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’s no point where any logical and rational person can look at pre-colonial Africa and say “yeah, this would’ve been (insert 1st world country here) without colonialism.”
Technology wise, it was just too far behind like most non-western countries during its time. Africa was largely still tribal which means endless fights for kings, land, ethnicities, rules, culture, Etc.
When someone beats you to the finish line, regardless of how they did it, and they show you the path to how they did it. You take that path. Africa should’ve taken the Japan approach and embrace westernization, globalization, and modernization before the colonial powers came in. Japan would’ve been another colonial puppet for a western power had they not adopted westernization and quickly developed a powerful military which at one point defeated Russia and conquered all of East and South East Asia.
East Asian countries (Asian tigers aka Asian miracles) are the only example we have of countries making the jump from 3rd world to 1st world so it can be done.
The point is not why Africa was behind western civilization during it pre-colonial period and largely a tribal culture. Hell, China was behind the west as well. The point is that they were behind them and that a lack of colonialism wasn’t going to change the outcome of Africa’s countries into 1st world countries without an embrace of westernization. Today, colonization can longer be an excuse for the failed states of Africa.
Triditionally Hausa, Swahili, Songhay, Tamasheq, Wolofal, Fula Somali and etc use Ajami scripts basically modify Arab alphabet to fit African language.
The Colonial government were not interested in development Africa, Essentially Colonialism removed leaders and Governments who wanted to advance the state and culture. And put in place Colonial governors who didn't.
Quote:
Colonial economic policy made itself felt in other ways as well. As
previously mentioned, African governments focused substantial energy on
developing an internal infrastructure for trade during both the era of the slave
trade and during the period of "legitimate commerce." Colonial governments,
focused solely on the export component of the economy, improved the
infrastructure as well. Their interests were only to improve transport of raw
materials to market and not the improvement or enrichment of the colonies
themselves. "In order to encourage the movement of commodities for export,
the government built and operated railways to connect the interior and the
coastal markets. ,,22 This resulted in most of the roads and rail systems in
colonial Africa to be oriented towards the coast. Little or no development of
railways occurred between colonies or within colonies.
Quote:
problems in African economic development.
Colonialism lasted in Africa for only a period of about eighty years.
During that time, colonial governments built a substantial infrastructure,
introduced a cash crop system of agriculture, and changed the traditional
standards of wealth and status.25 Education refonns were introduced and in
many areas, modem state systems implemented. However, the long tenn
economic impact of European development held some very negative
consequences for Africa also. The infrastructure that was developed was
designed to exploit the natural resources of the colonies. Also, the
technological and industrial development that had been occurring in Africa
was stalled by the imposition of colonialism. Prior to the partition of Africa,
local production provided Africans with a wide variety of consumer goods.
The policies of colonialism forced the demise of African industry and created
a reliance on imported goods from Europe. Had native industry been
encouraged and cultivated by the colonizing powers, Africa would probably
be in a much better economic and technological position today.26 The most
significant negative impact of colonialism on Africa was the overemphasis on
single cash crop production. Colonial African economies were focused on
the production of one or two agricultmal products for consumption in the
world markets. The coming of independence during the mid nineteen sixties
led to the breakup of many large colonies. The individual nations that
remained often could not or did not produce the range of agricultmal goods
that were produced prior to independence and the breakup of colonies. An
example of this is in French West Africa. The interior states of Niger,
Burkina Faso, and Mali did not have access to the lucrative cocoa market that
tided Cote D'Ivoire through the first precarious days of independence. Other
consequences of colonialism is the destruction of trans - African trade and
cooperation. Prior to the partition of Africa, the continent had become
increasingly integrated economically, with trade occurring north - south and
east -west. The policies of the governing powers redirected all African trade
to the international export market. Thus today, there is little in the way of
inter - African trade, and the pattern of economic dependence continues.
