August 16, 2011
Amid new images of starving Africans we are told the United Nations is using a word it rarely utters—famine. It is the next supposedly global crisis, though no one ever explains how a succinctly regional matter can also be a global one.
UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Baroness Valerie Amos has called on would-be donors to “dig deep for Africa.” Only a (so-called) baroness would ask Western nations with high unemployment rates to give to someone else. In response, the author will now utilize a phrase which seems to roll all too frequently off the tongue these days—go to hell.
Harsh? Not particularly.
It is not a lone locale or a single nation which is affected—it is a large chunk of an entire continent. This most recent racial roundup of your meager money is brought courtesy of Djibouti, Ethiopia, Somalia, and Kenya. In total, the United Nations estimates more than 12 million people are in “urgent need.”
Is it not reasonable to inquire about what these people failed to learn from famines in Biafra (1967-70)? Or Uganda (1980)? Or Ethiopia (1984-5)? Or Somalia (1991-93)? Or Sudan (1998)? Or the Congo (1998-2004)? Or Rhodesia (AKA Zimbabwe 2000-09)? Or Sudan again (2003)? Or Malawi (2005)? Or Niger (2005-06)? Or Djibouti, Ethiopia, Somalia, and Kenya redux (2006)? Or Ethiopia, Somalia, and Kenya yet again (2008)? Or all of East Africa (2008)? Or Kenya still once more (2009)?
Worse, these aid agencies have the gall to call it “food assistance.” Food assistance is when one must request horseradish a second time from a negligent waiter. This is food coddling, overpopulation production, or at a minimum, massive nutritional welfare.
While it is difficult to observe emaciated Africans, a piquant preventative is to not notice them in the first place.
For those who recoil in horror at my words, the author humbly advocates that any African donations be immediately redirected to him in care of this publication, whereupon your hard-earned income will promptly be squandered toward supporting a bevy of lovely beauties (post-adolescent, unlike many African “brides”) to be licentiously entertained in St. Tropez or Las Vegas, location at the donors’ discretion. As a Western concession, taking potshots at any passing fellow tourists will be forgone.
While the parable is absurd, the principle is not. Who among us would not enjoy interminable, consequence-free intercourse?
A recent TV news report broadcast an interview with an African woman who arrived at a refugee camp after nearly a month of walking…with her five children. She was joined by other families of similar expanse. Aside from Gypsies and Mormons, with how many families is the average reader acquainted that has five children?