4 ms·

"There Are No Successful Black Nations" was the original title of this article in Foreign Policy: https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/08/09/why-black-people-must-hel

"There Are No Successful Black Nations" was the original title of this article in Foreign Policy: https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/08/09/why-black-people-must-help-africa-develop-racism-pan-africanism/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/08/09/why-black-people-must-h... It's an uncomfortable title, but it's a truth that must be confronted. How have once downtrodden countries like Korea, China, and large swaths of Eastern Europe been able to turn rags into riches while most of Africa has so far failed to? GDP is not everything of course. But even on measures of safety, why is Africa so much more violent than equally poor Laos or Cambodia? South America shares some of Africa's woes, so perhaps it's not a uniquely African problem. But it seems less bad, and the region has produced success stories. I've heard it said that Africa has yet to have its naissance. Maybe, hopefully, that's it and things will get better over time. But with the current corrupt institutions and leadership that looks to be a gargantuan task.

jimbob45 3y ago
Are we not counting Haiti or Jamaica? If we’re counting “black” as “African”, then yeah. But then “There are no successful African countries” seems a lot less difficult to prove/refute.
- rejectfinite 3y ago
  Successful compared to South Korea and China? Even eastern europe? And you say “Jamaica”? Do you not see the absurdity?
- TMWNN 3y ago
  Jamaica, and especially Haiti, are in no way "successes". The Dominican Republic is not exactly a rich country, but the contrast between it and Haiti are so stark as to beggar the imagination. Relevant: TIL that Haiti has had 23 constitutions since 1801, with the most recent being enacted in 2012. At least two have declared the country to be an empire. <https://np.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/3t5wzt/til_that_haiti_has_had_23_constitutions_since/ https://np.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/3t5wzt/til_th...>
rejectfinite 3y ago
>but it's a truth that must be confronted Why? I really do not care anymore. How much have been poured in? How many marshall plans in $? While Germany rose from a bombed out nation in 1945 to the EU's strongest economy? South Korea too is even more impressive, from an illiterate peasant nation to now with Samsung and all that. Japan got hit with the most destructive man made weapon, twice. Granted, they were an Asian powerhouse up to WW2. I think the key is education and "making your own shit". Have any African nations made weapons, planes, tanks, communications equipment, trains, cars, and now computers and phones in the same ilk? Being Swedish, we are 10milion only and have made planes, submarines, ericsson + vast mining and forest operations with assorted companies. :)
- prmph 3y ago
  > How much have been poured in? Nothing. Do you actually think vast sums have been poured into Africa, with the objective of helping its development? If so, I'd like to disabuse you of that notion. Actually, development aid to Africa (a drop in the ocean compared to what the US sends to Israel, or spent on the Iraq/Afghan war each week, for instance) is intended to hinder its development, by propping up the donor countries industries at the expense of local industry, or by supporting rulers who tow the western line. I cannot go into all the reasons why/how this is the case, but all the information is out there if you search for it.
- seiferteric 3y ago
  Those three nations were heavily invested in by the US after WW2 and Korean war as bulwarks against communism, perhaps not the best examples of pulling themselves up by the bootstraps.
newsclues 3y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse
mschuster91 3y ago
> How have once downtrodden countries like Korea, China, and large swaths of Eastern Europe been able to turn rags into riches while most of Africa has so far failed to? At least for Eastern Europe, the answer is very clear: the European Union imposing a serious baseline regarding democracy, rule of law and corruption. While Poland and especially Hungary are testing how far the patience of the EU can stretch, in general it's still holding up. On top of that, Eastern European nations/their populations wanted to join the EU desperately, wishing to never experience authoritarian realsozialismus again. China had an immense amount of young, trainable people and a lack of environmental and worker regulations, which the West was all too keen on exploiting, and established trade routes from UK empire times. That's how they got big. Africa, in contrast, had and widely still has nothing. No coalition/federation that pushed applicants to improve, no/barely any external interest in the countries, no major trade routes, no one who gave a flying fuck about the entire region. The US largely don't care as long as there is no bad actor threatening their interests (such as ISIS, al-Quaeda and its offshoots), Europe doesn't care about anything but getting rid of migrants no matter what, the Arabs don't care, and there aren't natural resources worth the trouble of extracting them without violating supply chain concerns. The only ones at least caring a bit about Africa as a continent are the Chinese, but they don't care about politics as long as they get a supply of workers and a potential market for cheap crap now that Europe and the US are saturated - we're seeing first signs of that by Chinese fast fashion taking over clothing from Western "second hand" (mitumba) stuff.
letrowekwel 3y ago
IMO the main problem is the arbitrary way borders were drawn in Africa by colonialists. Too many ethnicities that didn't get along very well suddenly shared a common state, while others were split between many countries. When even much richer and educated areas have problems with multiculturalism of much smaller scale (the Balkans, Spain, Belgium for example), it's not surprising that countries like DR Congo with over 200 languages spoken are basically ungovernable through democratic means. The border situation isn't anywhere near as bad in South America and most of Asia - and even there countries which lack common national identity tend to be less stable than others. Peaceful coexistence of many cultures within the same society is a nice idea, but in reality it's very hard to do right due to the tribal nature of our specie. Highly successful multicultural countries appear to be an exception, rather than a norm.
- benj111 3y ago
  I don't think the language thing covers it. Plenty of European countries have more than one language, only recently got 1 unified language. You have countries like India that manage to make a cohesive country out of disparate peoples. That's not to say these aren't contributing factors. My current 'theory' / observation is that sub Saharan Africa never really had large scale civilisations, I wonder if that colours their conception of what a nation state is. Eg, if you think in terms of tribes. Perhaps that hinders scaling up to something bigger.
  - dotancohen 3y ago
    Why even scale anything up? If these peoples have been living and fighting and reproducing successfully for millennia, why do Europeans and Americans think it necessary to get group them into states and force them to form large-scale heterogeneous bodies of law? Does that just make it easier to remove the mineral wealth from the continent?
    - benj111 3y ago
      Very true. Or do they need to develop their own concept of the state, or at the risk of sounding imperialistic, do they need to learn the concept of the nation state? Broadly speaking I would say having structures larger than a tribe is a net benefit. Whatever form that may take.
prmph 3y ago
> GDP is not everything of course. But even on measures of safety, why is Africa so much more violent than equally poor Laos or Cambodia? Can you point to some statistics to back this up? I've lived in Africa for most of my life, and I struggle to see the truth of this. Apart from some countries at war, where is tis extreme violence going on? For what it's worth, I felt far more unsafe when I lived in the US. Compare how many people were killed in wars in the 20th century, by continent. Africa has been by far more peaceful compared to Europe and Asia; it's not even close.
TMWNN 3y ago
>"There Are No Successful Black Nations" was the original title of this article in Foreign Policy: https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/08/09/why-black-people-must-h https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/08/09/why-black-people-must-h... I read the article with the original title. Resulting Reddit discussion: <https://np.reddit.com/r/TrueReddit/comments/4x2vbu/there_are_no_successful_black_nations_and_the/ https://np.reddit.com/r/TrueReddit/comments/4x2vbu/there_are...> >It's an uncomfortable title, but it's a truth that must be confronted. How have once downtrodden countries like Korea, China, and large swaths of Eastern Europe been able to turn rags into riches while most of Africa has so far failed to? It's all of Africa. I was flabbergasted to learn that, contrary to what I'd heard for years about how Africa was poor but rapidly growing, the truth is that Africa is poor and not growing at all. <https://np.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/6krxpv/world_map_of_economic_growth1600x1071/djogip0/?context=3 https://np.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/6krxpv/world_map_of...>

