10 ms·

Portugal Dominated Angola for Centuries. Now the Roles Are Reversed

107 points by benbreen 9y ago

donquichotte 9y ago
"On her Twitter account, Ms. dos Santos identifies herself with just one word: entrepreneur." It makes me vomit a little bit in my mouth to hear a super corrupt billionaire, daughter of a guy who has been president in a country for 38 years, calling herself "entrepreneur". EDIT: she was invited to the London School of Economics to give a lecture. WTF? What's next, Kim Jong Un giving a lecture in democracy?
- k__ 9y ago
  Where is the problem? Most young entrepreneurs I met had, at least, better of parents, if not rich. The idea of startups is to fail fast, so if you can fail on your parents money till you're 21 that could also counts as an apprenticeship... Friend of mine hand dentist parents. Did a few motion picture companies till 21, made almost no money with them and lived with his parents. Later he jumped on the VR bandwagon with 4 years of CEO expertise and got investors like nobodies business
  - andrepd 9y ago
    She is the richest women in Africa on account of comically massive corruption, nepotism, being the daughter of a "democratically elected president" who has been in the job for 38 years, all the while the people of Angola live in absolutely abject poverty. Seriously, Luanda is almost the definition of late stage capitalism: one of the most expensive cities in the world to live in as a uber-rich, and a population so miserably destitute I don't even... You gotta be really in too deep if this is just a ok with you.
    - thiagooffm 9y ago
      you need to understand that most, really most of the riches we've got today are rich due to crimes to society. in the US you have a lot of "self-made" people who wouldn't make it anywhere if the US didn't keep its imperialism, which generally kills more people than that regime, but it's ok right as you are the benefitor of something which happened somewhat far away from you, correct? not really. becoming an entrepreneur is something only some people can afford to. it's just life.
      - DarkKomunalec 9y ago
        > you are the benefitor He has to pay the taxes and has his social programs gutted to finance imperialist policies that primarily benefit the connected ultra rich, who might let him have a few crumbs of their wealth. Some benefit.
      - andrepd 9y ago
        "Society is unequal. It's just life" said the slave to the master, said the serf to the lord, said the subject to the sovereign. No its just just bloody life, it's a system of society which can be improved upon or even replaced (as indeed such systems have evolved and changed in the past). What an appallingly paralysing way to view things.
        bobthechef 9y ago
        That went downhill fast. I'm assuming here that you mean income inequality. Just bear in mind that equalizing politics has been one of the greatest sources of tyranny in history (think Animal Farm; see Frankfurt's "On Equality" for some discussion around equality qua equality and the issues around it). The problem isn't inequality per se, but things like poverty or secondary issues like the power that money often buys. To say that "the system" is the ultimate source of our evils is a silly notion that fails to pin the blame on individuals. "Systems" (or I'd say, prevailing social realities) can make bad behaviors appealing, but morally upright people do not take advantage of such opportunities. Certainly, some social orders are better than others, and legal systems that punish and reward appropriately is very important, but thinking that a properly constructed "system" will eliminate all concerned evils by removing inequality is terrifying madness. Focus on the elimination of poverty instead. Inequality per se is irrelevant.
        icebraining 9y ago
        In Animal Farm, the source of tyranny was not equality, on the contrary; it was the failure of the masses to sustain the idea and to prevent the leaders from violating it. Orwell was still a believer in socialist equality, just not in the Bolsheviks or Stalinism. See Revolution on Animal Farm: Orwell's Neglected Commentary.
    - tragomaskhalos 9y ago
      Democratically elected with 99.6% of the vote, according to a picture in the article. So either a massive campaign of coercion, or redolent of a quote about whichever of North Korean Kims it was who was reported to have got 18 holes in one the first time he played golf: "the more outrageous the lie, the greater the display of power".
- raverbashing 9y ago
  Seems on pair with the behind-kissing of major Oil producers including one (or many) that finances terror
- docdeek 9y ago
  LSE has a little form in this area… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_School_of_Economics_Gaddafi_links https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_School_of_Economics_Gad...
- grecy 9y ago
  The West has been supporting the insanely-corrupt governments in Africa for a very long time. The governments of first world countries exploit the people and encourage corruption every chance they get, because it's profitable for their corporations, and it keeps the people of Africa as slaves to the first word countries. The UN watches, and does nothing. I am in West Africa now. I have been to 15 countries here in the last 14 months. My eyes are open.
  - mmsimanga 9y ago
    As an African let me rephrase that for you. Africans do not think twice about turning on their bretheren when offered huge sums of money. Liberation heroes turn into tyrants once they taste the good life. I am by no means condoning what the West is/has done. I however have a problem with my own people taking the lions share of any profits.
    - stult 9y ago
