Recently, as part of an academic assignment at school, I was engaged in an intellectual debate with a few colleagues. We were seeking answers to the roots of Africa´s problems. It was an interesting discussion for me. Shockingly, the majority of my colleagues subscribed to the idea that the major cause of Africa´s social-political and economic problems was the legacy left behind by the colonial masters. As far as they were concerned, the colonialists ruined Africa for good. For the record, they had some strong arguments to support their claims. I do not intend to go into that.
Africa is known as the problem continent. Indeed, the problems are legion — Poverty, diseases, famine, poor leadership, religious conflicts, ethnic clashes and corruption are a few of them. With each passing day, the problems increase. For long, the economic and social underdevelopment of the African nation has been blamed on white colonialists who exploited the land and left Africa bare. To this day the blame game continues.
Africans are usually quick to blame most of their problems on the evils of colonialism. We sometimes blame the violence on the borders colonialists created that ignored ethnicity. Many African nations have been independent for four decades. If colonial borders were a major problem, how come they haven't changed them?
Colonialism cannot explain Third World poverty. Some of today's richest countries are former colonies, such as the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Hong Kong. Some of today's poorest countries were never colonies, such as Ethiopia, Liberia, Tibet, Nepal and Bhutan. The colonialism argument is simply a cover-up for the failings of African dictators and people.
As long as Africans keep bickering about the past without focusing on the future, African people will continue to suffer. Pointing fingers at the colonial masters won't change the fact that the majority of people in Africa are living and dying in horrible conditions. The Europeans colonized Africa about 400 years ago. Right now, Africans are in trouble because they cannot manage their own problems. Instead of brainstorming and finding solutions to their numerous social and economic problems, the people hold out a begging bowl to the west in one hand, while punishing the remaining white people in the land with the other. (Does Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe and the Zimbabweans come to mind?)
We are responsible for our problems, but we prefer to blame others rather than taking a good look in the mirror. Fine, the colonialists were a bunch of bunch of greedy no-gooders, but if truths must be told, the self-interest of early colonialists pales in comparison to the personal greed of African leaders today. Those who blame Africa's problems on colonialism must not forget that the experience was not unique to Africa. Generally, the Asian countries that also experienced colonialism are doing fairly well. So what has Africa, or to be more precise, its leaders, been doing for the past 40 years?
Article comments
1 - Heloise
Glad someone can tell the truth about life in Africa. It's been bad for decades. I used to work for a linguist professor who specialized in African languages. He used to get papers and information about Africa that the ordinary person did not. The news out of Africa was always shocking and brutal. And made me never want to even visit Africa.
It reminds me of what I said about public schools, look who's in them! There's your problem...who peoples these places. Look at the African-settled or black-run countries and you can rest your case. They are all in a shambles and have been for some time. Poor Jamaica is a good case in point. When Brits pulled out Jamaica went under and has never recovered.
That could be alinged with colonialism and the cause. But as you point out it's the people stupid who are causing the problem. And those people are black not white.
What about India? They were colonized by the Brits? They are faring much better than Africa. Now, they are not considered blacks, but they are brown and they were a ruled people.
But truthfully they have some freakin direction. Africa sadly has no direction except to, as you say, worship dictators. Dictators are without direction, they are only about absolute power over the people.
The problem with Africa is the Africans, sad to say.
Heloise
2 - roger nowosielski
Heloise,
You may catch hellfire from some, I hope you're aware, for being so brutally frank.
Roger
3 - Dave Nalle
The key point Heloise makes is the very important one that it is culture rather than skin color or ethnicity which seems to make the difference, and that's a very important thing to remember.
Another good example to keep in mind is the Maori in New Zealand who have fared relatively well in the post colonial period because their culture is adaptable and resilient and they're as black as anyone.
Dave.
4 - roger nowosielski
Dave,
A great argument, therefore, against racism. It's not the skin color but humanity in general - "the evil in all of us."
Roger
5 - RJ
Excellent column. Africa is rich in natural resources. The continent's future could be bright, if the people and their leaders make wise choices. Unfortunately, many of the leaders that the people choose are anything but wise (Mugabe, Zuma, etc.).
Sadly, it seems to me that Red China is in the process of quasi-recolonizing the continent. This is truly unfortunate.
6 - Clavos
Excellent, well-written and objective essay, Mfonobong. Africa needs leaders with your perspective.
7 - roger nowosielski
It also needs economic development, methinks, and major effort in the area of education, and an outlook that would go beyond regional and ethnic differences.
