Do African 'leaders' actually want Africa to grow

[__08]

The title is self-explanatory, but I would like to gauge the positions and opinions of people in the forum.

Also:

Are they merely naive and uninformed of geopolitics, or do they consciously sell out their Nations?

Hell No! I mean a luxurious lifestyle you get to live and all the power gets to them. Maybe good intentions was initially there but like they say hell is paved by good intentions.

 

[Nilotic]

This ironically shows that African leaders have more foresight than you guys and aren’t complete idiots.

Think about it, if Africans developed their country, it means more than developing their infrastructure. It means developing their population, educating them, giving them a better QOL.

Now that’s all been done, do you think the african leaders can cash out their investment and start wantonly taking money out the treasury?? Of course not!

The people would obviously be aware of this and immediately take him out of office. Take Somalia for example, Muse Biixi is doing whatever he wants but the people are either too illiterate to be aware, too hungry to care, or too uneducated to know what it really means.

By keeping the population distracted and stupid, you can do what you want to them.

Yeah, I don't see African 'leaders' initiating a program of economic growth that could eventually displace them from absolute power and extreme wealth.

The senior members of our rebel movement were considered heroes; and they would have been accorded the right to take large plots of land and build lavish estates upon them; people would also have been receptive to these small handful of heroes rewarding themselves with tens of millions of dollars on an annual basis...

..But they literally stole $20 billion and left nothing to the people; the current war in South Sudan came about as a result of them competing over the oil wealth.

 

[Caaro]

Yeah, I don't see African 'leaders' initiating a program of economic growth that could eventually displace them from absolute power and extreme wealth.

The senior members of our rebel movement were considered heroes; and they would have been accorded the right to take large plots of land and build lavish estates upon them; people would also have been receptive to these small handful of heroes rewarding themselves with tens of millions of dollars on an annual basis...

..But they literally stole $20 billion and left nothing to the people; the current war in South Sudan came about as a result of them competing over the oil wealth.

the saddest thing about history is that nothing can be done to change it. People are in their current state because of a series of bad events.

Everytime I’m reading a history book about Somalia or something and they start mentioning what happens. I sometimes vainly hope that what I already know isn’t going to happen. It’s like reading a fiction book except you already know the ending, a tragic ending. No such things as “if only”.

Just a few decisions that were made better could have easily put Somalia or almost any country for that matter in a much better position. I remember there was famine in South Sudan recently and I’m just thinking wtf, the nile river, the river of life, flows through Juba. How can you not feed just under 12 million people when Ethiopia and Egypt are feeding ten times that.

Then I remember South Sudan and Somalia suffer the same fate of disunity. If 12 million people worked together and saw each other as one people, there’d be much less starvation. Instead it’s every man for himself first and then every man for his tribe second.

I was just reading a book that was saying that food is the core of all civilization. Now we take that for granted because of technological advances. Despite us having MUCH less people working in agriculture on average, we produce TONS more food on average. Why can’t technology like that reach Somalia and South Sudan? Why are they giving us money and packages of food when they can send us tractors, GMO crops that produce abundance of food, food production plants. If we could just end the starvation we’d improve leaps and bounds.

 

[Hassan2000]

Blaming leaders is so played out if the people weren't corrupt they wouldn't have corrupt leaders. If Africans decided to topple their blood sucking leaders they could do it but they are too weak and unorganised and uninspired

 

[Caaro]

Blaming leaders is so played out if the people weren't corrupt they wouldn't have corrupt leaders. If Africans decided to topple their blood sucking leaders they could do it but they are too weak and unorganised and uninspired

there’s some truth to that for sure.

 

[Nilotic]

the saddest thing about history is that nothing can be done to change it. People are in their current state because of a series of bad events.

Everytime I’m reading a history book about Somalia or something and they start mentioning what happens. I sometimes vainly hope that what I already know isn’t going to happen. It’s like reading a fiction book except you already know the ending, a tragic ending. No such things as “if only”.

Just a few decisions that were made better could have easily put Somalia or almost any country for that matter in a much better position. I remember there was famine in South Sudan recently and I’m just thinking wtf, the nile river, the river of life, flows through Juba. How can you not feed just under 12 million people when Ethiopia and Egypt are feeding ten times that.

Then I remember South Sudan and Somalia suffer the same fate of disunity. If 12 million people worked together and saw each other as one people, there’d be much less starvation. Instead it’s every man for himself first and then every man for his tribe second.

I was just reading a book that was saying that food is the core of all civilization. Now we take that for granted because of technological advances. Despite us having MUCH less people working in agriculture on average, we produce TONS more food on average. Why can’t technology like that reach Somalia and South Sudan? Why are they giving us money and packages of food when they can send us tractors, GMO crops that produce abundance of food, food production plants. If we could just end the starvation we’d improve leaps and bounds.