      It's not Africans, it's just people. Westerners sell each other out to foreigners too. Just look at the history of Latin America. There are just far fewer foreigners with the relative wealth to buy off whole governments in MDCs. And in many cases our institutions developed to resist corruption before international finance made it so incredibly easy to accomplish. The intentional abuses of colonization were vile, but the neglectful exploitation of decolonization has hardly been better.
      - mmsimanga 9y ago
        I replied to another post below. People are just people, agreed. Impact of corruption on a developing nation is felt much more by the people. This is why Africans will risk their lives on rickety boats to get to Europe but Europeans haven't got to that stage yet.
    - athenot 9y ago
      If that's any consolation, I don't think that's only for Africans. You can see the same thing happening in Europe, the Americas and in Asia. Power corrupts. That's why our history is filled with stories about the powerful oppressing the weak, and our litterature is replete with upper-middle class characters struggling with the allure of power, resisting or giving in to the dehumanization aspects that occur all too easily.
- lcamacho84 9y ago
  According to her, she started selling eggs and buying cotton http://www.makaangola.org/2016/05/isabel-dos-santos-africas-richest-woman-and-the-lie-of-her-assets/ http://www.makaangola.org/2016/05/isabel-dos-santos-africas-... (sarcasm here)
  - zouhair 9y ago
    The most scary part is that she isn't trying to be a smart ass, she really believe what she is saying.
  - smcl 9y ago
    Buying/selling eggs and cotton? Is she following the M&M Enterprises business model? https://norighttobelieve.wordpress.com/2011/06/08/everybody-has-a-share/ https://norighttobelieve.wordpress.com/2011/06/08/everybody-...
- nl 9y ago
  On her Instagram account (linked from the NYTimes article) there's this pic: https://www.instagram.com/p/BWnuoDFlGC1/?taken-by=isabel_dos_santos.me https://www.instagram.com/p/BWnuoDFlGC1/?taken-by=isabel_dos... What does she use to get that weird, almost photoshopped like effect?
  - rangibaby 9y ago
    I'm not seeing the effect you mentioned. She is lit with a flash, which makes her look flat, but other than that I'm not seeing anything.
  - mark212 9y ago
    I noticed this by accident on my iPhone 7+. If you take a picture of a figure with strong back lighting, then use the editing functions to bring up the shadows, it will look like this.
  - todd8 9y ago
    The strong front lighting reduces shadows, for example on her face, that normally provide visual clues about the depth of her features (e.g. how large her nose is) this tends to flatten a persons features to a degree as pointed out by rangibaby. The overall focus in strongly divided into foreground features and very blurred background features. I haven't played around with the ability of the iPhone 7+ to do this blurring algorithmically, but it is very commonly done with SRL cameras by choosing a very shallow depth of field. This is done by using a large aperture, say f2 or f2.8. This wider open lens allows more of the outer, more curved, part of the lens to collect and focus light onto the image, and due to the geometry of the optics this makes the range of the scene that remains in sharp focus much shallower. (See, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field .) Notice particularly, the excellent bokeh formed by the blurred lights in the background. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bokeh https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bokeh) Finally, a flash combined with a wide open lens can overpower the exposure, a problem for film's limited range of sensitivity (film speed). Cameras can compensate for this by using insanely short exposures, like 1/8000 second, and/or adjusting the exposure sensitivity for a few individual shots (film cameras require changing film rolls to change sensitivity, but today's digital cameras can automatically change the sensitivity on a per shot basis). To me, the picture has a frozen, surreal aspect that can come from a high shutter speed. All of these effects, which can be done with the appropriate camera settings, can also be simulated with enough Photoshop work. This particular photo could have just been produced serendipitously, especially in this age of unlimited snaps from cell phones that never run out of film, but it looks more professional to me. Consider the careful edge lighting that separates the hair from the background. (See https://www.slrlounge.com/5-ways-to-separate-your-subject-from-the-background/ https://www.slrlounge.com/5-ways-to-separate-your-subject-fr... )
icebraining 9y ago
Not Angola, but the cadre of family members and generals that rule the country. It's a daily shame for many of us Portuguese, seeing how our governments grovel to them and keep silent while Portuguese citizens (even if they're also Angolan) are made political prisoners. Our self-respect indexed to the barrel of Brent. I really hope they can move on, but my Angolan friends (both emigrants and living there) aren't hopeful for the short term.
- andrepd 9y ago
  Yes, not Angola, but the select Angolan crony elites which basically bleed the country dry for their benefit, with the blessing of the western world. The same can be said about a couple handful of other African countries as well.
aaron-lebo 9y ago
Kind of crazy just how late it was decolonized: 1975. You don't really think of 20th century Portugal as having remnants of empire.
- tellarin 9y ago
  "Decolonized" reads way too light. It was a 13 or 14 years long war (depending on how you count) before independence and that has left huge scars in the country. Not to mention that the war mostly ended because the Portuguese government fell in 1974. Also, Macau was only returned to China in 1999.
  - Jacqued 9y ago
    Not to forget Goa, which was actually invaded by India in 1961, with the Portuguese fighting back, although there were 10 times more Indian troops.
