Why is Africa a Failure?

[Highflyer_GP]

Give some please, give some, Start a thread Motivational Therapy and see how it goes. I will be your avid reader.

No thanks, that's not my area of expertise. Seek professional help if you acknowledge that you might need it

PS: interesting to note that you chose to ignore the rest of my post, especially the part dealing with blaming AA/EE for everything that's wrong.

 

[PostmanPot]

PP, I think the onus is on you to expand on why it's a poor analogy.

No one indicated they wanted me to expand until now.

In [recent] history, Europe has been a lot richer than Africa (and I'm talking about actual "bank notes" if you will, and not un-mined natural resources ) even through times of war; Europe has always been richer in having more educated/skilled people; better technology etc. etc.

I hope that answer will suffice in how it was relatively easy for Europe to rebuild itself after WW2.

 

[UnoPanelvan]

No thanks, that's not my area of expertise. Seek professional help if you acknowledge that you might need it

PS: interesting to note that you chose to ignore the rest of my post, especially the part dealing with blaming AA/EE for everything that's wrong.

As we see postman pot deemed that OFF topic as that is SA related not Africa. Boggles the mind.

Anyway, In a way you are correct, Still does not retract from the fact, specially with the school leavers, (ie no real experience) that it has a real and great affect on their chances. It is wrong.

Just for justification/clarification for some, that is one of the small reasons contributing why the South African portion of Africa is a failure.

 

[fskmh]

No one indicated they wanted me to expand until now.

In [recent] history, Europe has been a lot richer than Africa (and I'm talking about actual "bank notes" if you will, and not un-mined natural resources ) even through times of war; Europe has always been richer in having more educated/skilled people; better technology etc. etc.

I hope that answer will suffice in how it was relatively easy for Europe to rebuild itself after WW2.

Fair enough, although I think your answer glosses over the economic policies required to rebuild the affected countries and the privations suffered by people in those countries. This is the kind of detail I was trying to elicit. It wasn't smooth sailing, it required some political will, and that's why I don't see it as such a bad analogy.

 

[PostmanPot]

As we see postman pot deemed that OFF topic as that is SA related not Africa. Boggles the mind.

The OP and initial posts in this thread were about Africa as a continent, not South Africa and its government's policies and failures such as BEE/AA, Eskom etc. While these problems do fall under bad governance, they are specific to South Africa.

 

[PostmanPot]

Fair enough, although I think your answer glosses over the economic policies required to rebuild the affected countries and the privations suffered by people in those countries. This is the kind of detail I was trying to elicit. It wasn't smooth sailing, it required some political will, and that's why I don't see it as such a bad analogy.

Agreed that people suffered and that the rebuilding required political will etc. But Europe still had a lot more than Africa had ever had, even though Europe was bombed to sh*t.

 

[Highflyer_GP]

The OP and initial posts in this thread were about Africa as a continent, not South Africa and its government's policies and failures such as BEE/AA, Eskom etc. While these problems do fall under bad governance, they are specific to South Africa.

I thought it necessary to raise the issue, address it and eliminate it before it was brought forth as another excuse, instead of people acknowledging their laziness both in thought and effort as one of the contributing factors for remaining stagnant.

So basically I deliberately derailed the thread slightly, my apologies, but it was a necessary evil

 

[PostmanPot]

I thought it necessary to raise the issue, address it and eliminate it before it was brought forth as another excuse, instead of people acknowledging their laziness both in thought and effort as one of the contributing factors for remaining stagnant.

So basically I deliberately derailed the thread slightly, my apologies, but it was a necessary evil

That's okay. It's difficult to not set the record straight after someone's initial derailing (referring to the original bringing up of the ANC, AA/BEE and Eskom).

 

[Turtle]

Colonial draining of African welath. Exploitations such as people/slaves, gold and other natural resources, spices and plants etc.

These things are oft-repeated, but don't hold up to much scrutiny. Slavery was abolished, what, 200 years ago. And what kind of "draining of wealth" are you referring to, specifically? I'd be interested in hearing details and concrete examples (and not ancient history details, because it doesn't take hundreds of years to pick your nation up from its bootstraps). Are you suggesting that most of the resources (e.g. gold, spices, plants) of Africa are being forcibly stolen? Are there European tanks all over Africa where the resources are being forcibly removed, and any African who tries to fight it is blown to bits? Are most resources smuggled out by the Europeans illegally? No, in virtually every African country and virtually every case, resources are being traded equitably and legally. The resources are being sold and paid for in MUTUALLY VOLUNTARY transactions, and this has been the case for a long time. Are Africans being legally or violently prevented from using their own resources? No, in very few cases, and certainly not enough to explain the success of the West as being built on exploitation. African countries are now virtually entirely just voluntary selling stuff to the West, and I hate to break it to you, but voluntary trade is always mutually beneficial. A lot of money flows in, many jobs are created, industries grow, technologies are imported, infrastructure is developed, etc. etc.

