Was Africa better off when Europeans were running it?

Question

It seems that no African government can get its act together. Corruption, starvation, and persecution are all rampant. Was it better for Africans when Europeans were running the place?

Answer 1

You definitely have a point there. But a more valid question should be "Was Africa better off BEFORE the Europeans were running it?" Think about it, the Europeans went into the continent, broke up millenial long tribal turfs and even forced rival tribes to live in the same areas. And what about Rwanda. It was the Europeans who split up the Rwandans into the Tutsi/Hutu ethnicities, and whose resulting rivalry exploded into the horrible Rwandan genocide of the early 1990's. Go rent "Hotel Rwanda" and then ask yourself: "Was Africa better off BEFORE the Europeans were running it?"

Answer 2

No. Read Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad, or Black Livingstone by Pagan Kennedy. Did it ever occur to you that maybe the corrupt governments arose out of the unrest and resentment generated by European-run governments? If things were better then, why would they have had coups and civil wars instead of letting the Europeans run things? Why would people have revolutionary wars if they were happy? The Europeans loved exploiting the Africans and would still be doing it to this day because it was so profitable. They only left because things got hostile and people hated them so much.

It's like the U.S.--why would the English have left voluntarily? People don't just trade good times for violence--they get sick of being exploited and dominated by outside forces and decide to rule themselves. They're usually not very good at it because they're out of practice and susceptible to warlords taking over and broke from fighting.

Like take Ethiopia--they weren't doing too bad overall but they had a corrupt government. They were overtaken in a coup and most of the old government wound up in jail and nobody was prepared for a famine and they didn't bother asking for foreign aid because they were busy doing coup-related things. So then they wind up on TV in totally humiliating commercials and concerts to feed Africa.

So what's the answer? Don't overthrow corrupt governments? I'd say they need to focus a lot more on building proper nations after the corrupt governments are overturned. Fareed Zakaria wrote an article about how South Africa could have just pitched everybody who was involved in the apartheid-era government, but the new government led by Nelson Mandela allowed enough old officials to stay in place to get the new government going. He related that to building a new Iraq and said that they need their own Nelson Mandela. Creativity, forgiveness, and good planning are the answers. Not European control.

Answer 3

A brief overview of British history and the history of the countries that it colonized would lead you to believe that the countries within British territory were becoming more civilized during the time they were under British rule. But an even closer look at those histories would show otherwise.

Yes, the majority of countries that were once consider British territory currently lack a stable government, but that it because the people of these countries have been told what to do for themselves by foreigners that they are forced to discovery who and what they are. This can only be done through trail and error.

I do not believe that any country is/ was truly better off when it was under British rule or the rule of any other European/ Western government. The only difference between than and now is that the foreign governments never allowed you to view the way things really were.

Answer 4

I guess that all depends on your standards.


Zimbawee before it literally kicked the white farmers of 'their' land, did fairly well...afterwards, their economy was worthless. Zimbawee is on the verge of economic collapse and the dictator has officially being screwing around with the currency, which makes investment nearly impossible.

While that's not all of Africa, I'd say that it's more or less European-ideas that have probably done more harm than good. Ideas such as authoritianism, socialism, etc. I'd say that the countries that get the best of European ideas are better off, but if you flip that coin to the other side, you get a backwards society. Look at all of South America, whom prodominately adopts ill-conceived philosophies from Europe.

I mean if you really want to go back in time, most of Africa or central or south america where really just tribe-like. Fortunately they're langauge was evolved in most areas, although I'd say the greatest evolution of mentality was the creation and use of written language. Continents such as North and South America, as well as Africa didn't have a consistant written language for sometime, due to the fact that until boats were of common habit, people usually didn't travel north to south or vice versa, due to the changes in temperature. Thus the natives of the Americas and Africa weren't as intellecually diverse as Europe, China, and the Middle East....because exchanging knowledge east to west (through travel and trade) or visa versa has made those areas incredibly knowledgeable in comparison.