    - zemvpferreira 9y ago
      If by fighting back you mean laying down arms as quickly as humanly possible.
      - nl 9y ago
        The engagement lasted two days resulting in twenty-two Indians and thirty Portuguese killed in the fighting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Goa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Goa
- matthewrudy 9y ago
  Macau was handed over from Portugal to China in 1999. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macau#Transfer_of_sovereignty_and_SAR_status https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macau#Transfer_of_sovereignty_...
- icebraining 9y ago
  Yeah, that's what the fascist dictatorship at the time got by being aligned with the "right" (ie. winning) side, first by not allying itself with the Axis powers in WW2 and then allowing the US to use Azores as a military base during the Cold War.
dandare 9y ago
> Angola is often listed as one of the world’s most corrupt nations. And Portugal has been singled out for its laxness in reining in money laundering and bribery... The end of story.
- dang 9y ago
  Would you please not post unsubstantive comments to HN, especially on inflammatory topics? This never serves thoughtful discussion, which we're hoping to see in HN threads.
supremesaboteur 9y ago
> late stage capitalism Much later than the capitalism in most advanced economies ?
- nl 9y ago
  "late stage capitalism" is a reference to a view that capitalism inevitably leads to a system run by oligarchs. Or something like that - it isn't exactly used consistently[1]. Originally it was a Marxist term, but I don't believe many people use it in this original meaning[2]. It's a pity, because everything else in that poster's comment made sense, I think this detracts from their point. [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/05/late-capitalism/524943/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/05/late-ca... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_capitalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_capitalism
  - sageikosa 9y ago
    Pegging "capitalism" into a teleological historiographic narrative (aimed at justifying non-capital producing collectivist dictatorships) has been around for so long that its retro chic again.
    - andrepd 9y ago
      That wasn't at all my intention. But nor is it unreasonable to argue that capitalism as it is practiced today cannot sustain itself indefinitely. Nothing teleological or prophetic about it.
      - sageikosa 9y ago
        To my ear that's like saying evolution cannot sustain itself indefinitely. As long as there are generational selective pressures on imperfect replicators, evolution will continue. Without a superstructure of omnipresent social domination to hinder or disrupt it, capitalism will be used where countable savings for investment and idea that promising accountable returns find themselves together. Here's a thought to explain my defense of capitalism: capitalism doesn't cause corruption, but like anything else it is destroyed by corruption. Capitalism is used by the corrupt because it is so good at identifying that which the market values and in delivering it.
personlurking 9y ago
Here's a graph of all the political and corporate interconnections, from a popular book and documentary (afaik, only published in Portuguese), called Os Donos Angolanos de Portugal (the Angolan Owners of Portugal). https://i.imgur.com/Fb0ZWRG.jpg https://i.imgur.com/Fb0ZWRG.jpg And another one, sans politicians, from a sister publication, Os Donos de Portugal (The Owners of Portugal) https://i.imgur.com/NBJHcB7.jpg https://i.imgur.com/NBJHcB7.jpg
eighthnate 9y ago
What an odd assertion. Most of the elite and leadership ( especially business ) in agola are portuguese. It's just the angolan political elite and portuguese business elite plus a handful of chinese oil companies that dominate angola. It isn't angola dominating portugal. It's portuguese businessmen and angolan political elite dominating and robbing angola of its wealth and moving it to europe.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
whipoodle 9y ago
> “And suddenly they were able to help us and to buy things that we cannot buy,” he said. “It was like a housekeeper buying your house. That is awkward.” Good lord. Come on.
- pm90 9y ago
  Yeah I found that statement rather classist/racist
guico 9y ago
And here's yet another major publication resorting to click bait...
thedonkeycometh 9y ago
That is quite a patronising story. Corruption is Corruption.
jk2323 9y ago
Portugal is a small country. I did not see any serious investments going on, anything besides their "golden visa" program. A rich guy may invest 500k there to get his residency but serious cash is stored in the UK, Switzerland, Luxembourg, USA. But isn't this the case for most African countries? OT: A much more interesting woman than Ms. dos Santos, also from Angola: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nzinga_of_Ndongo_and_Matamba https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nzinga_of_Ndongo_and_Matamba OT2: Actually most of the oil in Angola is in an obscure enclave: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinda_Province https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinda_Province
JamesBarney 9y ago
Anyone interested in reading more about Angola and the U.S.'s involvement should check out the book "In Search of Enemies" by John Stockwell who was a manager in the CIA, and involved in the Angola operations.
southphillyman 9y ago
This is really interesting, especially in light of all the alleged racism in Portugal. As far as the corruption in Africa, are there any good books that explain why this is so common in Africa? Is this simply a post colonial pattern that can be found through out human history or is it unique to the recent situation in Africa?

