"The most biggest representative of under-developed countries would be Africa. Nations of Africa, except South Africa, have no government, and are ruled by war lords.
I think the best way to help such nations would be by lending them money, such as by organizations like the IMF."
and then
"I would say a much better way than giving them money is to give them technology/infrastructure. If they industrialize, progress towards better life expectancy will follow. If they are just given money, it could be used inefficiently and for all the wrong things."
Furball, Bombadil, you are both wrong.
Loans are not what is needed. But neither are loans with conditions as Bombadil states. The IMF has been loaning with conditionality for years now and it is actual the cause of many of Africa's contemporary problems, brought on by what is know as the Structural Adjustment Programs (widely repudiated).
What is needed instead is not loans but grants.
These countries should not be forced to open their markets to what amounts to dumping of cheap goods from industrial countries. Their own industries never develop, which leads to unemployment, which leads to an informal economy, which leads to no tax revenue, which leads to a government which can't afford to pay its employees enough, which leads to corruption, which leads to not getting any loans.
Vicious cycle, but there is no silver bullet either. An educated workforce with no employment is worthless. A country with infrastructure but no industry to export or no resources to export is worthless. Etc. All problems must be attacked. Inequality within societies being one of the most potent problems, a problem I might add that the developed world has yet to set its own house in order about.
So........ as to how to create harmony:
Let the developing countries actually develop without forcing them to open themselves and be blindsided by what amounts to neocolonialism. The systems of global governance currently in place completely favor industrialized nations, and these nations use their influence to perpetuate the situation.
In one sense, the United States and others have climbed the ladder of development, that is, having heavy government involvement and direction in fostering competition and innovation even as they prevent their own economy from being adversely affected from the outside, and now that they have achieved development, are attempting to kick the ladder out from under them so others cannot follow, as the policies of the World Bank, IMF, and WTO all indicate.
The UN, supposedly the recourse of these underdeveloped nations to air their grievances, is marginalized by those in the world with the real power, the rich. Even within the framework of the UN, the Security council is an anachronism which preserves the balance of power of 1950, which is no longer accurate in any meaningful sense.
So the first way to get harmony is fix global governance (such as it is), the next way is to promote fairer trade which either/both:
A) Eliminates the hypocrisy of rich nations who insist of open markets even as they insist on exceptions for their own industries or create loopholes for themselves, like American farm subsidies (*fuck* American farm subsidies).
B) Allows poorer countries to protect themselves and their economies and head toward development via the proven model that Europe, the US, Japan, and China have followed. I.e. fair trade.
That's what I think. The short answer is:
Let poor countries become rich. Harmony ensues. Sure some rich guy in NY bitches about it, but he'll be dead soon and then harmony is achieved.
)
Wherefore art thou been there?
)
)
)
)
)