The imposition of colonialism on the continent of Africa occurred for
many reasons, not the least of which was economic. Prior to this
development, Africa was advancing and progressing economically and
politically. Colonialism encouraged this development in some areas, but in
many others severely retarded the natmal progress of the continent. Had
colonialism never been imposed on Africa, its development would be
significantly different and many of the problems that plague it today would
not exist.
Affonso I (1460-1545) was a king of Kongo whose reign marked the high point of Portuguese and Christian influence in the kingdom, as well as the failure to establish relations between Europe and Africa on the basis of equality.
After the Portuguese navigator Diogo Cão reached the Kingdom of Kongo in west-central Africa in 1482, contacts between Kongo and Portugal multiplied. The Portuguese dispatched a technical assistance mission to Kongo, and in 1491 the Kongo king Nzinga Nkuwu was baptized under the name João I.
One of João's sons, Nzinga Mvemba, was baptized Affonso and upon his father's death in 1506 he assumed the throne of Kongo. Thereafter, relations between Portugal and Kongo became much more active. Missionaries, teachers, masons, carpenters, and military advisers were dispatched to King Affonso, who paid for their services with slaves, copper, and ivory. Serious problems soon developed, because many of the Portuguese preferred to engage in trade—especially the slave trade—rather than to exercise their crafts. Portuguese commercial establishments on the island of São Tomé also interfered in Kongo-Portuguese exchanges.
In 1512 Affonso requested tighter royal control over the activities of Portuguese nationals. King Manuel I decreed a royal monopoly over trade with Kongo, dispatched an envoy with jurisdiction over all Portuguese nationals, and submitted an extensive plan for the acculturation of Kongo involving the adoption of the Portuguese legal system, feudal titles, and court etiquette. Manuel's instructions were largely ineffective, and the Portuguese colony in Kongo was soon divided between a royal faction and a faction favorable to São Tomé interests, with the latter increasingly gaining the upper hand. The slave trade became the predominant European occupation; although Affonso himself was involved in this activity and did not object to it in principle, he strongly resented the traders' indiscriminate seizure of Africans, even including members of the Kongo nobility.
Portuguese missionary and educational activities declined. The number of missionaries during the reign of Affonso seems never to have exceeded 10, all of them residing at court. One of Affonso's sons, Dom Henrique, studied in Lisbon and Rome and served as bishop of São Salvador, the capital of Kongo, from 1520 until his death in 1526. By that time, however, the disruptive effects of the Portuguese presence had reached such dimensions that Affonso decreed the expulsion of all Europeans except missionaries and teachers. But he was forced to rescind his order and to content himself with setting up a board of inspectors to control all commercial transactions conducted by foreigners. Affonso's efforts in 1529 and 1539 to secure Vatican support through the dispatch of a mission to Rome met with no real success. The increasing disruption of Kongo royal authority culminated with the attempt by eight Portuguese to shoot Affonso in church on Easter Day, 1540. With this incident the reign of King Affonso ended, although the actual date of his death is not known. Portuguese factions supported rival contenders for the throne, and one of Affonso's grandsons, Diogo I, eventually ascended to the throne.
The reign of King Affonso left lasting memories in Europe and Africa. Kongo remained nominally Catholic during the following century, and lineal descent from Affonso became a recognized requirement for succession to the throne. At the same time, whatever illusions might have been entertained on both sides regarding the possibility of peaceful interaction between the cultures of western Europe and Africa were shattered in the reign of King Affonso; and a relationship that had started on a quasi-idyllic note deteriorated in less than one generation into the ruthless exploitation of Africa by Europeans.
The idea that there weren't precolonial Africa leaders and government that want to modernize their society improve education and Trade etc...... is a big azz lie.
18th and 19th Western modern influence could had influence African society the same way 10th to 12th Middle eastern cultures influence some Africa cultures.
Some of the precolonial nation states could had follow the way China and Japan did.
There’s no point where any logical and rational person can look at pre-colonial Africa and say “yeah, this would’ve been (insert 1st world country here) without colonialism.”