jimbob45 3y ago

Are we not counting Haiti or Jamaica? If we’re counting “black” as “African”, then yeah. But then “There are no successful African countries” seems a lot less difficult to prove/refute.

rejectfinite 3y ago
Successful compared to South Korea and China? Even eastern europe? And you say “Jamaica”? Do you not see the absurdity?
TMWNN 3y ago
Jamaica, and especially Haiti, are in no way "successes". The Dominican Republic is not exactly a rich country, but the contrast between it and Haiti are so stark as to beggar the imagination. Relevant: TIL that Haiti has had 23 constitutions since 1801, with the most recent being enacted in 2012. At least two have declared the country to be an empire. <https://np.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/3t5wzt/til_that_haiti_has_had_23_constitutions_since/ https://np.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/3t5wzt/til_th...>

rejectfinite 3y ago

>but it's a truth that must be confronted Why? I really do not care anymore. How much have been poured in? How many marshall plans in $? While Germany rose from a bombed out nation in 1945 to the EU's strongest economy? South Korea too is even more impressive, from an illiterate peasant nation to now with Samsung and all that. Japan got hit with the most destructive man made weapon, twice. Granted, they were an Asian powerhouse up to WW2. I think the key is education and "making your own shit". Have any African nations made weapons, planes, tanks, communications equipment, trains, cars, and now computers and phones in the same ilk? Being Swedish, we are 10milion only and have made planes, submarines, ericsson + vast mining and forest operations with assorted companies. :)

prmph 3y ago
> How much have been poured in? Nothing. Do you actually think vast sums have been poured into Africa, with the objective of helping its development? If so, I'd like to disabuse you of that notion. Actually, development aid to Africa (a drop in the ocean compared to what the US sends to Israel, or spent on the Iraq/Afghan war each week, for instance) is intended to hinder its development, by propping up the donor countries industries at the expense of local industry, or by supporting rulers who tow the western line. I cannot go into all the reasons why/how this is the case, but all the information is out there if you search for it.
seiferteric 3y ago
Those three nations were heavily invested in by the US after WW2 and Korean war as bulwarks against communism, perhaps not the best examples of pulling themselves up by the bootstraps.

