Land Rush in Africa - Businessweek
The following story was printed in the December 7, 2009 Businessweek. Read the story and then submit your response to it (or to other responses). Your response should demonstrate you utter brilliance in the understanding of global economics.
To read the article click here: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_49/b4158038757158.htm
To read the article click here: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_49/b4158038757158.htm
posted by Mr. Castle at
3:26 PM
27 Comments:
It is amazing how much Dominion has hurt the people! however, as they did pay for the land, they do have the right to use it. the question, though, is if the government had the right to lease it...
That greasy Burgess guy from Okla. really bugs me. He says that a man from his church inspired him to use his skills to help out people in Africa and thinks he's doing them a favor. He may bring some jobs to people but while he's doing that, he's erasing hundreds of years of a beautiful culture, poisoning livestock (the most important possession of these people), and degrading the land. Charity is not is motivation. It's profit.
He isn't trying to befriend any of the people. He's exploiting a weakness that the Kenyan government has (land leasing) as it is such a new country and yet to establish a functional system.
I agree with Andrew, obviously the government doesn't have the right to lease the land, therefore Dominion should have no business buying it. Burgeois's claim that he is "boosting poor economies" could very well be true, since as we discussed in class GDP reflects economic growth, not well-being. He can identify growth, but it is misleading about the actual situation of the country
I thought it was interesting but expected that despite the numerous issues that were presented against the work Dominion did in Africa, Burgess continually denied any wrong doing by his company. The people have been mistreated and clearly something has to be done about this situation.
I find it interesting that the money paid by Dominion was vanishing. This obviously means that instead of the money aiding those in need or being pumped into the economy, the cash was put straight into the pockets of the men doing the business deals; most likely the men in the "western style suits" who begged Burgess to "help their people." This seems to be an unfortunate, yet common theme.
I largely agree with Carolyn. I find Burgess to lie somewhere in between dishonest and delusional. It is clear he is working for profit, not for the benefit of the African people, as he so professed. It just so happens that he has not followed through with many of the service aspects of his project (buildings schools, hospitals, etc.), yet seems to have had no problem setting up an effective agribusiness - with all the associated adverse results...
I was also struck by Burgess' ingorance and condescension towards the African people and culture. He seems to fail to understand, or at least admit, that although the land he leased wasn't "owned" (at least in the westernized sense of the word) by the African people surrounding it, it played a vital part in their lives. Plus, if you're genuinely interested in helping out a needy group of people, you ususally don't dismiss them as "These people," who "just want someone to blame."
I similarly think that Burgess's attempts to impose western values on an African people was stupid and misguided. Further, hiding behind god, and essentially calling himself the equivalent of a savior, is disgustingly arrogant and in direct contrast to the evidence that this article presents.
It must be recognized that Dominion made an effort to discuss land leases with tribal chiefs-they did not just take the land after a brief discussion with a distant federal government. However, this can simply be seen as a good business move.
Burgess is either a very cruel person, or completely ignorant of those around him according to the quotes used in the article. Assuming that the writer was trying to paint a picture with the article, then the reader is given a very unfair view of Burgess' opinions. I find it hard to believe that the only things he says are religiously themed and condescending. These sound bites are meant to make him out to be a religious extremist instead of the business man that he is.
However, if the article's side of the story is correct, then he is doing horrifying things to an unstable nation. He needs to fufill his promises before he rapes the land of its natural resources.
I think that what Burgess is doing is wrong, and he knows it. Out of every example he gave for how Dominion is benefiting the locals, the villagers clearly stated that that was not the case. Furthermore, Burgess uses religion as an excuse for what hes doing, claiming to be a "savior" for the Kenyans. Clearly, he has not owned up to what he said he would do for the locals.
While Burgess claims that he helped the locals due to the presence of Dominion. The damage to the locals homes and property is inexcusable. It's ridicules that Burgess was offended when the locals voiced their anger at what he did to their homes and how unfairly they had been treated. He manipulated these people and took control of their land without fair compensation and should be forced to repair the damage inflicted.
I agree with Kate B. I think the Burgess is aware of what he is doing, but ignoring the effect that he has on the country. If he isn't aware he is completely ignorant of the pain and destruction he is causing.
The small quote of "No one was there," really troubled me, as it was established that there were in fact people there before, tending to their land and just because the government sold the land to some big Western hotshot meant that anyone who had been living there was displaced. It's inexcusable.
Burgess' actions are morally terrible, true. And although I completely disagree with what he's doing, it IS his job. His goal is to make money no matter what the cost.
It seems like the typical situation here. The locals can't really get the publicity that is needed to doing anything about Dominion and they really don't have any way to fight. The problem seems to lie with the people in this world, there is plenty of talk of action to help the less fortunate, but nothing really to back it up. Advocacy for these people is nonexistent. That seems to be the true problem to me, because there will always be those who are willing to take advantage like that..
it is stated that Burgess said he paid Siaya County Council $100000 two years ago. A county official conceded that $100000 canished, according to local newspaper reports. Also. Burgess again said he paid $120000 to the local Lake Basin Development Authority in 2003,where this money also "disappeared". Money just doesnt disappear, unless it is being used for something other than its intended purpose.