Technology wise, it was just too far behind like most non-western countries during its time. Africa was largely still tribal which means endless fights for kings, land, ethnicities, rules, culture, Etc.
When someone beats you to the finish line, regardless of how they did it, and they show you the path to how they did it. You take that path. Africa should’ve taken the Japan approach and embrace westernization, globalization, and modernization before the colonial powers came in. Japan would’ve been another colonial puppet for a western power had they not adopted westernization and quickly developed a powerful military which at one point defeated Russia and conquered all of East and South East Asia.
East Asian countries (Asian tigers aka Asian miracles) are the only example we have of countries making the jump from 3rd world to 1st world so it can be done.
The point is not why Africa was behind western civilization during it pre-colonial period and largely a tribal culture. Hell, China was behind the west as well. The point is that they were behind them and that a lack of colonialism wasn’t going to change the outcome of Africa’s countries into 1st world countries without an embrace of westernization. Today, colonization can longer be an excuse for the failed states of Africa.
Western counties where ahead of African and Asia at that point yes. that's not what being debated. What being deabate is " it was just too far" now this is false, Many places in Asia and Africa were practically where Europe right before the industrial revolution. Your making it seem that they was hundreds of years behind which is false.
Next error is though trade societies have advance. The industrial revolution started in the UK, so how did it get to Germany, Russia, and the US? by trade and exchange of ideas.
Japan has ties to China and other Asian countries, Many parts of Africa had trade across the Sahara and Indian ocean. This cause Mali, Songhai, Sawhali, Ethiopian, Ashanti etc empire. So lets use logic here........... if though trade of the latest technological advancement during the middle age cause them rise to middle age technological advancement..... what logic do you have that trade modern technological advancement would not cause a repeat, them to rising to modern nations them self?
For Europe "To show" the latest ideas of the industrial revolution all Europe had is trade and exchange of idea ....
"colonization" is not one culture trying teach other it's one culture trying exploited or destroy another. Do you think colonization was peaceful?
Your entire argument is base on results already after the damage of colonization.
Also your injecting a straw man, I mention this before " colonization can longer be an excuse for the failed states of Africa. "
So lets be clear here no one is excusing bad leadership now, but your overtly trying to excuse colonization.
Bad African leaders of post colonization can be criticize but that have nothing to do with African leaders before colonization. It's not a either or. Colonization could screw up Africa, then post colonization instead of fixing African leaders didn't improve. Non excess the fact that Colonization was bad from the jump, which is what your trying to do.
Interesting. I guess this implies that Africa would have followed the nation-states concept that happened to Europe, just naturally, on their own.
The Europe way was basically a 'King' continued to 'take over' subjects' until eventually they just made them all speak that King's language, etc. Than militaries were built, to protect those conquests, and education enforced the same language, etc.
I think it wouldn't have happened in the exact same way in Africa, on its own. I think it occurred everywhere in Europe around the same time, as regionally they each were almost required to do this, for their own preservation. Africa being removed, wouldn't have had to do that, in quite the same way. They would have to develop in the exact same way, at the exact same time.
I think no matter what, it would have taken Africa exposure to the concept of city-state, to have built its own city-state Europe equivalents. The only way it would have escaped it would have been to be a place like Thailand. Thailand conformed to the concepts of a legal state under a King, and tried to show itself as a democratic state, with a King that did the biddings of Europe to such a degree, so that a European powers just agreed to leave it alone, as long as they could still exploit resources and such under that Thailand city-state.
Oh no, I'm with you in that I don't think it would have happened exactly like the European concept...I'll have to search again for the example I'm thinking of but my main point is that nations of Africa weren't backwards folk, they actually had a functional culture and we know trade happened. It was mentioned already that trade brought in new ideas and expanded on functional cultures. That's why I feel that pre-colonial Africa would be okay. The transition would have probably started on the coast...then again, the world would have been very different had Africa not been colonized. No?
A more realistic map like this would have lots more countries. The ethnic diversity on the continent is greater than found elsewhere.
