Dambisa Moyo counter-attacks Bill Gates’ critique of her work as ‘evil’

You will remember from yesterday, that Bill Gates is not a fan of Zambian economist Dambisa Moyo (see below video). Responding to a question about Moyo’s book Dead Aid, which criticizes Western aid interventions in Africa, Gates claimed the book is ‘promoting evil.’

Well, it turns out that Moyo is not happy with what Gates has to say about her book. Moyo issued a pithy response to what she described as a personal attack by Gates.

“To say that my book ‘promotes evil’ or to allude to my corrupt value system is both inappropriate and disrespectful,” writes Moyo in a blog post this morning.

The short blog post makes two points to refute the remarks made by Gates. First, Moyo says that the book serves as a debating point on aid. She says that both she and Gates agree on the goal to improve the livlihoods of Africans in a sustainable way. Her goal was to raise concerns about the limitations of aid.

The second point made by Moyo addresses Gates’ claim that she does not know much about aid. Moyo is quick to point out her experience in the classroom, a PhD, and out, World Bank Consultant. She concludes that her experience being raised in Zambia provides her with a unique first-hand insight into poverty in Africa and the impacts of aid. It is the very same selling point that Moyo used in promoting her book.

“To cast aside the arguments I raised in Dead Aid at a time when we have witnessed the transformative economic success of countries like China, Brazil and India, belittles my experiences, and those of hundreds of millions of Africans, and others around the world who suffer the consequences of the aid system every day,” says Moyo.

Gates is not alone in claiming Moyo’s analysis is seriously flawed.

Economists have cited problems in the economic conclusions made by Moyo and pointed out that some points lack factual evidence. The proposition to immediately cut aid has huge ramifications if it is considered given the impact it would have on the lives of individual people, argued Owen Barder of the Center for Global Development, in his review of the book. If Moyo is wrong and people follow her advice, the results can be devastating.

“There is a debate to be had about aid, but Moyo’s book, sadly, does not advance it. Dead Aid is poorly researched, badly argued, mendacious in its use of evidence, and pedestrian in its suggestions for alternatives to aid,” concluded Barder.

Zambian economist Chola Mukanga came to similar conclusions in her review of the book, also citing a lack of evidence and calling the proposed solutions by the book ineffective.

“[O]n both theory and practice, Dead Aid falls far short of what is expected of a book advocating such a radical proposal of “turning off the aid tap”. If there’s any consolation in this assessment, it is that Dead Aid will hopefully not find any intellectual traction.”

Colombia academic and aid superstar Jeff Sachs took umbrage with claims made by Moyo, in a 2009 Huffington Post blog post. He criticized Moyo and other aid critics, including Easterly, for their narrow views on aid and use of government funding for research.

I begrudge them trying to pull up the ladder for those still left behind. Before peddling their simplistic concoction of free markets and self-help, they and we should think about the realities of life, in which all of us need help at some time or other and in countless ways, and even more importantly we should think about the life-and-death consequences for impoverished people who are denied that help.

Moyo shot back with her own blog post saying that Sachs played a crucial part in her understanding of aid by serving as one of her professors in Harvard. There, she says, he touted the need for private sector and free market solutions to long term development challenges.

“Perhaps what I had not gleaned at that time was that Mr. Sachs’ development approach was made for countries such as Russia, Poland and Bolivia, whereas the aid- dependency approach, with no accompanying job creation, was reserved for Africa,” wrote Moyo.

Sachs and MVP head John McArthur again replied saying that the evidence shows that aid has made lives better. Bednets, for example, have helped reduce malaria cases and deaths in sub-Saharan Africa. Concerns by Moyo that they nets are not produced in Africa misses the larger point of the health gains from their use and the economic benefits of a healthier population, said Sachs and McArthur.

