[Washington Examiner] There are 640 million people in Africa who have no access to electricity. And extreme environmentalists in the West aren’t pleased with the methods Africans are using to lower that number.A recent report from the group Oil Change International laments the progress African nations are making in utilizing more fossil fuels, in part thanks to funds from China and the World Bank Group.
Many countries in Africa are confronted with issues of energy production. Algeria and South Africa have reserves of shale gas ‐ much cleaner than coal ‐ which could be extracted via fracking.
Affordable energy is the lifeblood of a healthy and growing economy, yet Oil Change International would rather Africa not develop its own affordable energy, despite the benefits for these needy countries. The group describes oil, gas, and coal as sources of "global warming, human rights abuses, war, national security concerns, corporate globalization, and increased inequality." Unfortunately, even the United Nations warns against shale gas extraction in Africa ‐ empowering environmentalists in their opposition.
In short, left-wing First World activists want to govern Africa their way ‐ heaven forbid they give way to what the locals want.
And it’s not just with energy. Food is another area. Hunger and starvation affect an estimated 230 million Africans. One success in the United States has been the advent of genetically modified crops, which can be bred for traits such as drought resistance. But this technology is also the bane of ideological environmentalists, who view it as tinkering with nature.
Genetically modified crops have struggled to maintain a foothold in Africa, despite their ability to help alleviate the famine, pest, and disease issues that ravage the continent. One environmentalist group, ActionAid, has a hand in poisoning the debate through its scare tactics directed at Africans. Representatives have warned of the "serious risks" accompanying genetically modified crops and claimed the crops would surrender the African farmer’s "sovereignty over the food system to the corporates."
However, multinationals are not attempting to control the food supply. A representative of one biotech firm clarifies that their work is being done for the public good. "We put the technology in open pollinated plants so that the farmers can save their seed, do their own crosses. There isn’t going to be a tech fee or royalty associated with it."
After Zambia’s president declared genetically modified food as "poison" and banned genetically modified food relief received from other countries, the country endured a famine. A significant example, this should encourage environmentalists to consider human lives the next time they make their recommendations.
The Left’s paternalism also extends to wildlife management.
Recently, strident animal liberation groups, led by PETA and the Humane Society of the United States, were in uproar over a Trump administration decision to allow the import of a small number of safari trophies, reversing an Obama-era ban.
Safari hunts are a controversial topic. At first glance it seems counterintuitive, but trophy hunting has actually been beneficial to conservation efforts in Africa. A century ago, the white rhino population of South Africa was pushed to the brink of extinction and then carefully brought back up to 800. Subsequently, managed trophy hunting was introduced, creating an incentive for landowners to have rhinos on their land and increase and protect their habitat. If there’s no reason to protect them, many Africans view animals we love ‐ elephants, lions, etc. ‐ as pests that destroy crops and prey on livestock.
Today, there are 20,000 white rhinos in South Africa ‐ one of the biggest conservation success stories on the continent. If PETA had its way, this never would have happened.
Africa has suffered a great deal due to its history of being at the mercy of colonial powers. Today's Left, with its twisted and patronizing form of neocolonialism, think they know what’s best for Africa and want to impose their vision on the continent.
But Africans deserve the right to self-determination, free of misguided Western do-gooders.