I agree with virtually all of that except that I think we can do something to change the current situation -- independent of our 'Governments'.

I honestly believe that the people must create their own parallel Governments in all but name; they must create their own Ministries and Departments; their own Treasury; their own banks and enterprises; and their own schools and curriculums...

..And over a period of 30 years or so of gradual reforms, you would have captured the people; and be primed to capture the State -- once an educated, united, confident and wealthy middle-class has been established.

I think we could change things through the creation of community owned co-operatives, Citizens Assemblies and sortition -- parallel Governments that are transparent and accountable to the people.


Salva Kiir (our 'President') bought tractors and distributed them to every county, but it became a farce because he didn't seem to realise that you need depots, spare parts and people with the knowledge to operate and service them. It was a knee-jerk reaction.

Pastoralists are also proud and look down on farming; this is why work should be mandatory and critical fields (like agriculture) should be filled through some sort of conscription.

 

[ReerVanCadde]

I constantly chuckle at the sheer ignorance of those who lay the blame with dumb or cowardly leaders.
If an African country decides to raise their prices it will effect the living standards of those in the west.
Think of it from another angle, will the west tolerate a non corrupt leader trying to do right by their people? Hell no.
Every leader must bend their backs, without exceptions or be faced with plots, assassinations, foreign inspired uprising, treachery, backstabbing or opponents backed by foreign states, it's as simple as.
Damned if they do, damned if they don't.
The weak simply can't negotiate with the strong.

 

[Nilotic]

Blaming leaders is so played out if the people weren't corrupt they wouldn't have corrupt leaders. If Africans decided to topple their blood sucking leaders they could do it but they are too weak and unorganised and uninspired

Yes, I've already acknowledged that the leaders are reflective of the people they come from:

We can't just blame the politicians; a people’s government is more often than not a reflection of their society.

A Nation's elite don’t just drop out of the sky or manifest themselves from another dimension — they are us… even if they are a little more corrupt or a little more murderous.

This is precisely why I advocate for a philosophical and moral revolution. Our own non-profit private schools would instill principles, morals and ethics and extol the virtues of human rights; this would plant the seed for taking back our Countries.

 

[ReerVanCadde]

Case in point, one minute you'll be a Deby, former president of Chad, holding hands with macron, a few weeks later you'll be dead from a bunch of so called rebels in your own country.
Or a magafuli, former president of Tanzania, who one day is healthy and fine, the next day does from COVID. Lol joke
I see it so clearly it feels stupid discussing corrupt African leaders without looking at foreign pressure.

 

[Nilotic]

I constantly chuckle at the sheer ignorance of those who lay the blame with dumb or cowardly leaders.
If an African country decides to raise their prices it will effect the living standards of those in the west.
Think of it from another angle, will the west tolerate a non corrupt leader trying to do right by their people? Hell no.
Every leader must bend their backs, without exceptions or be faced with plots, assassinations, foreign inspired uprising, treachery, backstabbing or opponents backed by foreign states, it's as simple as.
Damned if they do, damned if they don't.
The weak simply can't negotiate with the strong.

You're talking about unequal exchange.

I've spoken about this before

Rich countries drained $152tn from the global South since 1960

Rich countries drained $152tn from the global South since 1960

Imperialism never ended, it just changed form.

www.aljazeera.com

For the South, the losses outstrip foreign aid transfers by a wide margin. For every dollar of aid the South receives, they lose $14 in drain through unequal exchange alone, not counting other kinds of losses like illicit financial outflows and profit repatriation.

African Nations are susceptible because they put all their hopes in an individual instead of socialising the philosophies and ideologies necessary for re-asserting the Nation's political and economic Sovereignty.

One man could easily be eliminated; how would you go about eliminating millions of like-minded people in this day and age?

 

[Nilotic]

Case in point, one minute you'll be a Deby, former president of Chad, holding hands with macron, a few weeks later you'll be dead from a bunch of so called rebels in your own country.
Or a magafuli, former president of Tanzania, who one day is healthy and fine, the next day does from COVID. Lol joke
I see it so clearly it feels stupid discussing corrupt African leaders without looking at foreign pressure.

So is Africa the only continent the West has designs on? How is it that every other continent and region of the world has Countries that have found ways to protect their Sovereignty and National interests from the West?

 

[ReerVanCadde]

So is Africa the only continent the West has designs on? How is it that every other continent and region of the world has Countries that have found ways to protect their Sovereignty and National interests from the West?