Moyo is not offering a reasoned or evidence-based position on aid. Everybody that deals with aid wants to promote financial transparency and market-led growth, not aid dependency…The purpose of aid should indeed be to break the poverty trap through targeted investments in an African Green Revolution; disease control; children’s education; core infrastructure of roads, power, safe drinking water and sanitation, and broadband; and business development, including microfinance and rural diversification among impoverished smallholder farmers.

Academic Edward Carr found Moyo’s book to be rife with problems and lacking in evidence. “Dead Aid, in the end, is not a contribution to conversations about development for those of us who actually do the work – it is a non-sequitur that does not deserve the attention it has received, or any further attention,” he wrote in reviewing the book.

ONE supporter and Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson is yet another opponent to Moyo’s ideas. Like Sachs, Gerson makes the case that aid has done good across a spectrum of health indicators. Ending aid would cause more harm than good, he argues.

“If Moyo’s point is that some aid can be bad, then it is noncontroversial. If her point is that all aid is bad, then it is absurd. The productive political agenda is to increase the good while decreasing the bad. The productive academic debate is distinguishing between them,” writes Gerson.

Gates is not the first and certainly will not be the last to tangle with Moyo over her ideas of aid. Who’s next?

Share.

About Author

Tom Murphy

Tom Murphy is a New Hampshire-based reporter for Humanosphere. Before joining Humanosphere, Tom founded and edited the aid blog A View From the Cave. His work has appeared in Foreign Policy, the Huffington Post, the Guardian, GlobalPost and Christian Science Monitor. He tweets at @viewfromthecave. Contact him at tmurphy[at]humanosphere.org.

  • John S.

    This quote from Michael Gerson summarizes a lot the failures of the criticism of Dead Aid:

    “If Moyo’s point is that some aid can be bad, then it is noncontroversial. If her point is that all aid is bad, then it is absurd. The productive political agenda is to increase the good while decreasing the bad. The productive academic debate is distinguishing between them,” writes Gerson.

    But neither of those is Moyo’s point. Moyo clearly distinguishes between charity (individual and NGO) and government to government aid. She criticizes the latter as incentivizing corruption and power-grabbing, prolonging the suffering of the poor it purportedly helps by entrenching the worst kind of autocrats.

    • Good point, John. Thanks for the comment.

      • Faisal Abdullahi

        John, is anyone a fan of Moyo’s views? Surely there are a few who find her views sound… Though I wouldn’t be able to confirm that by reading this article.

    • SJN82

      Exactly, tell them John S!

    • SETI

      exactly…so the problem is bigger than what it seems to be. The problem is the status quo, the political system that points to emboldening the rich and as usual trampling on the poor.

  • pato

    Moyo conflates her Arguments. Moyo’s Point some Aids in Africa is bad!! which holds water in both academic and practical sense.

  • The is a middle ground here, many of the points raised by Dr Moyo are valid but her time scales seems very aggressive but the fact still remains that the China model in Africa has been far more successful in a shorter space of time then the western one, as unpalatable as this may be for some. As raised in her criticism of Jeffrey Sachs “Perhaps what I had not gleaned at that time was that Mr. Sachs’ development approach was made for countries such as Russia, Poland and Bolivia, whereas the aid- dependency approach, with no accompanying job creation, was reserved for Africa,”…while one woman not offer solutions, she has opened the debate about the fact the current aid model is not working. Chinese infrastructure projects for resources are bringing modernization and prosperity while trickle down aid donations are breeding rampant corruption but like the ME debate, we the west, can’t have entered it with anything but honorable and well meaning intentions, that thought is an impossibility to accept.

  • I agree with many of the criticisms of Dead Aid, but at the same time I’m not sure I see how saying it promotes “evil” (not a scientific or economic concept but one used primarily to elicit an emotional reaction) helps to move the debate forward.

    • Agreed. It doesn’t and Gates deserves criticism for saying that.

