Jasper-Global-Tyranny-Step-By-Step-The-United-Nations-and-the ...

The central argument for foreign aid has remained that without it Third World countries
cannot progress at a reasonable rate, if at all. But not only is such aid patently not required
for development: it has tended to obstruct development more than it has promoted it.
External donations have never been necessary for the development of any society anywhere.
Economic achievement depends on personal, cultural, social and political factors, that is
people’s own faculties, motivations and mores, their institutions and the policies of rulers.
In short, economic achievement depends on the conduct of people and their governments.
It diminishes the people of the Third World to suggest that, although they crave for material
progress, unlike the West they cannot achieve it without external doles.27
American philosopher-economist-theologian David Chilton, in Productive Christians in an Age of Guilt-
Manipulators, his powerful riposte to Ronald J. Sider’s redistributionist economics, cogently :
The government-to-government transfer of tax receipts is not conducive to the development
of a market-oriented society; indeed, it is a denial of it. Moreover, it positively encourages
the growth of statism and the politicization of life in recipient countries. Foreign aid simply
turns the recipients into "little Soviets." ...
Like other bureaucracies, multinational aid organizations and their staffs have two main
goals in life: spend the money, and increase the budget (as much as two-thirds of an aid
organization’s budget will be spent on "administrative costs").28 [Emphasis in original]
On the left too, we have very devastating critiques of the aid fiascos by reputable scholars. The
September 1987 issue of Britain’s Keynesian-socialist Economic Journal, for instance, carried a
withering blast at the World Bank authored by three British economists: Paul Mosley, John Hudson, and
Sara Horrell. After exhaustive statistical analyses of Bank projects around the globe, they concluded,
"empirically we have found it impossible to establish any statistically significant correlation between aid
and the growth rate of GNP in developing countries."
Moreover, the economists said:
The apparent inability of development aid over more than 20 years to provide a net
increment to overall growth in the Third World must give the donor community, as it gives
us, cause for grave concern.
Even "liberal" Newsweek (a principal CFR transmission belt) admitted in a 1990 survey of foreign aid
programs that aid ultimately hurts Third World countries because it "tends to prop up incompetent
governments or subsidize economies so they can never stand on their own."29
Perhaps the most damning indictment of the UN’s so-called aid programs has come from author Graham
Hancock, who would probably describe himself politically as a liberal. After examining repeated cases
of the most destructive and unconscionable policies, he wrote in Lords of Poverty: "UNICEF, UNHCR,
and the World Food Programme et al. do indeed deliver relief supplies during emergencies; the quality,
timeliness and relevance of these items, however, as we have seen ... often leave a great deal to be
desired."30 The totality of the record of these multilateral agencies led him to the following very
negative and bitter conclusion:
Of course, the ugly reality is that most poor people in most poor countries most of the time