U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Africa
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-22-2013, 12:21 AM
Status: "I hate living in Georgia!!" (set 13 days ago)
 
48,186 posts, read 45,506,708 times
Reputation: 15339

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike1978123 View Post
If the entire continent was under European rule, all African countries would be developed. These countries where doing so much better when they where colonies of European countries.
Actually, I disagree. The native Africans weren't doing that well. There were a few that benefited. However, most Africans really didn't benefit at all. One example is the Congo. Alot of infrastructure was built by the Belgians in Kinshasa. However, none of that was for the native Africans. It was for the Belgians. There were alot of places Black people weren't even welcomed to be in apart from "servants". The people who benefited were those who were coming in from the ruling nations, not the natives.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-22-2013, 12:31 AM
Status: "I hate living in Georgia!!" (set 13 days ago)
 
48,186 posts, read 45,506,708 times
Reputation: 15339
Quote:
Originally Posted by angrymillionaire View Post
Never, African leaders can not lead. Africa will only become first world if they allow themselves to be colonolized again which is unlikely. When African countries were colonized, their economies were pretty good.
Actually, I would have to disagree. When colonialism was in place, the colonial rulers benefited. Any benefits natives got, it was secondary, and only a few got those benefits. For the most part, it was the ruling class got everything and everyone else got the scraps. It works the same way now.

And another thing. Alot of these "nations" weren't decided by the natives in Africa. Alot of the borders were decided based on what colonial powers wanted, and never took the feelings of the natives into consideration. Part of why there are problems today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2013, 12:48 AM
 
4,654 posts, read 3,710,629 times
Reputation: 1408
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner View Post
Actually, I would have to disagree. When colonialism was in place, the colonial rulers benefited. Any benefits natives got, it was secondary, and only a few got those benefits. For the most part, it was the ruling class got everything and everyone else got the scraps. It works the same way now.

And another thing. Alot of these "nations" weren't decided by the natives in Africa. Alot of the borders were decided based on what colonial powers wanted, and never took the feelings of the natives into consideration. Part of why there are problems today.
Very true
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2013, 12:57 AM
 
Location: Atlanta
2,851 posts, read 5,590,680 times
Reputation: 1723
Quote:
Originally Posted by lepillow View Post
In your opinion, what will be the world's first truly developed African country, and in which year will this be achieved? Think on the level of Switzerland or Denmark, not those straddling on the periphery like South Korea.

I'd say Ghana in the year 2100. I base this conjecture on what I've heard and read about the country. It seems to be performing very well for its size compared to other giants like Nigeria or South Africa.
High standards you're looking for. The United States is not even developed to the level of Switzerland or Denmark.

Ghana BTW probably has the best stability and pro business climate. It also has lots of untapped natural resources. It will just take time for it to develop a skilled and educated enough work force, get rid of some government corruption, develop an adequate power grid and infrastructure, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2013, 07:54 AM
 
237 posts, read 152,734 times
Reputation: 95
Africa is on the up and up. If your looking to make some money. Look there. Its the wild wild west in some places but so was Asia back in the day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2013, 08:47 AM
Status: "I hate living in Georgia!!" (set 13 days ago)
 
48,186 posts, read 45,506,708 times
Reputation: 15339
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galounger View Post
High standards you're looking for. The United States is not even developed to the level of Switzerland or Denmark.

Ghana BTW probably has the best stability and pro business climate. It also has lots of untapped natural resources. It will just take time for it to develop a skilled and educated enough work force, get rid of some government corruption, develop an adequate power grid and infrastructure, etc.
There is also something else to consider. It took China a while to get a growing economy. Same with South Korea and Japan. With Ghana, any development that took place under colonialism was a matter of "built for the British, by the British". In short, the native peoples didn't have much say compared to its colonial rulers. When it came to colonialism, Africa was treated like a large plantation of sorts. The idea was to take as much out as possible.

And consider this. South Korea's economic miracle came courtesy of the USA. South Korea pledged to send thousands of South Korean troops to fight in the Vietnam War on the side of the USA. In exchange, the USA loaned South Korea $150 million dollars, and then injected billions more into South Korea's economy.

How Did South Korea Come So Far, So Fast?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2013, 09:00 AM
 
Location: Geneva, IL
12,982 posts, read 12,259,876 times
Reputation: 14820
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
The Republic of South Africa, under white rule. To a traveler passing through, it was just like Canada or Australia.
Well that would really have depended on which part of the country you passed through. My husband's family was forcibly relocated to a "township", aka project, from a lovely suburb which was then razed and rebuilt to house white families. The "townships" and "homelands" were hell on earth. Astoundingly high crime rates, poverty, unemployment, family pathology, alcoholism, parents forced to leave for months or years at a time to find work.

What you saw as civilized and developed was at a huge cost to the majority of the population.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2013, 09:06 AM
Status: "I hate living in Georgia!!" (set 13 days ago)
 
48,186 posts, read 45,506,708 times
Reputation: 15339
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
The world's first developed African country? How is that different from "Africa's first developed country"?

It happened already. The Republic of South Africa, under white rule. To a traveler passing through, it was just like Canada or Australia.
If you were White and were traveling to the parts reserved for White people, it would feel like Australia or Canada. For Black people under apartheid-era South Africa, it was nothing like Canada or Australia, as Blacks were treated like 2nd class people and given the short end of the stick. Apartheid era South Africa was only a benefit to Whites, not for Blacks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2013, 09:21 AM
 
237 posts, read 152,734 times
Reputation: 95
Defined develop. What country do you consider developed?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2013, 09:30 AM
 
530 posts, read 1,078,792 times
Reputation: 610
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner View Post
Actually, I would have to disagree. When colonialism was in place, the colonial rulers benefited. Any benefits natives got, it was secondary, and only a few got those benefits. For the most part, it was the ruling class got everything and everyone else got the scraps. It works the same way now.

And another thing. Alot of these "nations" weren't decided by the natives in Africa. Alot of the borders were decided based on what colonial powers wanted, and never took the feelings of the natives into consideration. Part of why there are problems today.
I agree 100%.

It's crazy how some ppl are so clueless.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Africa
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top