Nicholas Kristof’s opinion columns follow a template: He identifies what he thinks is a problem in some African country, usually the DRC, Sudan or somewhere in West Africa, then he thinks aloud about it to offer some “hard truth” that no one wants to say for fear of offending anyone, especially well meaning Westerners (he means critics of his approach) and finally, offers some 19th moralism as solution.  His latest column is no exception.  This time, he has it in for Congolese parents who cannot afford to pay their children’s school fees, but have cheap cellphones and occasionally have a drink.

It’s all captured in the op-ed’s introduction:

There’s an ugly secret of global poverty, one rarely acknowledged by aid groups or U.N. reports. It’s a blunt truth that is politically incorrect, heartbreaking, frustrating and ubiquitous:   It’s that if the poorest families spent as much money educating their children as they do on wine, cigarettes and prostitutes, their children’s prospects would be transformed. Much suffering is caused not only by low incomes, but also by shortsighted private spending decisions by heads of households.

“Ugly secret,” “rarely acknowledged,” “a blunt truth that is politically incorrect.” Later he proposes that what he offers is to “look unflinchingly at uncomfortable truths .” The ones who refuse to see these basic truths about the supposed moral failings of Africans are “aid groups or U.N. reports” and what he calls further down “well meaning humanitarians.”

Of course Kristof found a Congolese child since it plays well with American readers to focus on children as he has argued somewhere else. He confronts the child’s parents and the neighbors:

I asked Mr. Obamza why he prioritizes alcohol over educating his kids. He looked pained.

He then brings up Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo’s work – they’re all the rage these days – to endorse his 19th century views in which Westerners, and particularly white Westerners, decide whats good for poor, third world, mostly black, particularly black people, and then babbles on about “microsavings.”  On this, we should take his word, because he saw it work:

Microsavings programs, organized by CARE and other organizations, work to turn a consumption culture into a savings culture. The programs often keep household savings in the women’s names, to give mothers more say in spending decisions, and I’ve seen them work in Africa, Latin America and Asia.

I am tired.

Our friend, Siddhartha Mitter (on Twitter: @Siddhartha Mitter) summed up the whole mess:

… The Great White Savior really outdid himself with this one. A blame-the-poor classic with particularly overt Calvinist moral messaging, even less appreciation than usual for colonial legacy, public finance and global economics, and that condescending Kristof brand of Savior Feminism Lite that verges on misandry.