What is the "other type" of involvement? when you say
Quote:
Most people grind their axe with our foreign policy because we exploit countries, making their people poor, and creating a wealth disparity that people will risk their lives to get on the top with.
Honestly, if our corporations and military pulled out of poor third world countries that people are risking their lives to leave from, they would be much better off.
|
South Korea was a third world country that people risked their lives to leave from. Our military involvement there was followed by corporate involvement there. They are now becoming rich.
We exploited the hell out of them. We used them, and continue to use them, as a pawn to place and protect American military interests in that sector of the world. They were a source of tremendous cheap labor for a few decades. And then, because they were a strong people to start, they quickly started to figure it out for themselves. Now they are rich and becoming a power all their own, a center of the world of computing and electronics that is seriously rivaling Japan.
But it never would have happened without that first step up.
Countries *hope* they need to be as exploited as South Korea. The problem with the African countries is that they are not exploited enough. Being "exploited" by the US is like a teenager being "exploited" by working at MacDonalds. Here's a shit job for shit pay dispensing pieces of shit. But as a "starter job", it's the one teaching teenagers to dress decently, show up on time, deal with the general public, deal with managers, etc... it's the job that teaches you what it's like to have a job. If Africa could just get a job at MacDonalds, they might be able to get their foot in the door for a better deal elsewhere.