107 points by benbreen 9y ago

"On her Twitter account, Ms. dos Santos identifies herself with just one word: entrepreneur." It makes me vomit a little bit in my mouth to hear a super corrupt billionaire, daughter of a guy who has been president in a country for 38 years, calling herself "entrepreneur". EDIT: she was invited to the London School of Economics to give a lecture. WTF? What's next, Kim Jong Un giving a lecture in democracy?

k__ 9y ago
Where is the problem? Most young entrepreneurs I met had, at least, better of parents, if not rich. The idea of startups is to fail fast, so if you can fail on your parents money till you're 21 that could also counts as an apprenticeship... Friend of mine hand dentist parents. Did a few motion picture companies till 21, made almost no money with them and lived with his parents. Later he jumped on the VR bandwagon with 4 years of CEO expertise and got investors like nobodies business
- andrepd 9y ago
  She is the richest women in Africa on account of comically massive corruption, nepotism, being the daughter of a "democratically elected president" who has been in the job for 38 years, all the while the people of Angola live in absolutely abject poverty. Seriously, Luanda is almost the definition of late stage capitalism: one of the most expensive cities in the world to live in as a uber-rich, and a population so miserably destitute I don't even... You gotta be really in too deep if this is just a ok with you.
  - thiagooffm 9y ago
    you need to understand that most, really most of the riches we've got today are rich due to crimes to society. in the US you have a lot of "self-made" people who wouldn't make it anywhere if the US didn't keep its imperialism, which generally kills more people than that regime, but it's ok right as you are the benefitor of something which happened somewhat far away from you, correct? not really. becoming an entrepreneur is something only some people can afford to. it's just life.
    - DarkKomunalec 9y ago
      > you are the benefitor He has to pay the taxes and has his social programs gutted to finance imperialist policies that primarily benefit the connected ultra rich, who might let him have a few crumbs of their wealth. Some benefit.
    - andrepd 9y ago
      "Society is unequal. It's just life" said the slave to the master, said the serf to the lord, said the subject to the sovereign. No its just just bloody life, it's a system of society which can be improved upon or even replaced (as indeed such systems have evolved and changed in the past). What an appallingly paralysing way to view things.
      - bobthechef 9y ago
        That went downhill fast. I'm assuming here that you mean income inequality. Just bear in mind that equalizing politics has been one of the greatest sources of tyranny in history (think Animal Farm; see Frankfurt's "On Equality" for some discussion around equality qua equality and the issues around it). The problem isn't inequality per se, but things like poverty or secondary issues like the power that money often buys. To say that "the system" is the ultimate source of our evils is a silly notion that fails to pin the blame on individuals. "Systems" (or I'd say, prevailing social realities) can make bad behaviors appealing, but morally upright people do not take advantage of such opportunities. Certainly, some social orders are better than others, and legal systems that punish and reward appropriately is very important, but thinking that a properly constructed "system" will eliminate all concerned evils by removing inequality is terrifying madness. Focus on the elimination of poverty instead. Inequality per se is irrelevant.
        icebraining 9y ago
        In Animal Farm, the source of tyranny was not equality, on the contrary; it was the failure of the masses to sustain the idea and to prevent the leaders from violating it. Orwell was still a believer in socialist equality, just not in the Bolsheviks or Stalinism. See Revolution on Animal Farm: Orwell's Neglected Commentary.
  - tragomaskhalos 9y ago
    Democratically elected with 99.6% of the vote, according to a picture in the article. So either a massive campaign of coercion, or redolent of a quote about whichever of North Korean Kims it was who was reported to have got 18 holes in one the first time he played golf: "the more outrageous the lie, the greater the display of power".
raverbashing 9y ago
Seems on pair with the behind-kissing of major Oil producers including one (or many) that finances terror
docdeek 9y ago
LSE has a little form in this area… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_School_of_Economics_Gaddafi_links https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_School_of_Economics_Gad...
grecy 9y ago
The West has been supporting the insanely-corrupt governments in Africa for a very long time. The governments of first world countries exploit the people and encourage corruption every chance they get, because it's profitable for their corporations, and it keeps the people of Africa as slaves to the first word countries. The UN watches, and does nothing. I am in West Africa now. I have been to 15 countries here in the last 14 months. My eyes are open.
