I love how american and european chauvinism continues to conquer reason in the 21th century. Why mention Africa when most of the world's malnourished people are in Asia? With the great variance that can occur on a continent why mention continents at all? If one must it is irresponsible to omit that both continents were forced into producing cash crops for export to Western Europe.
Does that mean that the Western European models of governance work? Duh!
>Why mention Africa when most of the world's malnourished people are in Asia?
Because in the US, at least in my experience, 'starving people in africa' is kind of a colloquial trope - it is more readily referenced than starving people in asia, since we don't see charity organizations constantly using asian faces to advertise their foundations.
>forced into producing cash crops for export to Western Europe
Who exactly went around the the countries in africa and asia and disallowed them from growing their own food instead of cash crops?
My bet is that these places found economic incentive in growing these crops rather than what they would consume locally - whether the global economy is a net benefit or net loss for a poor country is an entirely different discussion
Ok, most of world's malnourished people are in Asia, so now I can't say that people are starving in Africa without being accused of European chauvinism. Got it.
Does that mean that the Western European models of governance work? Duh!