes the initiative.’ Of course, a racist like Mr Geldof would present such urgings: It tarnishes his crown as the would-be saviour of Africa if the Chinks get there first with their inscrutable semi-capitalism! In truth, anything that enriches Africans, especially if it doesn’t involve Whites, is to be welcomed because of the racist emotional-baggage Whites carry around with Them wherever They go.

‘The newly emerging Asian superpower of 1.3 billion people, a quarter of the world’s population, is poised to overtake Britain as the fourth-biggest economy by the end of 2006’. As a point of fact, China did this a month ago. Britain is now in fifth place. This statement is made in the same tone-of-voice as Whites Against Darkie Immigration (WADI) use when millions and millions of the Black Bastards are swamping Britain. Why are we so frightened of Asians (whoops, sorry, that should be Orientals – it’s less confusing)? Perhaps it’s because we know we can’t compete with them in many economic areas – hence their increasing wealth. Along with the implications of this for our sense of inherent superiority to people who must be inferior because their skin is a different colour. What’s always missed is that they’re much more reproductively successful than we are because there are so many of the little buggers! According to Darwin this means they are, therefore, more fit to survive, so Whites can’t really complain now, can They?

Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. Martin Luther King, Jr (1929–1968), US clergyman, civil rights leader. Strength to Love, part four, chapter three (1963).

‘China has been accused of going on an oil safari with billion-dollar deals with Nigeria, Sudan and Angola, in addition to mineral mining and timber logging’. Why use the word ‘accused’ if the Chinese have committed no crime? Don’t you like the yellow-skinned devils? Have the Chinese used military force to achieve Their aims as Whites usually do? Blacks can’t have it both ways here. If the slitty-eyed ones want to do BUSINESS with Blacks then they must be ethically-superior to Whites because Whites have demonstrated throughput their short history that They prefer the use of FORCE rather than trade.

‘...China is busy hovering (Sic) up Africa’s oil and other natural resources...’ Again, this is racist because the word Buying is substituted with Hoovering. The writer is obviously a Marxist-Leninist with no idea of how free markets actually work. The writer never explains why China should not be trading with Africa, unless it’s because he just doesn’t like short, yellow-skinned people with slanty eyes.

Hide our ignorance as we will, an evening of wine soon reveals it. Heraclitus (circa 535–circa 475 BC), Greek philosopher. Herakleitos and Diogenes, fragment 53, part one (translated by Guy Davenport, 1976).

‘With Chinese businesses way more efficient than African textile factories, many businesses in South Africa, Ghana and other states have closed with thousands of jobs losses’. More Marxist-Leninist garbage. This is how free markets work. Less efficient businesses lose out to ones that are more efficient: That’s how consumers are continually benefited with ever-lowering prices. And the lower the price the more the poor are benefited because they are then able to make their meagre capital go further. (Those who lose their jobs must seek other employment in those expanding fields made possible by the capitalist trade with China.) Communists seem to think that keeping the price of goods artificially inflated somehow benefits poor people. I’d like them to explain how they come to such a bizarre conclusion.

‘Another complaint against China is its importation of labour rather than developing African skills’. China is under no obligation to develop ‘African skills’ – that’s the job of the Africans themselves. Are Africans always going to be on the lookout for handouts from their betters; or are they going to start standing on their own two feet like real men with real testicles between their legs? It’s obvious that these complaints come from those who want Africa to always be poverty-stricken so that they can use this poverty to berate White neo-colonial racism rather than the Africans themselves for their fecklessness. (It also allows such complainants to appear to be compassionate and altruistic when they pretend to step in to alleviate problems that they secretly want to perpetuate so that they can perpetually step in to alleviate such problems.) The Chinese are being very sensible here because they possess more of the skilled workers they need who speak Chinese and are probably cheaper to employ in order to bring such projects to completion themselves. They don’t want the unnecessary extra expense of training people they simply choose not to employ. To assume otherwise is to assume Blacks MUST be employed regardless of Their qualifications for the jobs that need doing! Talk about assuming the world owes Blacks a loving! I ask you!

Ignorance is the mother of devotion. Dean Henry Cole (1500–1580), English prelate. Disputation with the Papists at Westminster, 31 March 1559.

‘The Chinese are not shy in playing the anti-colonialist card’. This is meaningless since you play the cards you have in order to win the game you’re playing. Everyone of sense does this because it makes no sense not to. To do otherwise is simply to deliberately and volitionally lose the game - in which case why play the game in the first place? (It’s not the taking part; it’s the winning.) It also makes a useful counterbalance to the fact that Western Whites aren’t shy in using the colonialist card.

‘Esther Stanford, convener of the Forum of Afrikan (Sic) Descendents Against Racism, said: “This is a development that we must watch with keen eyes. Ultimately we do not want to exchange one oppressor with another”’. These are the blatherings of a paranoid/schizophrenic. Where is the oppression involved in doing deals with others? No-one’s being forced to engage in these deals! This is thinly-disguised anti-capitalist hogwash.

Ignorance is not innocence but sin. Robert Browning (1812–1989), English poet. The Inn Album, canto five.

This moron goes on: ‘She said there were many potential advantages to China’s involvement in the continent but the terms of trade must be determined by African leaders’. No, the terms of trade are dictated by mutual agreement not by one side. This bitch is against exploitation in one breath while in the next she implies that Africans must only engage in one-sided commercial deals!

‘Experts say Africa is grown-up enough to be aware of potential pitfalls in its relationship with China, but concerns remain that patterns of exploitation by the West could be repeated from the East’. Entirely correct! Nevertheless, exploitation only ever really and truly works if those being exploited have a deep-seated and masochistic need to be exploited.

The ground for taking ignorance to be restrictive of freedom is that it causes people to make choices which they would not have made if they had seen what the realization of their choices involved. A J Ayer [Sir Alfred] (1910–1989), British philosopher. The Meaning of Life and Other Essays, “The Concept of Freedom” (1990).

The sheer, volitional ignorance of how the world works that his article demonstrates just beggars the imagination. And I’m quite imaginative!
Post a Comment

About Us:

My photo

Frank TALKER - Truth-Teller