This is the first part of a yet to be determined number of introductory posts on my view of Africa. I am not sure how much I will cover/be willing to write, so I don't yet know the number of posts it will take. This first one has a harsh stance and it not my totally final conclusion on Africa. It is just a starting point/introspection.
What purpose is there in Africa existing? If it was not there, what would the world have lost? Maybe there would be less diamonds and golds, but rap will survive, it is already almost done with gold. Any agricultural goods can be made up by other countries, and possibly even enrich their economies. There is absolutely no industry to speak of that can't be replaced by China. It is a "lost continent". (my quotation) The easiest thing would be simply to never deal with Africa again, simply act like it didn't exist and not let anyone leave.
From an odd efficiency stance, is this not the best course of action? Have any resources ever been effectively/efficiently invested in Africa? It has always been a case of people, yes mainly white, taking/buying resources on the cheap and creating horrible conditions. I am not a student of modern african history, but the majority of countries have not been well led. Some have, but usually they are eventually brought down by conflicts in neighboring countries, or their development is limited because of the unstable nature of the continent.
The divisions within countries in africa is also horrible, be it tribal, religious, political, or racial. People die for all those reasons in areas all over Africa. In America there are deep divisions, but we keep the killing to much lower levels, preferring to slowly poison ourselves with chemicals and over-consumption. How can you save a people when prejudice is so prevalent?
Bono thinks eliminated coountries' debt burden will allow them to rise up and finally development. That is a nice idea....
That was a pretty much rough and tumble overview of the basic problem/idea I would like to put forth. I am aware I ignore the humanitarian aspects involved in abandoning a contintent, that will be discussed in the next post that deals with the failures of the West/how they caused the problems. Right now I would like to stimulate discussion on how I may be wrong about Africa.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
among the other ailments im fighting through these days is insomnia. i just dont sleep anymore. i will continue to push on.
debt relief will do nothing without capital investment. capital investment wont happen without stable and morally responsible government. mnc exploitation will continue hand in hand with government corruption.
so boner's debt relief push will ultimately have little impact on improving the life of the common man and community on the dark continent.
places like rwanda and bosnia are unfortunately not economically important to the states. that's why the us govt looked the other way for so long during those terrible genocides. the same way we sadly dont care about the hiv epidemic in africa outside of the potential for it to spread here. people with hiv in africa die. today, people with hiv in america live normal lives with shorter, though comparable, life expectancies as non-hiv infected americans.
the multitude of problems in africa will likely continue until the development of more stable regions is further along - southeast asia & south america.
i always thought nation building in africa would be a possibility for me. but the shear insanity and brutality of some of the governments and militias there really scare me. those with the guns make the rules, often with very violent exhibitions.
the cold economic response to the question u pose is that as long as there are people and civilizations somewhere, they have economic value, both intrinsic and extrinsic. intrinsic- man power, brain power, and later value as consumers. extrinsic- the natural resources they posess, etc. so yes, as long as capitalism & its son globalization continue to spread, africa will theoretically eventually develop economically.
my own response to your question is not so much humanitarian in nature as it is the value of culture to our overall experience as human beings. africa is the birthplace of man as well as a rich cultures that permeate societies worldwide. i chose to study biology in college in large measure from taking a class in high school taught by a nigerian professor. he's certainly someone i think about in terms of someone who's had an impact on me and enhanced my life. i also think about the two nigerians i met while i sitting in the amsterdam airport while on a layover to india. deeply insightful into the problems of their country and continent, yet could still crack funny jokes about the plight of their country. the humor was uniquely african, but definitely universal in understanding. i think about the friendly ethiopians i met in my hotel elevator in cairo.
just as that determined teenaged kid from the balearics who dug deep & came out of nowhere to win the french open on his first try this weekend or the basquiat retrospective that is going on in brooklyn right now to the russian guy who drove me back to my friend's apartment in philly at 430 in the morning when i was wasted & had no money in my wallet, these are all people who enhance our global well-being and human civilization.
gandhi's political and spiritual revolution in india may never have occurred without the shit he went through in south africa.
kofi annan. bob sinclar's african beats inspired brand of french techno.
people in highly public spaces to people in less public spaces. they all enhance our lives directly or indirectly. whether we're conscious of it or not. all from a multitude of backgrounds and experiences.
Culture has no intrinsic value. Just labeling something as cultural doe snot make it worth anything. This may be because I haven't been educated in my people's cultural history and such, but it is true.
Culture has been dying and altered all through time, and it is inevitable that "our" current culture will be destoyed eventually. People only pick and chose what they think are the best parts of past cultures, especially after disenfranchisement and rediscovery. Often the negative aspects are brushed under the rug.