  • Sangwani Nkhwazi

    Reading all this, I get the sense that it’s difficult for those who were not born and bred in Africa (and strangely even some who were born and bred in Africa) to appreciate the solutions advocated in the book, which tio me are no brainers. The issues about aid are not about complicated PhD theses-type evidence obsessed by academics and other sorts, but that frankly means nothing to the person affected. Empirical research is mostly what Moyo is working from, and I commend her for that.The major issue is, ‘how can poor people be empowered with skills that will help them (i) get a job / start a business (ii) continue in that job without continuous external help.

    In my own family, I have seen what handouts do to people. There are able-bodied people in my family, who 30 years ago were dependent on one of my parents to help them, that are still receiving such help today. Their lives have not advanced, in fact they have become more lazy and complacent…exactly the situation most countries across Africa are in. The people are demotivated, the leadership has no incentive to get their act together because they are kept in power by donors, and the peopel are too poor to successfully orchestrate a revolution to demand change, and force their elected officials to begin work in their best interest. And this lot say aid must continue?? You are not living on planet earth!!!

    • I think the question is not necessarily about doing away with aid, because that is not likely to happen even if you and I agree it should be removed. Rather, it is to ask what are the best ways to use that money. One good example you raise is civil society. Another is thinking of ways to support people as they seek jobs/create businesses, but in a way that does not foster dependency. And you are right to point out the issues corruption and governance as they are related to aid.

      • Sangwani Nkhwazi

        Tom, lets break it down a bit more taking some examples.

        In Britain, when a hospital needs some products / services, they put out a tender using the local / regional Health Trust, and after a relatively fair and transparent tendering process, a contract is awarded to the successful company.

        Unfortunately, in most parts of Africa, things don’t work quite that way. In Africa, tax payers money can be embezzled by the government (http://mwnation.com/k5bn-fraud-scam-swells-to-k15bn/) It gets worse, in Africa, a minister can exert his influence to get a contract awarded to a company he prefers, which could belong to his cousin or someone in the family, or an outsider with whom that minister has a backdoor deal, and no questions will be asked. In fact vary rarely will some parties raise eyebrows, because most of the times, the deal is secret. The public never get to know about it, and civil society is under-resourced to pour resourced into probing such backdoor deals. Often the disgruntled just moan and moan that one particular company is always getting the major contracts, and the moaners are not, despite meeting all the requirements, including on price. They complain all they like, but nothing changes. The government of the day will simply reply that the winning party scored best in the criteria contest, so was given the contract. Once the government changes, to a new party + a new leader, interestingly this corporation ( which was always meeting the criteria and which was winning all the contracts) suddenly stops doing so??A different company favoured by the new president (or his/ her lieutenants) takes its place?? Its happened in Malawi, not once or twice. Countless times. Most recently, an Indian company was awarded a contract in an area they didn’t even have expertise…the fiction was so throughly violating and insulting to one’s intelligence, at one point the awarding authority’s evaluation committee went as far as completing some of the tender bid on behalf of that indian company????And this Indian, what does it do soon after. It purchases 50 new vehicles for the ruling party(http://www.malawivoice.com/2013/05/08/indian-firm-apollo-finally-purchases-50-vehicles-for-pp-as-part-of-us76-2m-bogus-contract-82992/ )??? Not for the government or the country, no for the ruling party!! All this was happening when there were better suited companies ( http://mwnation.com/contract-scandal-haunts-malawi-treasury/ ) to undertake the work in the tender (which had to be indian companies, as the money was coming from the Indian government)???? Despite all the obvious signs of foul play, and even after an official request to investigate, the Anti-Corruption Bureau, whose chief was appointed by the current president hasn’t even lifted a finger to investigate the deal(http://www.malawivoice.com/2013/03/20/jb-lipenga-76-2m-apollo-scam-treasury-seeks-acbs-intervention-92973/)

        So Bill Gates and his friends come in, pour their millions, thinking the money is going to be used for its purpose, and is cajoled into believing he is dealing with angels; that his millions will have some effect to the poorest in society blah blah blah; A part of those funds it will have an effect, but by far, a larger chunk of it goes to grossly inflated invoices, and finds its way into the pockets of some of the top brass in government. Again, 8 / 10 times there’s no auditiing, no questions are asked. In some cases, funds actually get transferred to other dpartments, again no questions are asked…

