Why are African countries incapable of development?

[Adeer_Boomer]

And please do not point to colonization as the reason as almost all countries in Asia were also colonized and they are all doing better than the best African country.
Look at Iran, despite being sanctioned to death for decades by the U.S and E.U, they are still strong enough to challenge Israel. North Korea is the same. They both have relatively advanced technological capabilities, and they can mass produce technology. This is unheard of in Africa.
Other Asian countries who haven't been affected by sanctions are doing even better, like Indonesia, Malaysia etc..
What's stopped African countries from developing? You can exclude south africa as it's pretty much ran by white people.
Even north african arab countries are doing better than SSA?
I think you know where I am going with this, but change my mind if you can.

 

[pinkyandthebrain]

they see themselves as inferior and anyone a shade lighter as superior and we act suprised why Africa is still a shithole

 

[Adeer_Boomer]

they see themselves as inferior and anyone a shade lighter as superior and we act suprised why Africa is still a shithole

Do they see themselves as inferior or are they really inferior?

 

[pinkyandthebrain]

Do they see themselves as inferior or are they really inferior?

They see themselves as inferior. No one is inferior. You choose to be one.

 

[DivineMartial]

All of French west Africa had their development actively sabotaged by France. Any politician that dares defy France is smoked. France to this day exploits them and controls their monetary policies so they have an excuse.

 

[Wonky]

Do they see themselves as inferior or are they really inferior?

Nacaas

 

[chronic]

There is development here and there, but the mindset to develop rapidly is not there. Oh yeah, Africans are retards

 

[Nak-Muay-Femeu]

I personally think it's foreign aid and brain-drain. What incentives, do farmers lets say, have to improve agricultural yield when a UNIcef truck is going to drop off food of a vastly superior quality completely for free? Why worry about improving crop rotation, irrigation etc when you're just going to be undercut by some Bengali rice? Why set up a rock quarry or a construction company and work towards producing your own construction materials at scale when any majory infrasture project is just going to go to some cunty offical's retarded relative? Why would the people in government think to the future and worry about development when the majority of that country's GDP is basically foreign handouts?

Not to mention the constant brain-drain. You have all of a country's brightest and most talented fleeing in droves, because again, why get paid pennies for your expertise and technical know-how when you can live a comfortable life in the West and get paid x10more for your labour?

Couple that with officals that are fucking cartoonishly corrupt, neoptism, tribal grudges and it's a wrap. Africans have been conditioned for decades to expect hand-outs, why do for yourself what others are willing to do for free? Try not to think about it sxb, you'll end up with clinical depression wallahi

 

[TelephoneMan]

Not to mention the constant brain-drain. You have all of the most talented people in a particular country fleeing in droves because why get paid pennies for your expertise and technical know-how when you can live a comfortable life in the West?

This is the answer I feel. Too many Africans prefer to become wage slaves in a white country because at least it's secure. Which is depressing for many reasons.

Anyway, what I want to understand more is the viewpoints of the so-called corrupt government people like Somali ones who apparently only care about tribes. Are they that cartoonishly retarded as people here say?

 

[Riftvalley]

Before the development of Helmets in war our grandfather Nilow bin Ham bin Cush bin Dinka was using his forehead as a combat tool. Our frontal cortex are genetically dispositioned to be overly emotive.

 

[Midas]

And please do not point to colonization as the reason as almost all countries in Asia were also colonized and they are all doing better than the best African country.
Look at Iran, despite being sanctioned to death for decades by the U.S and E.U, they are still strong enough to challenge Israel. North Korea is the same. They both have relatively advanced technological capabilities, and they can mass produce technology. This is unheard of in Africa.
Other Asian countries who haven't been affected by sanctions are doing even better, like Indonesia, Malaysia etc..
What's stopped African countries from developing? You can exclude south africa as it's pretty much ran by white people.
Even north african arab countries are doing better than SSA?
I think you know where I am going with this, but change my mind if you can.

The reality is that africa even before colonization was far behind the rest of the world. One of the main reasons africa wasn't colonized earlier is becuase african disease were deadly to europeans until the invention of quine in the late 19th century. To really have continuous development you need a centralized state that has writing that is widespread enough for adminstativw purposes. A cooperative urban elite with a shared culture/tradition. Enough agriculture,metals, and water to support this. Europe and Asia have had this continously for millenia. Whereas in africa it was on and off for the most advanced parts. On top of the lack of navigable rivers that make the logistics and transportation of goods, people , and ideas several times harder . It's not surprising africa was behind

 

[White-Macrobian]

Africa didn´t went thru what Europe went thru.

Most if not all of Europe history was based on countless wars. In wars u have often times losers and winners and becuase of that they formed naturally borders with people with the same ideology, ethnicity etc.

Africa didn´t went thru that at all which is good because war is bad but it left us with that mess we have today. Two seperate groups of people that genocided each other for centuries are now throwed together into one country where on of those tribes is now the head of the office.