Of course there are one or two cases where foreign interests may be manipulating local conflict via proxy armies to maybe gain access to resources - possibly, if you believe in conspiracies - but even then, it's only two or three countries MAX on a continent with, what, around 50 countries (sorry my geography isn't that good) - it doesn't explain all the other countries.

Gold doesn't even have very much inherent value, most foreign countries just put most of their gold into big vaults in the ground for no readily apparent practical purpose (diamonds too) - it doesn't "make them wealthy", it's just 'currency insurance', and then give Africans a lot of money which Africans did not have before. Gold is about the worst example you could've picked. Gold mining has created hundreds of thousands of jobs FOR BLACK AFRICANS who have all benefitted from an industry which would not even have existed if the rest of the world wasn't there to "exploit" Africa (Africans LITERALLY sat on all this gold and diamonds for hundreds of years and made no real effort to dig it up and export it).

I do know of a few fringe ugly cases - patenting indigenous medicines, or Botswana recently kicking the indigenous people off some land because the mining companies wanted to mine it - but the latter was perpetrated BY AFRICANS not Europeans, and in any case, these few cases cannot explain the wealth of the West, the West did not "get rich by exploiting Africa", if Africa did not exist at all the West would most likely have been similarly wealthy today.

And all these "resources" that Africans had, why then were they not all incredibly wealthy when 'we' arrived?

It's also a macroeconomic myth that masses of unskilled labour create wealth, so the slavery argument is dubious anyway. The opposite is true, unskilled labour is less productive and hence more of a burden (to feed, clothe etc.), it doesn't pay for itself - heck, apartheid should've taught us that lesson, it's the single biggest (economic) failure and flaw of apartheid. Large pools of unskilled labour did NOT make South Africa rich, it made us bloody poor and we continue to suffer the results of that.

Europe was much wealthier than Africa long before 'the first ships even landed' here, so to speak. How do you explain that?

 

[TooFastTim]

The OP and initial posts in this thread were about Africa as a continent, not South Africa and its government's policies and failures such as BEE/AA, Eskom etc. While these problems do fall under bad governance, they are specific to South Africa.

The problem being experienced by SA presently are exactly the same as those that permeate Africa. The analogy is, IMO, perfectly valid.

The European nations did indeed "plunder" African resources but they did give something in return. Infrastructure. The same infrastructure that was dismantled throughout Africa immediately post "liberation".

 

[Robin Hood]

Hi PP...I think these guys has answered SO many questions icw the topic, im not even going to bother explaining further...because i can promise you, that out of ALL these posts and you still want to carry on seeking "proof", it will take forever to put you mind at rest ( which i doubt will ever happen ). I like debating/talking sh*t on these forums, but it's deff NOT my intention to make these forums my daily work.

 

[Robin Hood]

Thing is i havnt heard or seen anything that these guys can achieve by themselves...Maby im wrong, who knows, but they havnt shown it yet. .

MAby you can enlighten me on the bold areas? If you can give me a straight answer to this, i might consider a 2nd chance for the Africans. Thats all i want to know

 

[BobbyMac]

I agree with this statement.

If south africa wasn't sanctioned 60 odd years ago for employing its segeregation policy, then south africa would have been a fully developed country.

South Africa is a highly developed country - far more so than any other African country. This country has the continent's largest economy, best managed resources, etc. So your statement makes no sense, and would be impossible to quantify in any event anyway. It's under the new dispensation that the infrastructure is faltering. The current government can't even maintain what's there, let alone build new infrastructure.

Russia, the usa, england all used cheap/exploited labour to help them industrialise But south africa should have done it without help.

No, without colonisation South Africa wouldn't exist, there'd likely be nothing more than severe tribal conflict and there'd likely be no knowledge of this country's vast natural resources. You can't base an argument on "If..." mate

Even today you see cheap labour coming into western world(indigenous africans, Eastern Europeans etc) because it feeds their economy, cheap labour cheap minerals.