        What Bill and his friends need to do in Africa is to support a vision that will help African countries to truly be independent of the west, or anybody else. No point giving aid knowing tommorrow you’ll needto give some more. How do you create sustainability?: http://malawiace.com/2013/01/15/rich-warm-heart/

        if not for the people to be empowered; to be economically stable, irrespective of who is in power. Soon, one day, they will realise their attempts will never work, not in a South korea or Brazil kind of way; these countries never developed on the back of aid.

        A final point, it’s strange that educated men like Bill Gates, who should know better, especially as to how countries like Canada, New Zealand,Australia or even the US itself achieved economic development, somehow don’t want to support the model that clearly works???? Maybe we should have asked that one to Steve Jobs??

        • I think you and I are largely in agreement. Blindly spending aid money through governments and projects without transparency, audits or monitoring/evaluations can be harmful.

          The thing is that Gates will keep spending his money on aid programs. My point is to ask how someone like yourself or I can hold him and his foundation to account. My hope is to investigate and raise questions so that aid can be deployed as a form of investment.

          • Irvine Chiwara

            It’s not Gates who has to be held to account though – it’s the direct recipient of his goodwill, who often don’t channel it down to the intended end user. Otherwise I agree with you, Tom, in that the point isn’t to stop aid altogether. But the point is to ensure that aid is not simply a wad of money given to a govt with no questions asked. Aid with an intended result of economic independence is no doubt better than aid with continued dependency.

          • Good point.

  • Sangwani Nkhwazi

    Oh ,and for good measure, the last president in Malawi Bingu Wa Mutharika– who died suddenly in April last year — looted over £117 million (MK61 billion, and the figure is still rising, according to the auditors of the estate). The current president, who has been hailed as a breath of fresh air and a symbol of women’s success by all the western powers, including being invited by the Queen to Buckingham Palace, Obama, and several other leaders, getting a visits from Tony Blair, Hilary Clinton, and much recently Bill Clinton, has reluctantly disclosed her assets –after a lot of pressure to do so– but interesting the information has not been released into the public domain by the Speaker of Parliament — himself a shady man–?????????????? And everybody with half a brain knows why. Because there are inconsistencies, because she won’t be able to clearly explain how she acquired some of her wealth…Its anybody’s guess how much of either the wealth of Mutharika, or that of Joyce Banda originates from aid money. No leader in the western world can ever amass such amounts of wealth from government via looting because the checks and balances are there in place…in Malawi, unfortunately they arent, and the more money is poured in without strict conditions and actual monitoring, the more the ruling politicians of the day become richer, and the more the people suffer…you don’t need to read a PhD thesis or undertake scientific research to understand that…just go live in Malawi for a few months, and you’ll see it for yourself (Even foreigners who stayed there barely a couple of years tell the same story: http://malawiace.com/2013/08/23/reshaping-the-african-politician-nick-wright/). In our case,the president’s salary was less than $10,000 a month, and even with other benefits, there is absolutely no way Mutharika would have legitimately amassed £117 million on a clean streak in 7 years (even if we take account of all the other priviledges he had!) Sadly, across Africa the story is the same. Then you hear of this: http://pulitzercenter.org/reporting/africa-malawi-public-health-care-medicine-doctors-shortage-hospitals-clinicians and wonder is aid really working?

  • OkoAbeni

    I pray that some days soon the discussions about Africa shall be on its accelerated rate of development and not the perennial wars, corruptions and Boko Haram. Mother Africa, please deliver your children from the Economic and Political Terrorists.

  • All Bill Gates wants to do is sterilize Africa and promote his depopulation agenda. It would be best if they started in Europe rather than Africa. Europe needs the help. Leave Africa for the Africans to deal with.