- mmsimanga 9y ago
  As an African let me rephrase that for you. Africans do not think twice about turning on their bretheren when offered huge sums of money. Liberation heroes turn into tyrants once they taste the good life. I am by no means condoning what the West is/has done. I however have a problem with my own people taking the lions share of any profits.
  - stult 9y ago
    It's not Africans, it's just people. Westerners sell each other out to foreigners too. Just look at the history of Latin America. There are just far fewer foreigners with the relative wealth to buy off whole governments in MDCs. And in many cases our institutions developed to resist corruption before international finance made it so incredibly easy to accomplish. The intentional abuses of colonization were vile, but the neglectful exploitation of decolonization has hardly been better.
    - mmsimanga 9y ago
      I replied to another post below. People are just people, agreed. Impact of corruption on a developing nation is felt much more by the people. This is why Africans will risk their lives on rickety boats to get to Europe but Europeans haven't got to that stage yet.
  - athenot 9y ago
    If that's any consolation, I don't think that's only for Africans. You can see the same thing happening in Europe, the Americas and in Asia. Power corrupts. That's why our history is filled with stories about the powerful oppressing the weak, and our litterature is replete with upper-middle class characters struggling with the allure of power, resisting or giving in to the dehumanization aspects that occur all too easily.
lcamacho84 9y ago
According to her, she started selling eggs and buying cotton http://www.makaangola.org/2016/05/isabel-dos-santos-africas-richest-woman-and-the-lie-of-her-assets/ http://www.makaangola.org/2016/05/isabel-dos-santos-africas-... (sarcasm here)
- zouhair 9y ago
  The most scary part is that she isn't trying to be a smart ass, she really believe what she is saying.
- smcl 9y ago
  Buying/selling eggs and cotton? Is she following the M&M Enterprises business model? https://norighttobelieve.wordpress.com/2011/06/08/everybody-has-a-share/ https://norighttobelieve.wordpress.com/2011/06/08/everybody-...
nl 9y ago
On her Instagram account (linked from the NYTimes article) there's this pic: https://www.instagram.com/p/BWnuoDFlGC1/?taken-by=isabel_dos_santos.me https://www.instagram.com/p/BWnuoDFlGC1/?taken-by=isabel_dos... What does she use to get that weird, almost photoshopped like effect?
- rangibaby 9y ago
  I'm not seeing the effect you mentioned. She is lit with a flash, which makes her look flat, but other than that I'm not seeing anything.
- mark212 9y ago
  I noticed this by accident on my iPhone 7+. If you take a picture of a figure with strong back lighting, then use the editing functions to bring up the shadows, it will look like this.
- todd8 9y ago
  The strong front lighting reduces shadows, for example on her face, that normally provide visual clues about the depth of her features (e.g. how large her nose is) this tends to flatten a persons features to a degree as pointed out by rangibaby. The overall focus in strongly divided into foreground features and very blurred background features. I haven't played around with the ability of the iPhone 7+ to do this blurring algorithmically, but it is very commonly done with SRL cameras by choosing a very shallow depth of field. This is done by using a large aperture, say f2 or f2.8. This wider open lens allows more of the outer, more curved, part of the lens to collect and focus light onto the image, and due to the geometry of the optics this makes the range of the scene that remains in sharp focus much shallower. (See, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field .) Notice particularly, the excellent bokeh formed by the blurred lights in the background. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bokeh https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bokeh) Finally, a flash combined with a wide open lens can overpower the exposure, a problem for film's limited range of sensitivity (film speed). Cameras can compensate for this by using insanely short exposures, like 1/8000 second, and/or adjusting the exposure sensitivity for a few individual shots (film cameras require changing film rolls to change sensitivity, but today's digital cameras can automatically change the sensitivity on a per shot basis). To me, the picture has a frozen, surreal aspect that can come from a high shutter speed. All of these effects, which can be done with the appropriate camera settings, can also be simulated with enough Photoshop work. This particular photo could have just been produced serendipitously, especially in this age of unlimited snaps from cell phones that never run out of film, but it looks more professional to me. Consider the careful edge lighting that separates the hair from the background. (See https://www.slrlounge.com/5-ways-to-separate-your-subject-from-the-background/ https://www.slrlounge.com/5-ways-to-separate-your-subject-fr... )