That's where a concerted U.S. foreign policy, coupled with far-reaching economic development program, would do the greatest good.
There's no better PR I can think of.
8 - Dave Nalle
A great argument, therefore, against racism. It's not the skin color but humanity in general - "the evil in all of us."
Sure, but there's something more there. Why is it that of all cultures those of Africa have responded particularly poorly to colonialism? Or is it even colonialism? It could just be the modern era. Even African countries relatively untouched by the colonial powers have done poorly in the modern era.
My first inclination would be to say that the problem is that they were more tribal and more primitive than other societies -- it's certainly true that the societies which were most advanced and closest to meeting Europeans as equals (China, Japan, India) came out of the colonial era in the best shape. But that leaves us scratching our heads about Ethiopia, which is one of the worst situations in Africa today, but had a very advanced civilization and was relatively untouched by colonialism. It should have come through the period much the way India did, but clearly something went very wrong.
Dave
9 - roger nowosielski
Dave,
Very sharp thinking. Ethiopians, BTW, are very intelligent people, at least those I've met.
But I think there has been a long history of religious persecution at the hands of the Muslims, which would tend to account for the present situation. But that's it for me.
Roger
10 - Dave Nalle
Which raises the politically incorrect question of whether Islam is inherently incompatible with modern civilization.
Dave
11 - STM
Dave: "Another good example to keep in mind is the Maori in New Zealand".
I'm not arguing with the thinking of this story, but NZ may not be the best comparison because whites are still the majority in NZ.
Actually, that might be a misrepresentation. In the north island, there's been so much intermarriage there would be a huge proportion of people who are of mixed-race heritage.
NZ is a really good example of cultures living together and showing mutual respect, though. It's not perfect, but they do damn well considering.
Certainly, I have known many, many kiwis and I have never heard white NZers - ever - say any racist things about their Maori countrymen and women and vice-versa (beyond things like very tongue in cheek comments about how nice pakeha -whites - taste when cooked in the hangi (earth oven).
Nevertheless, the maori have been very vocal in demanding from modern NZ the rights they were promised.
In NZ, the playing of sport - particularly rugby - and a genuine respect has had much to do with that.
There is, however, some resentment from both pakeha (whites) and maori towards some of the pacific islanders arriving in increasing numbers.
Even then, though, it is nothing like you would find anywhere else.
12 - Cobra
Shockingly, the majority of my colleagues subscribed to the idea that the major cause of Africa´s social-political and economic problems was the legacy left behind by the colonial masters. As far as they were concerned, the colonialists ruined Africa for good. For the record, they had some strong arguments to support their claims. I do not intend to go into that.
Why would the author use the term "shockingly" to describe the idea that White Colonials screwed over Africans, given the legacy and history of White Colonials all over the planet?
This is no secret, of course. But you know, there seems to always be a warm place in the hearts of Eurocentrics for indigenous non-whites who self-immolate to assuage White guilt and excuse historical attrocities.
--Cobra
13 - Brian
A significant issue is that groups have been exposed to different environmental pressures & genetic differences may have arisen. For instance, the onset of agriculture & population growth lead to increased genetic change ('The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution). This may manifest in average physical and cognitive traits. There is considerable evidence that group differences exist in intelligence and this is significantly genetic. Rushton, J. P., & Jensen, A. R. (2005). Thirty years of research on race differences in cognitive ability. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 235-294.
Intelligence at the individual level is important for success in school (and nurtured by school attendance), for success in jobs, in health management, generally in the rule of one’s life (e.g. Gottfredson, 2002). It is also important for civic attitudes and behaviour like tolerance or voting decisions (Deary, Batty & Gale, 2008), for the success of politicians like US presidents (Simonton, 2006) etc. etc. At the macro-social level cognitive competence is more important than economic liberty for the economic growth of nations (Rindermann, 2008a) and it is more important than wealth for the democratic development of countries (Rindermann, 2008b). And intelligence seems to be a sensible measure of development up to indicating failing societies.
Rindermann, H. (2007b). The big G-factor of national cognitive ability (author‘s response on open peer commentary). European Journal of Personality, 21, 767-787.
Rindermann, H. (2008a). Relevance of education and intelligence at the national level for the economic welfare of people. Intelligence, 36, 127-142.
Rindermann, H. (2008b). Relevance of education and intelligence for the political development of nations: Democracy, rule of law and political liberty. Intelligence, 36, 306-322.