    • Cliff Smith

      If your point is regarding “over-population” then you are misinformed. Europe already has a negative population growth rate. That is one area they do not need any help with.

      • Good. Leave Africa for the Africans. Europeans have done enough damage over the centuries with imperialism, terrorism, mass murder, enslavement, brutal human dismemberment, and introducing technoviruses. He’s better off killing Europeans. That would guarantee world peace and African survival. Afterall, we know what the goal is.

        • Gerimo_Ek

          You are emotional and in the heat of your rising emotions you are missing the point. I did not read Dr Moyo’s book but from this debate I see the salient points of it. Forget the politics and provide constructive debate.

    • DocHollywood_2

      Bill likes to muddle in affairs he knows so little about. Bill is equally unqualified to make any statement outside of technology other than “Who should I make the check out to?”

      Just ask any one in higher education

  • Djohndoe

    The problem with academic is that you are too arrogant in peddling your little knowledge. why will this woman go against Bill gates a man spending his own money to help the poor. it is his money and trying to draw negative attention to him for doing so is so evil and un African.
    the problem of Africa is not the aid but the government of Africa who spend the people’s money on themselves and their family. our effort should be focused on corrupt government in Africa, they are the ones that strip their citizen’s of dignity.
    everyday I lived abroad I get phone calls from family members who need help that I can give. many times I have responded albeit in a smaller dimension than a bill Gates . these people could not find any job at all even if many of you are promoting so called entrepreneurial skill which don’t work in these countries because they just cant support any economic activity. who cares about PHD where people are poor and if this lady has a PHP in a very poor country then she is part of the ruling class that always stand in the way of helping the people because the thought of getting help from abroad is obnoxious to them

    • Bill Gates foundation is promoting GMO in Africa why? with 20% or more of the world’s fertile land mass, organic farming is feasible… yes the foundation is doing a great job introducing new vaccines into Africa for polio and malaria.. sometimes the Africans being used as guinea pigs for new drugs… ok… but why not develop the infrastructure to produce these vaccines in Africa?.. thats the debate…. Whats the motive for aid to Africa? why is a continent with so much, have so little? ever asked yourself that question?… why are there trade barriers for African produce? ok… there is an Argument the west owes its citizens a duty… but Africans can produce and increase trade within the continent and ban all imports… its investment aid that the continent needs for prosperity, whcih will enhance freedoms and equality…

      • Djohndoe

        African’s are very sensitive to help from the west. Why do we see evil whenever a western interest wants to help. i see paranoia and the question is when will our educational institution truly live up to being an educational institution such that they can confirm in a collaborative sense whether the help promised are dangerous to our people. as someone who lives abroad i have come to the conclusion that western countries don’t want refugees on their doorstep for many reason because it takes away from the planning for their citizens and as such believes that if they can empower Africa by exposing them to current technology they may be able to do for themselves things that improve the quality of life in Africa.
        i am not oblivious of the fact that they want Africa to grow so that they can expand the frotier of international trade. this can only happen if they can remove the hinderance to growth which include: eradication of poverty, hunger and diseases.

    • Amansiis

      Djohndoe, It seems un African to undermine one’s charity at an elementary level of thinking. But think about the bigger scheme of aid to Africa. Do you really think that it is a free lunch? What does it mean to create a vast majority of dependent people in a society? What does it mean to have as many corrupt leaders as possible in Africa for the so called “developed world”? How much of the aid money has been spent on the intended projects in Africa and how much is deposited back in western banks? In fact we have to distingush between the geniune western people who donates aid and those who are in charge of channeling it. I don’t have any evidence whether Gates is any different in channeling the donated money. (remember over 60% of the Gates Millinda foundation is funded by others)

  • Mfana-boy Msibi

    The Great Thomas Sankara once said “he who feeds you, controls you”

  • ayanda

    In the above article there are only negative analysis and reviews of the book, Tom, is because you couldn’t find anyone who shares Moyo’s sentiments or is it because you wanted to channel the argument to favor a certain perspective?

