Republicans worship unconstrained capitalism to an obscene degree. That doesn't change the fact that giving people hope and oppurtunity then setting goals for them to achieve is a time tested way of helping people help themselves as the saying goes. If they repay the loan on time and the venture grows it usually makes them eligible for a larger loan should they need it in the future.

I read some research on this a few years ago, no links or even names of what the journals were. But in some societies (I think they were studying central asia) money loaned to women was much more likely to actually stay in their possession than money given to them. When it is a donation or a gift there is a strong pressure for the woman to share the majority of it across her extended family or else she is labeled selfish or a bad wife/mother/daughter etc.

When the money is loaned and must be repayed then it gives the woman justification to keep it and use it for the purpose it was intended. Money lending is understood most of the world over and defaulting is shameful or even perilous in most countries.

Again I'm writing from memory but that was the gist of their findings.

Lifting people out of poverty is a complex issue with more than enough room for both micro-credit and straight donations. But I don't think there is anything insidious in having the money repayed, especially since I'd wager the majority of people will roll it over into another loan.