In 2014, William Easterly released a book, The Tyranny of Experts, arguing his case that attempting to solve poverty in third world countries without providing the political infrastructure to sustain long term growth is a lost cause. Ignoring the idea that freedom and human rights are what have generated much of the growth in the west, third world experts’ “blank-slate” mentality fails to utilize history to the advantage of poorer nations. Easterly further argues that so-called development experts place their focus on nations rather than people when trying to alleviate poverty, and in the process trample rights of individuals. Continuing his critique, Easterly asserts that the overall manipulation of economies through conscious effort disables
…show more content…
In an article for TIME magazine entitled “Stop Sending Aid to Dictators,” Easterly states, “we need a new rule: no democracy, no aid.” He contends that dictators offer a false bargain: “ignore our rights abuses, and meet the material needs of those we oppress.” However, the idea of cutting off all aid to nations that have antagonistic leaders is overly idealistic. While it is true that democracy is the greatest long term hope for the citizens under dictators, how many need to die for the sake of that ideal? While western assistance sits idly by waiting on regimes to change into democracies, millions could die of easily solvable problems like unclean drinking water and lack of medicine. Easterly claims that his solution focusses on the rights of the individuals rather than focusing on nations. Yet, in his plan, millions of individuals must sacrifice their lives for an ideal that they will never see. The transition of any given dictatorship to democracy is often years or decades away, and even after the transition begins, poverty is not alleviated immediately. For those who are currently dying of unclean drinking water, the long-term solution of democracy would come too late. Withholding aid from an authoritarian nation in poverty until the government structure changes is like withholding medicine from an obese person until they change their lifestyle. While it is true that the best long term health option for them is to lose
In an article for TIME magazine entitled “Stop Sending Aid to Dictators,” Easterly states, “we need a new rule: no democracy, no aid.” He contends that dictators offer a false bargain: “ignore our rights abuses, and meet the material needs of those we oppress.” However, the idea of cutting off all aid to nations that have antagonistic leaders is overly idealistic. While it is true that democracy is the greatest long term hope for the citizens under dictators, how many need to die for the sake of that ideal? While western assistance sits idly by waiting on regimes to change into democracies, millions could die of easily solvable problems like unclean drinking water and lack of medicine. Easterly claims that his solution focusses on the rights of the individuals rather than focusing on nations. Yet, in his plan, millions of individuals must sacrifice their lives for an ideal that they will never see. The transition of any given dictatorship to democracy is often years or decades away, and even after the transition begins, poverty is not alleviated immediately. For those who are currently dying of unclean drinking water, the long-term solution of democracy would come too late. Withholding aid from an authoritarian nation in poverty until the government structure changes is like withholding medicine from an obese person until they change their lifestyle. While it is true that the best long term health option for them is to lose