    • Frankly neither. I choose to highlight Moyo defending herself from her critics as I figured that was the most direct way to deal with each of their concerns. It also allows some of the holes and bias that exist in the criticisms to be laid bare. For example, look at the strident points made by Sachs and Gerson. It is Gerson who is absurd for rejecting out of hand that all aid could be bad.

      Though the statements made by Moyo deserve scrutiny, as do those made by anyone else (myself included). When doing this story two years ago, I was struck by the fact that some people who are sympathetic to her arguments raised serious concerns about some of the evidence used in the book.

      Personally, I find a significant amount of what she says to be compelling. My thoughts on aid are relatively in the middle with a slight lean towards the ideas put forward by the likes of Moyo and Easterly, among others. I remain deeply skeptical of the status quo and think the industry has the burden of proving that what it does is not only good but is in the interest of the people they are supposedly ‘helping.’

      Thanks for reading and your comment.

  • I guess many people are missing the point.. Aid for investment leading to sustainability and self reliance is desirable… But aid as a knee jerk reaction to an episaode is damaging…. For instance, why are there no pharmaceutical companies in Africa, developing and producing the malaria vaccine?… why not invest money to train the human resource, develop the infrastructure needed to produce locally? on a more basic level… why keep bringing in used clothes when the land is fertile enough to grow cotton to make clothes?.. I believe its the handout culture the book is trying to redress… dont gift aid… invest aid… that will provide much needed infrastructure and much needed jobs….

  • kudz

    Im not sure why these leading Economists make her look like an idiot.

    Moyo has her flaws like any1, but on the most part shes very correct. We
    Africans agree with her, and we are on the receiving end of this Aid.

    Its clear what she is saying.

    Invest the Aid in building farms, schools and provide health aid in ways that
    actually uplift people form 1 stage to another. Instead of investing
    millions every year. Money can be put to a better use.

    Use locals to develop land that they can feed on for years. Provide
    irrigation systems, dig boreholes and build schools.
    Provide basic foundations that can be a platform for future growth.

    Teach these locals something they can use to defend themselves from falling into same
    issues time and again.

    I feel this does not need an Economist to understand.

    Sometimes i also feel like billionaire’s give away money as PR stunts. Just a thought.

    China has done so much in Africa, and if u stand to deny that, then u are either confused or totally lost.

    We are talking long term here.

    In 50 years Bill Gates will be Dead!! Then what do we do.

    What she is saying is pretty simple.

    People have a tendency of picking on the knitty gritties of sitiuation instead of focusing on the broader objectives.

    Theres a difference in using $20 to buy tonights dinner and a blanket, or using the same

    $20 to purchase Potatoe seeds and fertiliser for the month.

    These are things local govements are failing so why repeat the cycle.

  • Michael Munkumba

    Aid…aid…aid. An industry in its own right. With the best of intentions often. A fixed paradigm at the moment. Perhaps Dambisa punctured that paradigm. The negative reactions could be either because Dambisa is wildly wrong or she has made a paradigm challenge. My take is some aid…at a diminishing rate is needful. Bottomline is, that the combination of aggressive tax planning by Multinational Companies through tax havens and tax evasion through misinvoicing is greater than all the aid transferred to Africa each year. And i have not mentioned trade barriers! Or money transferred to western banks by corrupt politicians or money deducted at source of loans through inflated interest rates!! Come on, seen from this perspective Dambisa has shaken the right tree!!!