I disagree, South America is in the same shoes as Africa. Also, I've listened to duarte the philliphines prime minister speaking about CIA pressure.
Literally the only countries that are roughly safe are the nuclear powerhouses and Europe. Every other country is fair game.

 

[Nilotic]

I disagree, South America is in the same shoes as Africa. Also, I've listened to duarte the philliphines prime minister speaking about CIA pressure.
Literally the only countries that are roughly safe are the nuclear powerhouses and Europe. Every other country is fair game.

South America is still far better than Africa.

Look at what happened in Bolivia; their former leader (Evo Morales) was removed through a Western supported military coup and his party came back stronger than ever.

The difference between them and us is simple... they're not raging egotists; they usually have a number of people that believe in the same philosophies, principles, ideologies and plans, so the removal of one man doesn't upend everything.

 

[Caaro]

South America is still far better than Africa.

Look at what happened in Bolivia; their former leader (Evo Morales) was removed through a Western supported military coup and his party came back stronger than ever.

The difference between them and us is simple... they're not raging egotists; they usually have a number of people that believe in the same philosophies, principles, ideologies and plans, so the removal of one man doesn't upend everything.

The reason for Africa’s failure as a continent is just so fundamental that it’s sad. How are we the most undeveloped continent by far. Like it’s not even close.

Even goddamn vietnam and Colombia are more developed than the most developed african country. Paul Kagame was one of the few intelligent african leaders, ironically he wasn’t democratic lol.

I still remember what we learned in Civics class on different types of governments and the quick notes I wrote:

Democracy: Smart Population with a Smart leader is best suited for this

Autocracy: Uneducated population with a Smart leader.

Why tf should I have to listen to what a bunch of rural khathead Somalis who can’t even read say when they can just follow? Democracy works in the west only because the people are educated and know what’s best for them. It can’t work in Africa because these retards will just vote for their clan mates dfkm

 

[Nilotic]

The reason for Africa’s failure as a continent is just so fundamental that it’s sad. How are we the most undeveloped continent by far. Like it’s not even close.

Even goddamn vietnam and Colombia are more developed than the most developed african country. Paul Kagame was one of the few intelligent african leaders, ironically he wasn’t democratic lol.

I still remember what we learned in Civics class on different types of governments and the quick notes I wrote:

Democracy: Smart Population with a Smart leader is best suited for this

Autocracy: Uneducated population with a Smart leader.

Why tf should I have to listen to what a bunch of rural khathead Somalis who can’t even read say when they can just follow? Democracy works in the west only because the people are educated and know what’s best for them. It can’t work in Africa because these retards will just vote for their clan mates dfkm

Exactly!

That sort of unregulated democracy is a disaster and is wholly unsuited for all of Africa.

We need a system that is more tightly controlled; we shouldn't elect candidates; we desperately need a stringent political system with sortition at the center of it all.

In ideal conditions, Sortition would allow us the option of randomly choosing a handful of suitable candidates from a pool of millions, however, we don't have millions of educated people, so our pool will be in the thousands.



Sortition members would be subject to a criminal and background check; an extensive character assessment.

An education requirement

A mandatory and thorough psyche evaluation.

A cognitive test.

A prolonged probation period.

A training regimen in the laws of the Nation, economics, human rights, separation of powers and organs of Government; this training program would last for 2 years. This is where you would learn the ins and outs of committee hearings and the intricacies of drafting legislation.

In addition to mandatory psychiatric evaluations necessary to screen out grandiose, psychopathic and sociopathic people... a body should be established to determine the most suitable candidates; this body would screen out criminal, hostile, vain, uncooperative, incompetent and corrupt people.

Sortition members would only serve for 5 years and could never return; Government Departments and Ministries would be technical in nature but would come under the purview of sortition members.

 

[Nilotic]

Roughly a third of American voters think that the Marxist slogan “From each according to his ability to each according to his need” appears in the Constitution. About as many are incapable of naming even one of the three branches of the United States government. Fewer than a quarter know who their senators are, and only half are aware that their state has two of them.

The Case Against Democracy

If most voters are uninformed, who should make decisions about the public’s welfare?

www.newyorker.com

 

[faarax_mn]

Yeah no, most don't want their country to actually grow they're selfish

 

[faarax_mn]

The Case Against Democracy

If most voters are uninformed, who should make decisions about the public’s welfare?

www.newyorker.com

You're african socrates

 

[Nilotic]

You're african socrates

You're far too kind, mate.

I'm just a random dude.

 

[faarax_mn]

You're far too kind, mate.

I'm just a random dude.

It was a remark on your anti-democracy positions, but you are one of the most intelligent people on this site