icebraining 9y ago

Not Angola, but the cadre of family members and generals that rule the country. It's a daily shame for many of us Portuguese, seeing how our governments grovel to them and keep silent while Portuguese citizens (even if they're also Angolan) are made political prisoners. Our self-respect indexed to the barrel of Brent. I really hope they can move on, but my Angolan friends (both emigrants and living there) aren't hopeful for the short term.

andrepd 9y ago
Yes, not Angola, but the select Angolan crony elites which basically bleed the country dry for their benefit, with the blessing of the western world. The same can be said about a couple handful of other African countries as well.

aaron-lebo 9y ago

Kind of crazy just how late it was decolonized: 1975. You don't really think of 20th century Portugal as having remnants of empire.

tellarin 9y ago
"Decolonized" reads way too light. It was a 13 or 14 years long war (depending on how you count) before independence and that has left huge scars in the country. Not to mention that the war mostly ended because the Portuguese government fell in 1974. Also, Macau was only returned to China in 1999.
- Jacqued 9y ago
  Not to forget Goa, which was actually invaded by India in 1961, with the Portuguese fighting back, although there were 10 times more Indian troops.
  - zemvpferreira 9y ago
    If by fighting back you mean laying down arms as quickly as humanly possible.
    - nl 9y ago
      The engagement lasted two days resulting in twenty-two Indians and thirty Portuguese killed in the fighting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Goa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Goa
matthewrudy 9y ago
Macau was handed over from Portugal to China in 1999. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macau#Transfer_of_sovereignty_and_SAR_status https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macau#Transfer_of_sovereignty_...
icebraining 9y ago
Yeah, that's what the fascist dictatorship at the time got by being aligned with the "right" (ie. winning) side, first by not allying itself with the Axis powers in WW2 and then allowing the US to use Azores as a military base during the Cold War.