And there's no way the Kongo Kingdom can grow that big unless it adopts European ship and weapons technology. Also why isn't Nubia part of Egypt like in our timeline?
There’s no point where any logical and rational person can look at pre-colonial Africa and say “yeah, this would’ve been (insert 1st world country here) without colonialism.”
Technology wise, it was just too far behind like most non-western countries during its time. Africa was largely still tribal which means endless fights for kings, land, ethnicities, rules, culture, Etc.
When someone beats you to the finish line, regardless of how they did it, and they show you the path to how they did it. You take that path. Africa should’ve taken the Japan approach and embrace westernization, globalization, and modernization before the colonial powers came in. Japan would’ve been another colonial puppet for a western power had they not adopted westernization and quickly developed a powerful military which at one point defeated Russia and conquered all of East and South East Asia.
East Asian countries (Asian tigers aka Asian miracles) are the only example we have of countries making the jump from 3rd world to 1st world so it can be done.
The point is not why Africa was behind western civilization during it pre-colonial period and largely a tribal culture. Hell, China was behind the west as well. The point is that they were behind them and that a lack of colonialism wasn’t going to change the outcome of Africa’s countries into 1st world countries without an embrace of westernization. Today, colonization can longer be an excuse for the failed states of Africa.
Ethiopia, the Kongo Kingdom in the Congo and the Merina Kingdom in Madagascar tried to do what Japan did, but they didn't have the benefit of Japan's relative isolation to develop in peace. Japan probably had something else going for it. China, Southeast Asia and the entire Muslim World were all trying to play catch up in the 19th century but none really succeeded.
Ethiopia wasn't colonized until the 20th century and only briefly so it is holding itself back somehow.
Ethiopia, the Kongo Kingdom in the Congo and the Merina Kingdom in Madagascar tried to do what Japan did, but they didn't have the benefit of Japan's relative isolation to develop in peace. Japan probably had something else going for it. China, Southeast Asia and the entire Muslim World were all trying to play catch up in the 19th century but none really succeeded.
Ethiopia wasn't colonized until the 20th century and only briefly so it is holding itself back somehow.
The region around Ethiopia was colonialize this gave Ethiopia no regional power, it basically made Ethiopia just as isolated as Hati.
Japan and mainland China both weren't colonize so Japan wasn't isolated in its region. Japan imperialism is controversial. Because to their narrative they was defending Asia from the West. But they end up doing what the west did. It end up invading china, Korea and etc
If African states weren't colonialize the stronger states would had likely did what Japan did invade the smaller African states. The difference is a least there would been some African states with power.
Map is ridiculous there are so many languages within what is supposedly the Kongo empire. When we know hundreds of languages are spoken in this area today. Were there roads that connected these places? Nope. No uniform language either.
There were only a handful of African states that had anything close to a European or Asian nation state and most of those formed after European contact.
Map is ridiculous there are so many languages within what is supposedly the Kongo empire. When we know hundreds of languages are spoken in this area today. Were there roads that connected these places? Nope. No uniform language either.
There were only a handful of African states that had anything close to a European or Asian nation state and most of those formed after European contact.
The Congo River is highly navigable after you get past the giant waterfalls near the coast, but outside of that the transportation situation is pretty poor in that area. The Kongo Kingdom wasn't that impressive in my opinion. I'm not sure why it got so much attention.
The region around Ethiopia was colonialize this gave Ethiopia no regional power, it basically made Ethiopia just as isolated as Hati.
Japan and mainland China both weren't colonize so Japan wasn't isolated in its region. Japan imperialism is controversial. Because to their narrative they was defending Asia from the West. But they end up doing what the west did. It end up invading china, Korea and etc
If African states weren't colonialize the stronger states would had likely did what Japan did invade the smaller African states. The difference is a least there would been some African states with power.
I bring up Japan for both the good and bad.
Ethiopia was already isolated by Islam before Europeans came. In fact the Portuguese helped Ethiopians fight off Muslim invasions in the 16th century.
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.
