| OCR Text |
Show .53 modern world though some of what aid donors do, overtly, with their money could be characterized as because clear a understanding as from the recipient 1s Edward C. exactly what the donor expects (who makes the most persuasive ant1-aid argu come across5) examines the doctrine of indirect (the most common aid argument which is discussed below under influence the rationale policyit) and says that the probability for 1 ts "foreign is the by itself or more more peaceableJ security." 6 and capita incomes significantly; (b) (c) that being more democratic will make them (d) that being more peaceable will add to our When stated in this fashion one must agree that it is pretty thin thread on which to hang an aid program, discusses various and thus do not pro quo, a Banfield also categories of aid that are expected to work d:l.rect1y depend on the indirect influence, (1) quid They are: (2) business friendship, (3) maintainance of friendly govern will and (6) moral force, ment, (4) prestige, (5) good quo is that the with other energizing changes. will make soc1e- democratic; ties u(a) product of these four separate probabilities: that aid will increase per increase to defective missing). Banfield ment the writer has success (defective) bribery (i.e" more like the "bribe" mentioned earlier. this since he feels 1 t is this businesslike left-of-center more business like. approach has a great appeal. The quid pro Mr, Banfield prefers To the .conservative Many liberals sense) would also prefer this to the hypocrisy in the is involved in giving aid to reactionary regimes "helping the people." name (in the that of |
