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.
There is some cluelessness involved. On the other hand, I would also argue there is an attitude of arrogance involved, an attitude of "Blacks are inferior and incapable of anything".
Did you read the link about how South Korea developed so fast?
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.
simply because within the mind of the European, development is inherently tied to Europeanism. it doesn't occur to the European mind that the development that they push for isn't what is always wanted.
having lived in the West, i'd say Africa isn't the uncivilized one of the two.
you can keep you mcdonalds, your walmarts, your economy of debt, your money means everything mentality...the day Africa runs rampant with such, is the day Africa becomes truly uncivilized.
While i agree that the debt economy is not a sign of civility, telling my africa is civilized makes me laugh. Genocide, honor killings and husband knowing they have hiv but still having a dozen mistresses is not a sign of civility.
If you consider any country in Africa developed, then your standards are to low.
Botswana and Ghana are the two sub-saharan countries i think wil be developed first. They consistently rank the least corrupt and most business friendly, and they actually try to help their population.
South Africa is not developed and it not even close, it's descending. they scare away the rich part of their populace, which is not smart. The poor black majority does not have the money to create jobs.
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.
This has been said for 50 plus years now about Ghana. Ghana is doing better for sure but let's not get ahead of ourselves.
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.
Yeah and left to their own devices your husband's family and their neighbors would have been incapable if developing nothing more than tin shacks. There are two sides to a story your family was relocated the country got modern development and a rise of living standards.
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.
You are so mistaken I don't know where to begin. Colonialism took different forms in different places. My mothers father was not rich but he worked in the mines of Obusai, sent his kids to school, retired with a pension and lived to a 100. All of his kids he had with my grandmother could read and write. They all ended up in America with varying degrees of success.
My paternal grandmother who is 90 still waxes poetically about the "Obroni". So spare me your black nationalism life has gotten decidedly worse for most Black Africans post colonialism. A recent poll of Jamaicans revealed 60% would support the return of the Brits, that a decent market for the sentiment for most of Black Africa.
You are so mistaken I don't know where to begin. Colonialism took different forms in different places. My mothers father was not rich but he worked in the mines of Obusai, sent his kids to school, retired with a pension and lived to a 100. All of his kids he had with my grandmother could read and write. They all ended up in America with varying degrees of success.
My paternal grandmother who is 90 still waxes poetically about the "Obroni". So spare me your black nationalism life has gotten decidedly worse for most Black Africans post colonialism. A recent poll of Jamaicans revealed 60% would support the return of the Brits, that a decent market for the sentiment for most of Black Africa.
Your family waxes about that, but I don't know any Africans who express those sentiments. And I've had the opportunity to meet many African students, as well as students from the West Indies. From my conversations with them, none of them would ever want a return to the colonial days. Your family is among the minority that benefited. Most Africans didn't benefit. Colonialism was mainly exploitation.
And your poll on Jamaica, who conducted the poll? Who was asked? How many people were asked?
The whole "spare me the Black nationalism", I'm not bringing any of that. I've read about colonialism. I've talked to other people from African nations about it. And I'm mistaken? I know what this is about. And it is a sentiment that has been echoed all the way back to colonialism. It's the idea of "Blacks are inferior and can't rule themselves" thing. That's all it really is. I don't see anyone doing for many nations in Africa what was done for South Korea. South Korea went from being one of the poorest nations in the world to being a major economic power. Why? The USA pumped billions into its economy during the 60s and 70s. And South Korea had been under Japanese rule for a long time. Who is doing that for any African nations? And I'm not talking about "aid". I'm talking about something on par with what South Korea got.
Yeah and left to their own devices your husband's family and their neighbors would have been incapable if developing nothing more than tin shacks. There are two sides to a story your family was relocated the country got modern development and a rise of living standards.
This is not about "being capable". This is about dictatorial policies and being told "because of your race, you have no say in your life".
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.
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.
