Back in early December, Business Week magazine ran a cover story with the title: "Can Greed Save Africa?" The core idea of the article was that free enterprise, financed by private, profit-seeking capital may be able to "save" Africa whereas all the government grants and non-profit assistance "hasn't made a dent." In a later edition, the Business Week editors reported the article raised a firestorm of comment centered primarily around the word "greed." The social activists of the world say they are trying hard to save Africa, but admit they are not making much headway. They make it obvious they believe only non-profit organizations or government can solve the Africa problem, and that any for-profit businesses involved in Africa will be there for greedy reasons. The free-enterprisers fired back saying: "It is the results, not the intent, that translates into growth and greater opportunity" for the people of Africa. Others asked: "When someone has a job, is he greedy for accepting pay?" And the editors noted another had this to say: "Business greed will save Africa where government greed and (non-government organization) greed have failed horribly." In this case the "hot" word greed re-opened the age-old debate. On one side are the people who espouse government socialism, believing liberal altruistic government can solve problems like third world Africa if only wealthy nations will famish enough money. On the other side stand the free enterprisers who point out that the results wanted for Africa can best be found in those nations that have embraced personal freedom and capitalism. While the debate goes on, Africa burns.<br />
<br />
<I>This is Gordon Sawyer, and may the wind always be at your back.</I>