newsclues 3y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse

mschuster91 3y ago

> How have once downtrodden countries like Korea, China, and large swaths of Eastern Europe been able to turn rags into riches while most of Africa has so far failed to? At least for Eastern Europe, the answer is very clear: the European Union imposing a serious baseline regarding democracy, rule of law and corruption. While Poland and especially Hungary are testing how far the patience of the EU can stretch, in general it's still holding up. On top of that, Eastern European nations/their populations wanted to join the EU desperately, wishing to never experience authoritarian realsozialismus again. China had an immense amount of young, trainable people and a lack of environmental and worker regulations, which the West was all too keen on exploiting, and established trade routes from UK empire times. That's how they got big. Africa, in contrast, had and widely still has nothing. No coalition/federation that pushed applicants to improve, no/barely any external interest in the countries, no major trade routes, no one who gave a flying fuck about the entire region. The US largely don't care as long as there is no bad actor threatening their interests (such as ISIS, al-Quaeda and its offshoots), Europe doesn't care about anything but getting rid of migrants no matter what, the Arabs don't care, and there aren't natural resources worth the trouble of extracting them without violating supply chain concerns. The only ones at least caring a bit about Africa as a continent are the Chinese, but they don't care about politics as long as they get a supply of workers and a potential market for cheap crap now that Europe and the US are saturated - we're seeing first signs of that by Chinese fast fashion taking over clothing from Western "second hand" (mitumba) stuff.

letrowekwel 3y ago

IMO the main problem is the arbitrary way borders were drawn in Africa by colonialists. Too many ethnicities that didn't get along very well suddenly shared a common state, while others were split between many countries. When even much richer and educated areas have problems with multiculturalism of much smaller scale (the Balkans, Spain, Belgium for example), it's not surprising that countries like DR Congo with over 200 languages spoken are basically ungovernable through democratic means. The border situation isn't anywhere near as bad in South America and most of Asia - and even there countries which lack common national identity tend to be less stable than others. Peaceful coexistence of many cultures within the same society is a nice idea, but in reality it's very hard to do right due to the tribal nature of our specie. Highly successful multicultural countries appear to be an exception, rather than a norm.

benj111 3y ago
I don't think the language thing covers it. Plenty of European countries have more than one language, only recently got 1 unified language. You have countries like India that manage to make a cohesive country out of disparate peoples. That's not to say these aren't contributing factors. My current 'theory' / observation is that sub Saharan Africa never really had large scale civilisations, I wonder if that colours their conception of what a nation state is. Eg, if you think in terms of tribes. Perhaps that hinders scaling up to something bigger.
- dotancohen 3y ago
  Why even scale anything up? If these peoples have been living and fighting and reproducing successfully for millennia, why do Europeans and Americans think it necessary to get group them into states and force them to form large-scale heterogeneous bodies of law? Does that just make it easier to remove the mineral wealth from the continent?
  - benj111 3y ago
    Very true. Or do they need to develop their own concept of the state, or at the risk of sounding imperialistic, do they need to learn the concept of the nation state? Broadly speaking I would say having structures larger than a tribe is a net benefit. Whatever form that may take.

prmph 3y ago

> GDP is not everything of course. But even on measures of safety, why is Africa so much more violent than equally poor Laos or Cambodia? Can you point to some statistics to back this up? I've lived in Africa for most of my life, and I struggle to see the truth of this. Apart from some countries at war, where is tis extreme violence going on? For what it's worth, I felt far more unsafe when I lived in the US. Compare how many people were killed in wars in the 20th century, by continent. Africa has been by far more peaceful compared to Europe and Asia; it's not even close.

TMWNN 3y ago

>"There Are No Successful Black Nations" was the original title of this article in Foreign Policy: https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/08/09/why-black-people-must-h https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/08/09/why-black-people-must-h... I read the article with the original title. Resulting Reddit discussion: <https://np.reddit.com/r/TrueReddit/comments/4x2vbu/there_are_no_successful_black_nations_and_the/ https://np.reddit.com/r/TrueReddit/comments/4x2vbu/there_are...> >It's an uncomfortable title, but it's a truth that must be confronted. How have once downtrodden countries like Korea, China, and large swaths of Eastern Europe been able to turn rags into riches while most of Africa has so far failed to? It's all of Africa. I was flabbergasted to learn that, contrary to what I'd heard for years about how Africa was poor but rapidly growing, the truth is that Africa is poor and not growing at all. <https://np.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/6krxpv/world_map_of_economic_growth1600x1071/djogip0/?context=3 https://np.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/6krxpv/world_map_of...>