Not quite, there are countries that attract investment by offering cheap labour. China is a perfect example. And there is no such thing as a cheap mineral - especially not from South Africa...

The 'real' world is a capitalist dog eat dog environment.

This is where the problem lies: Africa wants to be a socialist system with capitalist riches and resources encompassed in a pseudo-democracy. In a dog eat dog world, the fittest survive, and if South Africa and Africa were truly a part of that, they'd be extinct by now. Africa needed a full blown proper war to eliminate the weak - whereas most of the Western civilisation has had hundred of such wars - from the beginning of history. Ironically most of the Western civilisation lives in relative peace, while Africa is littered with sporadic violence and senseless infighting.

Where every economy is subject to exploitation by its superior.

You like that word "exploitation" don't you? Nothing belongs to anyone in this world. Furthermore - every ounce of gold and resources from Africa is either sold by Africans in exchange for investment/capital or smuggled by Africans in exchange for weapons. The people doing the exploitation here are Africans - especially her greedy little leaders.

Ever heard of how the world bank keeps capitalist goverments borrowing money at interest...

Have you not heard how much debt the world bank writes off for Africa? Here's another little tidbit you seem to be ignoring: the Western world donates more money and aid to Africa than the rest of the world combined. Billions upon billions of dollars in aid for AIDS, food, healthcare, etc every year. In the last decade the US government has given more to Southern Africa for AIDS than they gave to both the American continents. Yet, Africa is the richest continent in terms of resources in the world. Why does Africa constantly need a helping hand? You can play the exploitation of resources game until you're blue in the face, the bottom line is Africa is rich enough to help itself, but it lacks innovation, willpower and drive to survive on its own.

The exploitation of weaker/developing economies is the only way for the Western goverments to repay the debt, or wage wars.

Wow, just when I thought you're done with trying to rephrase your "exploitation" argument you do it again. Africa is a weak continent - the leaders are poor, the people are weak and easily influenced and divided. Africa doesn't understand the need to survive as a people, while the instinct to survive as a person remains the only desire.


When I hear terms such as "Ubuntu" thrown around, it amuses me, because as a people, Africans do not really live in that spirit. Sure, you live in tribal communities where the women do the work and the men fornicate and breed with as many women as their cows can buy, but when it comes to your own survival and instinctive urges, the only thing on your mind is you - not the community or even your family. Don't believe me? Look at the rape and theft rate on the continent: you rape and steal from your very own.

 

[kingrob]

Africa was ruined the day the first AK-47 arrived here from Russia.

 

[Piepalook]

South Africa is a highly developed country - far more so than any other African country. This country has the continent's largest economy, best managed resources, etc. So your statement makes no sense, and would be impossible to quantify in any event anyway. It's under the new dispensation that the infrastructure is faltering. The current government can't even maintain what's there, let alone build new infrastructure.No, without colonisation South Africa wouldn't exist, there'd likely be nothing more than severe tribal conflict and there'd likely be no knowledge of this country's vast natural resources. You can't base an argument on "If..." mate Not quite, there are countries that attract investment by offering cheap labour. China is a perfect example. And there is no such thing as a cheap mineral - especially not from South Africa...This is where the problem lies: Africa wants to be a socialist system with capitalist riches and resources encompassed in a pseudo-democracy. In a dog eat dog world, the fittest survive, and if South Africa and Africa were truly a part of that, they'd be extinct by now. Africa needed a full blown proper war to eliminate the weak - whereas most of the Western civilisation has had hundred of such wars - from the beginning of history. Ironically most of the Western civilisation lives in relative peace, while Africa is littered with sporadic violence and senseless infighting.You like that word "exploitation" don't you? Nothing belongs to anyone in this world. Furthermore - every ounce of gold and resources from Africa is either sold by Africans in exchange for investment/capital or smuggled by Africans in exchange for weapons. The people doing the exploitation here are Africans - especially her greedy little leaders.Have you not heard how much debt the world bank writes off for Africa? Here's another little tidbit you seem to be ignoring: the Western world donates more money and aid to Africa than the rest of the world combined. Billions upon billions of dollars in aid for AIDS, food, healthcare, etc every year. In the last decade the US government has given more to Southern Africa for AIDS than they gave to both the American continents. Yet, Africa is the richest continent in terms of resources in the world. Why does Africa constantly need a helping hand? You can play the exploitation of resources game until you're blue in the face, the bottom line is Africa is rich enough to help itself, but it lacks innovation, willpower and drive to survive on its own.Wow, just when I thought you're done with trying to rephrase your "exploitation" argument you do it again. Africa is a weak continent - the leaders are poor, the people are weak and easily influenced and divided. Africa doesn't understand the need to survive as a people, while the instinct to survive as a person remains the only desire.