I think that Burgess has every right to do what he is doing. The lives of developed nations are built from the agony of less-developed nations. It's simply the way the world works in a world overpopulated with limited resources. Sure what he is doing isn't morally fair / ethically right... but when all is said and done, it's not throwing the world out of order or anything of a terrible magnitude. There are far worse thigns going on, so this has little concern to me.
Dominion inc. and Burgess are obviously taking advantage of the Kenyans. Misleading deals and then not following through on them, money disappearing magically, (possibly intentional) flooding.
He's also rather arrogant, saying that they don't know God well enough, calling their land "little gardens", and being ignorant of the culture.
Geez, Castle, if you want to increase your traffic, there are better ways than this! You can read all of my ideas on my olde blog, http://urbsblog.blogspot.com/
ANYWAY
I don't really think that the "locals" really "own" the land that they say they consider thiers. Just because you use the land doesn't make it your, the same arguement was used against the nomadic Native Americans who also did not techniaclly own their land and had no right to say otherwise. So, Dominion has the right to purhcase the land and use it as it wishes (of course, within environmental standards, I should hope), but I do not think that putting up a dam to deprive people of safe and healthy lives is a responisble thing to do. If you just start ,essing up the native's home (not necesarily land)then you can bet there will be hell to pay.
But consider this...you can own the earth and still all you own is earth until...
YOU CAN PAINT WITH ALL THE COLOOOOORS OF THE WIIIIIND.....
Burgess brings up a good point when he says that he disagrees when people say "We need to preserve our culture".... "because when they preserve it, they starve, and no longer have a culture to preserve."
I disagree with Joe. Clearly these people will not starve by preserving their culture. They have endured for probably ~1000 years and there is nothing to suggest that is about to change. They will not survive if Agrabuisness destroys the land.
The part about this article that bothered me the most was Burgess's assumption and tone that the more deveolped way of life is better. Cultures can reap profits far greater than wealth and infrastructure and who is to say which is better?
I agree with Phil H. I think there are more things in the world that people shuold be worrying about than what Burgess is doing. I also agree with Tatum a little. To tie the two together. Why not have people like Burgess doing other things that will benefit more then just himself.
Also when he said "I try to help these people, but all they do is complain." well did Burgess ever think that maybe they didnt want his so called 'help'.
As a person, I think that Burgess is very narrow-minded and finds it difficult to see past what only he wants. When stating, "When you try to help these people, all they do is complain," Burgess fails to see that maybe these people dont want what he imagines, and are longing for a more resourceful community.
I like what Noah and Tatum said, these people have survived on their own without Burgess's help for hundreds and hundreds of years, so why does he think that they need his help now. He states that the people do not respond positively to his support, but he never considers that they aren't responding positively because they do not want or need help. These people seem content with their own way of life and Burgess never steps back to realize this fact.
I agree with Brooke. Burgess definitely has a set way of beliefs that he believes everyone else should feel. This is shown especially when speaking about religion since he tells the villagers that they do not believe in Christ "enough". He may have had good intentions when Dominion first started up and as they do own the land it is really up to them what happens with it.
Dominion obtained the land completely legally. They were asked by tribal leaders and the local government to buy the land and employ local workers. They paid for the land honestly, even if the money disappeared into the hands of corrupt politicians rather than helping the people. What Burgess and the Dominion company fail to realize is that the decisions made by local government officials rarely (if ever) reflect the wishes of the poor in the region - the people who Dominion's decisions affect the most.
Burgess seems to have good intentions; he is out to make a profit for his company but comes across as genuinely interested in helping the locals. However, he is stubborn and clearly refuses to look at the facts of the situation. The Dominion irrigation project, while completely legal, has harmed the environment and economy far more than it has helped it. The water has been polluted, families have been displaced, and livestock are dying. Dominion should attempt to pressure the local leaders into making decisions to benefit their constituents, while Dominion should research ways to work the land better without harming the land as much.
It is obvious that the majority of the people here agree that Burgess is out to only make money. He is persuading the people (and several of you on this blog) that his intentions are good. He is NOT out trying to make money for his company because he is actually out only to maek money for himself. If he does not care about the thousands of people he displaces and kills, then why would he care for anyone else? The only reason he could care for someone else is if it would benefit him... he is dominated by greed and corruption and uses God as, basically, being the one that told him to do this to innocent, indigenous, and peaceful people.
I personally feel that issues like this are very important. this is almost the same type of colonialism as has been practiced by western nations for hundreds of years, it is only now changed into corporate colonialism. the idea that a foreign corporation can come into someone else's land which they have worked for hundreds of years, and force them off the land in the name of profit. corporate imperial power at its worst.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home