I'd say they're catching-up culturally to the knowledge that's just getting to be throughly available. Better or worse is just a standard of what you perceive is good...but I wouldn't say white people are better in control, I'd say their good ideas (e.g limited government, common law, logic, divided and controlled powers) are indispenseable, and superior as ideas. That culture can run it best, no matter the race.

Answer 5

Irony is that Europeans Colonial Powers although they left Africa are still running Africa by the help of their very corrupt African Dictators.Arab Africa is gone to the Dogs Black Africa to the Hyenas.Don"t get me wrong educated Africans are one of the nicest people in the world.

Answer 6

When they were???? WTF


They still are you ignoramus

yet another uninformed user.

consider this:

If the rest of the world allowed africa to be itself and recover

a) you would have a second Super Power EQUAL to america
b) trade and economy would be disrupted through out the world
c) It would mean the race war is coming.


Africa would do just fine if the europeans and america would stop pitting warlords agains THEIR appointed leaders, stop taking diamond and natural resources that should make africa the richest continent, etc, etc,etc


read history of civilization 1-9 by Will Durant then email me so i can give you so compare contrast material


Then post about history


you are mis informed ignoramus


further more they have been using the same tactics that brought slaves hence the corruption. i am happy my brother does not like the internet or sites like this. He would literally eat you up.

He is a WORLD HISTORIAN.

Your wrong as anyone who thinks that africans are doing this to themselves are.

Its games like pitting bloods against crips

your all blind and sad

to the educated answers

Thank you





UNLEARN

Answer 7

They were far better off. Blacks have a real problem in that few to none of them have the qualities needed for effective, or even sane leadership or maintaining the rule of law.

Does that mean they should live as slaves under white rule? Absolutely freaking not.

But what it does mean is that they should live as free men and tap whites for their leadership skills and other qualities that make them ideal for handling the day to day running of things.

Or to put it another way, under a true democratic system, blacks should choose whomever is best to lead them regardless of the color of their skin. To do otherwise is racist, foolish and as can be directly observed, results in disaster. The truth of the matter is that white and black people in africa.......are africans. So what if most of them are black.

Could you imagine an analogous situation in the western world where people only voted based on race instead of who is best? No way in hell people would tolerate that. Why is africa different?

People are not interchangeable. Some people are better at certain things than others. It just so happens there are racial genetics involved with this. Whites have a predisposition toward being good managers....high IQ's, a tendency toward rationality, and most important of all, a very wide streak of altruism and a desire to do what is right. That's the leader you want....not that ironfisted ****** who wants to line his pockets while you starve.

Answer 8

well, if your a liberal democrat you need to shut up. your being a hypocrite. you said Saddam was none of our business because its over there and their problem. well africa is over there too, so butt out. so for the rest of us who have a heart and know that you have to take action to see change, the real problem in Africa is the same as Iraq is now. we came, we saw, we conquered. now what? well the liberal Europeans hauled *** to let Africa "do its own thing" and its still a mess. if they would have stayed long enough to help out and patch up the African nations, they would be in a much better state. just like we need to stick with it in iraq, and leave those people somthing to work with.

Answer 9

Africa was better off before Europeans came in.

Answer 10

not as good as you think it was in africa 10 20 or 30 years ago.THEy have had constant problems in rural area's with the cumulative totals reaching into the millions in a few short years .MAJOR urban area's over steady extremely hard work with liitle reward or upper ward mobility possible but do offer enough for a few men to work and support a village .Often men will go to work in the cities for a time and return to the villages only to find out that they were attacked and the people have moved on or been killed .africa is now where near as well off as people would like to beleive .THERE have been waring ribes there for centuries and government s that change with the wind .CAPABLE of ordering the deaths of thousands of innocent people just to wipe out certain tribes that might have attacked his grandfathers village 65 years ago.