So africa has basically only two ways out

1. All out wars just like in Europe
2. We just skip that and let the past go and focus on the future

 

[daljirkadahsoon]

And please do not point to colonization as the reason as almost all countries in Asia were also colonized and they are all doing better than the best African country.
Look at Iran, despite being sanctioned to death for decades by the U.S and E.U, they are still strong enough to challenge Israel. North Korea is the same. They both have relatively advanced technological capabilities, and they can mass produce technology. This is unheard of in Africa.
Other Asian countries who haven't been affected by sanctions are doing even better, like Indonesia, Malaysia etc..
What's stopped African countries from developing? You can exclude south africa as it's pretty much ran by white people.
Even north african arab countries are doing better than SSA?
I think you know where I am going with this, but change my mind if you can.

The reason is very very simple and you can see a number of respected European political analysts, former leaders, etc admit it.

Africa is the breadbasket of the developed world- it subsidises them by giving them cheap commodities. This is why the continent has not developed- the emergence in Africa of diversified industrialised economies that aren't literally a large plantation of one commodity for Europe threatens the current status quo.

This is why even tiny gestures like by Ghana and its neighbours to unionise and demand higher prices for cocoa for example were responded to very quickly and strongly.

This isn't to mention a number of other reasons such as lack of full governmental control for most African countries, the arbitary and artificial borders, etc etc. The few countries in Africa that have institutional continuity, political stability and ethnic homogeneity such as Botswana are doing quite well.

 

[Midas]

The reason is very very simple and you can see a number of respected European political analysts, former leaders, etc admit it.

Africa is the breadbasket of the developed world- it subsidises them by giving them cheap commodities. This is why the continent has not developed- the emergence in Africa of diversified industrialised economies that aren't literally a large plantation of one commodity for Europe threatens the current status quo.

This is why even tiny gestures like by Ghana and its neighbours to unionise and demand higher prices for cocoa for example were responded to very quickly and strongly.

This isn't to mention a number of other reasons such as lack of full governmental control for most African countries, the arbitary and artificial borders, etc etc. The few countries in Africa that have institutional continuity, political stability and ethnic homogeneity such as Botswana are doing quite well.

Yeah this one of the most biggest myths. Africa accounts for only 2-3% of global trade its basicslly irrelevant. Africa doesn't have the most natural resources except gold and a few metals and isn't that good for agriculture either. There is a reason africa was always one of the least densely populated continents. The tsete fly also limited livestock and ability to use horses.

 

[Cali1996]

I think you guys are being harsh on Africa. Most African nations got their independence in the 1960s. You will rarely find a country that was fully colonised function well after 20-30 years of independence/unification. The healing process usually start after 20/30 years. Take Korea for example, they started their economic miracle in the early 60s but they didn't see the benefits of that up until the 90s. Before that they were a cheap labour force here in the gulf and Somalis were treated better than them. African countries are growing rapidly or at a decent pace right now including our beloved Xaarmalia. That being said, most of these countries will always be developing countries because they were always behind.

 

[daljirkadahsoon]

I think you guys are being harsh on Africa. Most African nations got their independence in the 1960s. You will rarely find a country that was fully colonised function well after 20-30 years of independence/unification. The healing process usually start after 20/30 years. Take Korea for example, they started their economic miracle in the early 60s but they didn't see the benefits of that up until the 90s. Before that they were a cheap labour force here in the gulf and Somalis were treated better than them. African countries are growing rapidly or at a decent pace right now including our beloved Xaarmalia. That being said, most of these countries will always be developing countries because they were always behind.

Korea isn't actually the best example because it has been occupied by Japan not as a random colony but as an integral part of the Japanese Empire and they spent a lot of money building basic infrastructure and the basis for their future growth- by the time they were kicked out they had established a lot of things.

 

[daljirkadahsoon]

Yeah this one of the most biggest myths. Africa accounts for only 2-3% of global trade its basicslly irrelevant. Africa doesn't have the most natural resources except gold and a few metals and isn't that good for agriculture either. There is a reason africa was always one of the least densely populated continents. The tsete fly also limited livestock and ability to use horses.

The historical stuff is a slightly different thing but it is indisputable that Africa post 'independence' hasn't been left to its own devices look up Lumumba or many other figures.

Africa puts more money into the developed nations than they receive as 'aid'- 'aid' that often can only be spent on companies from the issuing country so it flows back out.

 

[Midas]

Korea isn't actually the best example because it has been occupied by Japan not as a random colony but as an integral part of the Japanese Empire and they spent a lot of money building basic infrastructure and the basis for their future growth- by the time they were kicked out they had established a lot of things.

Your way more right than he is. But you guys need to realize korea was centralized state that had writing for close to 2000 years. The joseon dynasty that japan took over had existed for 600 years and had the historical records going back nearly 1,000 years. On top of an army,navy, and book printing. No where in africa came even close to this.

 

[Midas]

The historical stuff is a slightly different thing but it is indisputable that Africa post 'independence' hasn't been left to its own devices look up Lumumba or many other figures.

Africa puts more money into the developed nations than they receive as 'aid'- 'aid' that often can only be spent on companies from the issuing country so it flows back out.

That's true but nowhere in the world was left to it's own devices. One of the biggest reasons besides those I gave is that globalization and technology has made it way too easy for afticqn elites whose only connection with eacher other is colonization to not invest and just take the money and live overseas.