  • SJN82

    ‘Ears that do not listen to advice, accompany the head when it is chopped off.’ ~African Proverb I hope I will be alive when Dambisa Moyo is proved to have been right all along. I’m an African, I get it. Everything Moyo says, I understand it. Some westerners, as rich as they are, don’t get it. Even some foolish Africans somehow don’t understand. Not surprising, the continent is full of educated fools. We have loads of them in Malawi. Degree wielding Economists,Bankers, Political Scientist and others who don’t quite fit any distinct category – who have nothing of any real value to their name. ‘Experts’ accustomed to being hired by unscrupulous political bigwigs to repudiate the opposition, to confuse and deceive the masses. I know them very well.
    But back to the westerners for qa meoment. I’ve got a small theory, and its not something the likes of Bill will want to hear: that they’d need to spend 10 + years living on African soil, learning the language, history, politics, mixing with the people (not just the elite and expats), analysing the culture … to really get it. To clearly understand why Moyo couldnt possibly be wrong. I’ll end with another proverb: ‘You do not teach the paths of the forest to an old gorilla. ‘ ~Congolese Proverb

  • Christian

    I have spent two decades facilitating development in Africa –
    researching and engaging with communities, government institutions,
    development agencies, private sector, and civil society.

    I agree with Bill Gates when he refers to value systems and to the issue of understanding development.

    But is so sad that such a powerful person falls short on both aspect when it comes to development.

    Firstly,
    maybe we should understand that the value system of a philanthropist is
    displayed when they feed a street person today and fail to consider the
    root cause that will leave them still hungry tomorrow, and even more
    dependent on future handouts.

    Should we celebrate the halving of
    infant deaths without noticing that the health systems are now even
    more vulnerable to collapse due to aid-dependent expansion that is not
    backed by local institutional development.

    Secondly, what is
    development from a person like Bill Gates? Halving infant deaths CAN be
    an indicator of development, but is not development itself. Should a
    capitalist like him not know that handouts do not lead to sustainable
    development?

    Aid is needed for emergency relief, as much in a
    hurricane-ravaged US state as it is in a disease outbreak or famine-hit
    country in Africa. But aid cannot be the developmental solution to the
    US state, and isn’t for the African Country. How is it that this logic
    is somehow applied differently for Africa? This is the point Dambisa
    makes in her response to criticism by Sachs, because this is exactly
    what he taught her at Harvard.

    I know first hand, and have
    undertaken research showing that much of the aid that comes outside
    relief efforts interferes with development.

    As for the impact of
    development aid on Africa as a continent, why hasn’t another book been
    published that addresses aid in totality and shows that the conclusion
    by Dambiisa is wrong? We have many aid projects that have shown signs of
    success, but which have not been linked to overall sustainable
    development at country or continental level. Instead various other
    comprehensive evaluations, even by the World Bank, support Dambisa’s
    views.

    Weaknesses can certainly be pointed out in the
    methodology used in the book, but who has shown that such weaknesses are
    so fundamental that they cannot support the conclusion. Owen Barder of
    the Center for Global Development strings a number of phrases that can
    really only be appreciated by a person that hasn’t read Dambisa’s book
    and is looking for a reason not to, and doesn’t want to accept the
    book’s punch line. Dambisa presents very specific views that beg
    specific counter arguments. All I see are sweeping statements by even those that know better than to do so.

    As
    for Bill Gates, I think he expresses views that are so simplistic that
    they must have embarrassed even those critical of Dambisa’s book. He
    really doesn’t understand development and how it relates to Africa. He
    is a philanthropist.

    Africa has many systemic problems that are affecting her development. Very few of these need aid.

  • Indica Rising

    SACHS? REALLY? People are going to put stock in to something HE has to say? These people are thieves who are raping Africa of all her resources, not to mention systematically destroying the animals and people within. All these so called “aid” groups are funded by the “elite” who are the most diabolically scum on the face of the Earth. SACHS as in GOLDMAN SACHS is nothing but another money grubbing plague upon the earth. Anyone who buys into Gates and SACHS’ propaganda to keep their dirty families in power are foolish. If all these “aid” groups actually DID what they CLAIMED to do, I’m quite certain the situation in Africa and the world as a whole would be a much different scenario.