dandare 9y ago

> Angola is often listed as one of the world’s most corrupt nations. And Portugal has been singled out for its laxness in reining in money laundering and bribery... The end of story.

dang 9y ago
Would you please not post unsubstantive comments to HN, especially on inflammatory topics? This never serves thoughtful discussion, which we're hoping to see in HN threads.

supremesaboteur 9y ago

> late stage capitalism Much later than the capitalism in most advanced economies ?

nl 9y ago
"late stage capitalism" is a reference to a view that capitalism inevitably leads to a system run by oligarchs. Or something like that - it isn't exactly used consistently[1]. Originally it was a Marxist term, but I don't believe many people use it in this original meaning[2]. It's a pity, because everything else in that poster's comment made sense, I think this detracts from their point. [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/05/late-capitalism/524943/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/05/late-ca... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_capitalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_capitalism
- sageikosa 9y ago
  Pegging "capitalism" into a teleological historiographic narrative (aimed at justifying non-capital producing collectivist dictatorships) has been around for so long that its retro chic again.
  - andrepd 9y ago
    That wasn't at all my intention. But nor is it unreasonable to argue that capitalism as it is practiced today cannot sustain itself indefinitely. Nothing teleological or prophetic about it.
    - sageikosa 9y ago
      To my ear that's like saying evolution cannot sustain itself indefinitely. As long as there are generational selective pressures on imperfect replicators, evolution will continue. Without a superstructure of omnipresent social domination to hinder or disrupt it, capitalism will be used where countable savings for investment and idea that promising accountable returns find themselves together. Here's a thought to explain my defense of capitalism: capitalism doesn't cause corruption, but like anything else it is destroyed by corruption. Capitalism is used by the corrupt because it is so good at identifying that which the market values and in delivering it.

personlurking 9y ago

Here's a graph of all the political and corporate interconnections, from a popular book and documentary (afaik, only published in Portuguese), called Os Donos Angolanos de Portugal (the Angolan Owners of Portugal). https://i.imgur.com/Fb0ZWRG.jpg https://i.imgur.com/Fb0ZWRG.jpg And another one, sans politicians, from a sister publication, Os Donos de Portugal (The Owners of Portugal) https://i.imgur.com/NBJHcB7.jpg https://i.imgur.com/NBJHcB7.jpg

eighthnate 9y ago

What an odd assertion. Most of the elite and leadership ( especially business ) in agola are portuguese. It's just the angolan political elite and portuguese business elite plus a handful of chinese oil companies that dominate angola. It isn't angola dominating portugal. It's portuguese businessmen and angolan political elite dominating and robbing angola of its wealth and moving it to europe.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

whipoodle 9y ago

> “And suddenly they were able to help us and to buy things that we cannot buy,” he said. “It was like a housekeeper buying your house. That is awkward.” Good lord. Come on.

pm90 9y ago
Yeah I found that statement rather classist/racist

guico 9y ago

And here's yet another major publication resorting to click bait...

thedonkeycometh 9y ago

That is quite a patronising story. Corruption is Corruption.

jk2323 9y ago

Portugal is a small country. I did not see any serious investments going on, anything besides their "golden visa" program. A rich guy may invest 500k there to get his residency but serious cash is stored in the UK, Switzerland, Luxembourg, USA. But isn't this the case for most African countries? OT: A much more interesting woman than Ms. dos Santos, also from Angola: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nzinga_of_Ndongo_and_Matamba https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nzinga_of_Ndongo_and_Matamba OT2: Actually most of the oil in Angola is in an obscure enclave: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinda_Province https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinda_Province

JamesBarney 9y ago

Anyone interested in reading more about Angola and the U.S.'s involvement should check out the book "In Search of Enemies" by John Stockwell who was a manager in the CIA, and involved in the Angola operations.

southphillyman 9y ago

This is really interesting, especially in light of all the alleged racism in Portugal. As far as the corruption in Africa, are there any good books that explain why this is so common in Africa? Is this simply a post colonial pattern that can be found through out human history or is it unique to the recent situation in Africa?