I am from China, and when I was in China, China was hit by the double whammy from Chairman Mao - in the form of great famine and cultural upheaval
Hey, you people decided you'd rather have Chairman Mao than the kleptocrats you had before. On balance, I'm not sure you made the right choice, but on the other hand, I'm not sure you didn't (the previous "government" was about as bad as any in history, when you come right down to it).
Tens of millions of people perished
From what I've read, closer to 100 million than to ten million. Mao easily displaced Hitler as the cause of the greatest number of human deaths in history (thought the Black Death still beats them both).
Why then the West wants to give out money to help those "poor" countries? I mean, what the West is thinking?
Depending on whether you're talking government aid or private aid, the logic is that you get a better trading partner if those people over there aren't starving OR that it's the Christian thing to do (and don't waste my time going on about "christian hypocrisy" - the only people I actually know who go over to places like Liberia to help out (medical missions, in this case, every year, not just because ebola) are doing so because they consider it their Christian Duty).
They think without the "foreign aid" those poor countries will die?
Based on past evidence, a lot of them will. Note ebola, consider its effects sans Western medical people/equipment being sent to Africa.
For thousands of years the people of those "poor countries" were there before the "West" is known as the "West ... and they never got any "Western aid" at all, and still, they survived, right?
For values of "survive" that include average lifespans of 40 years or so, starvation a year or two every decade, a great deal of what civilized people consider to be serious crimes (rape, murder, that sort of thing), etc.