  • Jonijo

    You know what they say.. if you give the street vendors money.. they will not leave the streets… Moyo has something to say… listen…

  • SETI

    I am with Moyo. I totally agree with her. Hand outs by the West and from
    people like Gates is somehow creating in their minds a false sense of
    humanitarianism. one that is granted out of publicity and not from the
    heart. Money for
    politics is the usual pork barrel feeding tree used for centuries. i
    often wonder what the statement AID FOR AFRICA means? They can NEVER
    raise enough AID for Africa. NEVER. Where does this money go? Who spends
    it? What is it spent on? And yet we still see millions dying from
    starvation and the lack of basic health facilities. Am I saying AID does
    not have a place in any country’s development? No. Aid is good when
    used effectively. Aid must not only be granted ,it must be managed with
    specific aims and objectives.

    Like Moyo I see all the so called white
    band-aid as dressing a prick on a finger when the problem is a deep
    wound in the head. She is right. AFRICA DOES NOT NEED MORE AID. Africa
    needs Africans to first understand that leadership means suffering ,
    putting self last. Africans must be unhinged from the brainwashed
    machinery of the Western ideals of development and structure and create
    their own African development. African leaders must understand that
    TOGETHER they can fight the system that invaded and plundered their
    wealth in Africa, invest it and then give them the crumbs from their
    table and call it AID.

    Africa’s development is in the hands of Africans
    and every country in that continent is capable of growth, development
    and recognition of their people and country as long as they are given
    the same level of respect and trust the developed world have for their
    own kind. The operative word is TRUST.

    Trust is like a bird that keeps
    flying looking for a branch to rest its wings. No one trust anyone. So
    they both use each other, stabbing each other in their backs, one giving
    AID, the other receiving, both corrupt, the people not empowered. Back
    to square one. More AID and the cycle continues.

    Stop this nonsense of
    accepting hand outs. It gives the elites a reason to be sacrosanct and
    the opportunist every opportunity to corrupt.

  • Nyari

    I find this article by Tom Murphy also worrisomely one sided and seemingly biased to oppose the investigation into the Impact of AID in Africa. Most if not all of the quoted arguments by the book review suggest that Moyo’s experiences in the book are bad. Do you seriously mean that of all the reviews that were done about Dead Aid all were negative? It lacks balance as well at the end of the day one wonders if this was just to push a certain position rather than explore truth and realities in the end offer balanced and truthful information. Dambisa’s book has some truths in it. For instance, there has been a huge debate lately about the loses that Aid has caused in Africa where economists believed that for every billion brought to Africa in AID probably three billion leaves Africa in losses. That needs to be explored so that we deal with this issue once and for all. I do believe that AID has caused tremendous development in Africa, but has also caused amazing dependency syndrome which has caused Africans to depend on AID. Whie there has been that deveopment, the question is is that the best there could be for Africa? Could Africa not do better without depending so much on AID? why should Africa continue to depend on AID? AID is great as an alternative but not as the sole provider of development, its not sustainable and disenfranchises economies if applied solely. There has to be a sustainable development from within and ofcourse and continued AID on the side to sustain the current system while another system is being worked on. I believe we need both Sustainable home grown solutions as well as AID support.

  • DocHollywood_2

    Bill Gates was asked to leave Harvard for academic ineffectiveness (flunking out) and it was suggested by the Registrar (which I met and was told) that Bill was told to take a semester or two at a local community college, then come back to Harvard which he never did and as we all know was very successful with Microsoft.

    If Bill didn’t have millions to donate, would anyone listen to him? Probably not, so to criticize someone with the credentials of Dr. Dambisa Moyo leaves him on weak ground, unless Bill professes each statement with “In my non-academic and unsubstantiated academic option…” or perhaps “As one of the wealthiest men in the world, and based on no practical real-world experience other than what others have have written or told me…” And other than Microsoft, and his donated millions, Bill seems to be a “one trick pony.”

    Again, If Bill didn’t have millions to donate, would anyone listen to him? Probably not,