Culture only has family if it furthers humanity.
Many people, mainly Europeans, complain that american culture is destroying theirs. America has no culture, america has entertainment. Ethnic groups and communities have culture, but not america as country. Entertainment is fun, and can have value, but is no basis for development. Cultural things can be entertaining with no lost value.
Looking around the world for diversity poisons people into not seing how people are similar and very different/unique/valuable. It is when you say "only people from different cultures are interesting" that there is a problem.
MNCs do not exploit people. Once we left the days of colonialism and nations stealing resources, we also left foreign governments and countries stealing other countries goods (outside of war situations). It is always bad local people/government that is necessary to destroy countries. Foreign companies and countries do not promote good things. But, the locals could have said no. I define "locals" as people in government or anywhere in that country. There are many cases of the local people, say in a village, being terribly abused. But, "local" leaders let it happen. It is all about greed and power, the West just got enough money first to transfer those ills to developing countries.
of course culture has value. it is the basis for civilization.
the sheer basis for each person's existence as they are aware and unaware.
the picking and choosing of culture as u describe doesnt occur. everything is built on top of and out of something else. slavery in the us is still a critical component of american society's race problems today. it cant be "brushed under the rug as u say"
the culture of america is capitalism. entertainment is just another medium by which capitalism disseminates its culture & values.
mncs are just as responsible for the exploitation & destruction of nations as the governments and locals. ure naive to simply place blame on local authorities. the east india company was the initial seed for british occupation of india. as were similar ventures in america that led to destruction of the native americans. in modern times, evil companies like shell drill for oil in africa and simply let oil spill across the countryside destroying people's homes. how do they not have any responsibility in that? central america is owned by the dole fruit company. people have to eat so they have to work for dole. do they have any choice? simply blaming the local govt for allowing economic investment and subsequent abuse at the hands of mncs is narrow-minded and short-sighted almost in a very republican-inspired sort of way.
really trying to hard to fix my internal clock.
The part about the east india company and native americans is invalid. I already said "post-colonialism". Yes Shell and Dole, the company that turned hawaii into a state through usurpation, have responsibilities, but they are invited in, and take advantege of the non-rules of having money.
Capitalism is just the civilized form of power. In the past it was conquering and killing and shit. Now, it is about money. Sometimes brains gets you money, sometimes being a ruthless asshole, just like in pre-capitalist days.
It is not just the local govts, it is the "culture" of taking everything. We do live with the same culture, the suburbs taking over all the open land, just like the houses in peters. Hawaii is the best place to view it. It is an island, tiny, and slowly all the affordable land, houses, and apartments are disappearing. Eventualy there will be no place where regular people can live.
What is the defintion of culture, I am not exactly sure. But America promotes yes capitalism and entertainment for its own sake. It could be america's culture, but that is demeaning the idea of culture. The idea/america is bad when no one reflects on why something is funny. When there is no culture to support the cleverness, just mindless following.
Africa is still dealing with the problems of colonialism.
I'm not saying that the trend of despotism that is all over the continent is due to colonialism, but a large part of ethnic tensions and corruption can be traced back to colonialism.
In most places nationalism occured because the people had a shared language, culture, history, etc that they wanted to protect against other peoples of differing nationalities.
In Europe and Asia national borders were decided by what lands would be protected by what king in terms of national intrest.
This wasn't allowed to happen in Africa. The European colonizing powers carved up the map of Africa amongst themselves with no regard for what kind of people were living where. When African nationalism was taking place in the 1960's it was just easier to use the existing borders and infastructure.
There are some ethnic groups who are split up between a few national boundries. There power is diminished in each of those countries because of the split. There are some countries with over 100 small ethnic groups. This usually does not cause a huge problem because no group is strong enough to dominate the other groups.
The countries with real problems have a different make-up. Most of these problem countries have a few larger ethnic groups within their borders. These groups are large enough to cause major problems to the other groups in the country.
Imagine if Europe had been colonized by a foriegn power for hundreds of years. Then the foriegn power left, but the same colonial borders were kept. Imagine that one colony consists of the area we call France, Belgium and Germany. So you have a country that has a large group of French speakers and a large group of German speakers. Add some government corruption to the mix and it would not be surprising when the French speakers starting attacking the German speakers and vice-versa.
I have no idea what if any solution there can be to this problem. It just shows that national borders should be decided by the local people and not by outside powers without regard to the local people.
Your blog I found to be very interesting!
I just came across your blog and wanted to
drop you a note telling you how impressed I was with
the information you have posted here.
I have a african wildlife photos
site.
Come and check it out if you get time :-)
Best regards!
Post a Comment