When I hear terms such as "Ubuntu" thrown around, it amuses me, because as a people, Africans do not really live in that spirit. Sure, you live in tribal communities where the women do the work and the men fornicate and breed with as many women as their cows can buy, but when it comes to your own survival and instinctive urges, the only thing on your mind is you - not the community or even your family. Don't believe me? Look at the rape and theft rate on the continent: you rape and steal from your very own.

Well put.
One of the few posts on this forum that makes sense.

 

[BTTB]

Colonisation is no excuse

All the people do in this continent is blame colonialism, racists and other countries for their own problems and this all is p*ssing me off.
Hong Kong and Singapore were colonized, it didn't stop them from using the colonialist infrastructure to build up their economies tremoundesly.

Africa has potential, and its not using it

Exactly.

I have been to Singapore and witnessed their progress which is absolutely amazing. In actual fact the Singaporeans went one step further and are making money from their Colonial Legacies with Tourist Traps like Sentosa Island where you can still see the old British Battlements at Fort Silosa preserved and visited by millions each year, unlike many of our own historical places which are falling apart at the seams.

The Singaporeans with a country the size of the Cape Peninsula decided several decades ago to make their country a financial capital as their country was too small for anything else and now it is nicknamed the Mini Switzerland of Asia.
The point is they did it all on their own. Africa must solve it's own problems and the first place is Education imho....

GTG
BTTB.

 

[bodhi]

lol - comparing Africa to Asia

 

[Robin Hood]

lol - comparing Africa to Asia

You cant compare the two...What i'm trying to say is, can "Africana" get Africa to flourish again?

 

[diesel]

Evolution.

 

[DJ...]

Africa as a whole HAS been failing for some time. Why? Politics! Its simple.

Africa as a whole has never been at the forefront of world politics because they are backwards (generally) in terms of the rest of the world. We have had and still do AFAIK have more dictatorships than any other continent. Dictatorships bred prosperity for a few and poor conditions for the majority. Even the democratic African countries are still in their infancy.

African countries never gave themselves an opportunity to embrace worldwide economic policies due to the lack of good governance and therefore didnt have an opportunity to actually make anything of their resources available.

Africa got itself in so much **** politically that it required world bank loans and international companies to bail it out - the loans are massive and will never be conducive to structuring a self-reliant democracy. This is an economical war that has been raging now for many decades.

As a continent with abundant natural resources, Africa should have become the most successfull continent on the planet. We missed the boat however and are now the poorest continent on the planet (apart from Antarctica).

Well, there isnt much that you can do about this anymore to be honest, as we trade our resources in foreign currencies, import more than export due to a lack of infrastructure and investment, cannot afford to educate the masses, allow "old" values such as tribe and race factors to be incorporated into politics, refuse to become a part of western and asian politics economically speaking (numerous Afican countries still do this) for some in-bred fear/lack of trust of the western world, still wage war on our own people etc.

The moment African countries insisted on doing everything themselves and isolating Africa from western politics, Africa became a baron land economically speaking. Our politicians often talk about inependance from the western world and its values, yet IMHO this is exactly what landed us in the **** in the first place.

So how do you solve it? Well Mbeki was on the right track by pooling the resources of Africa as whole and facilitating deals amongst African countries. Pan African Parliament needs to actually do some work for a change instead of sitting on its arse watching SABC1 (I have been there plenty - it happens). African countries need to be less self-reliant and more reliant on each other - although this is very unlikely to happen considering we cant get along with the majority of each other. And Africa needs investment, not loans! Sort out the political crap, and the investment will follow.

As much as people want to blame race and do research into Africa and its people to identify the true underlying factors, I reckon its a waste of time. It has been politics and a lack of worthy politicians that has resulted in Africa's demise. The only way Africa as a whole will sort out its political issues is if there was an African country to learn from - South Africa could and should be this country but we need to sort out our own political issues first! Then the African Forum can start working and Pan African Parliament will actually have some work to do for a change!