http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/08/09...nations-africa-diginty-racism-pan-africanism/
The article goes into a lot more detail about history and gives a few more points.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
There Are No Successful Black Nations - Chigozie Obioma (Foreign Policy)
- Thread starter Piecake
- Start date
- Status
http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/08/09...nations-africa-diginty-racism-pan-africanism/
The article goes into a lot more detail about history and gives a few more points.
Its the end result of colonialism and the carving up of a continent by outsiders.
Eta- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mokele-mbembe if this ever got caught, instant destination.
Eta- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mokele-mbembe if this ever got caught, instant destination.
andythinkpad
Member
Why is South Africa not a black nation?
Byakuya769
Member
A bit?
It is, but South Africa doesn't have the power of a US, China, Japan, India, Russia, Europe, Brazil, etc, and I think his point that Africa needs one of those nations to get the end-racism ball rolling.
I think the author would definitely agree. He just thinks that that is not going to happen unless Africa has a powerful nation first. Is he right? I hope not, because I don't like the idea of us not having the power on our own to rid ourselves of racism and be dependent on a nation in Africa to become a significant power first.
I would certainly like to see a nation develop into a signficant power like one of the nations above because not only that is also a good thing, but I would imagine that that even if the author is wrong in his point having a powerful nation in Africa would help reduce at least a little bit discrimination and racism in other parts of hte globe.
GTP_Daverytimes
Member
South Africa is far from successful, at most it's a 2nd world nation. In Africa the richest countries per capita face massive inequality and of course they wield zero influence. The average Joe doesnt know a country named Equatorial Guinea or even Botswana. Until the large African nations approach first world standards of living and until they weild enough influence to affect change far from their borders Africa and in turn Blacks will not be respected. Of course at some point we would get there, but that responsibility lies in the hands of a handful of countries, mainly Nigeria, South Africa, DRC, Kenya and Angola. The represent the hope of "Black Africa", and should they succeed Africa's image and the image of black people would be transformed. Of course racism won't dissappear but some aspects should temper down.
My ashy detector is in the shop.
Byakuya769
Member
Follow the money.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Some people seem to think that black people in Africa are somehow concerned about African Americans. Just because you would have a 1st world country in Africa doesn't mean its population would care at all about them. This idea that such a nation would somehow use its influence to improve the status of black people globally is really misguided.
jordan0386
Member
ratcliffja
Member
Thanks Obioma.
GTP_Daverytimes
Member
LOL, btw that name literally means "Good Heart"
For all intents and purposes African Americans are pretty much a separate people from Africans. Slavery cut and beat all that out of us, we are pretty much the original Americans because we were created by this nation.
Snowman Prophet of Doom
Member
Wishful thinking. A first-world black nation won't give racial minorities elsewhere any more internal leverage.
I think there's another group out there that might take offense at that...
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Well that would be the Native Americans, but I know what you mean. That being said, it's the same for many other black people throughout South and Central America. I think that the US is so centered on itself culturally and in terms of education that African Americans probably have a very limited knowledge of how things are and have been for black people in South and Central America.
You often hear about the situation in the US, and the African "motherland", but never about black people on the rest of the continent, because in a way it makes the whole discussion more complicated; suddenly you have to take into account the opinion and history of whole other groups of black people in other countries who are also descendants of slaves, who have their own problems today regarding social injustice.
andythinkpad
Member
Africa's geography is not ideal for large inner continental nation building. All the rivers are not suitable for commercial transportation. There is no continental railway or highway.
As for why Africa states (excluding SA) doesn't have high value added industrial. All I can say is sub-Sahanran Africa has been in contact with Egypt and the west for thousands of years, even earlier than when the West made contact with China. They have plenty of time to create their own writing, unify their culture, create their own religion etc. I have no scientific explanation why Africa hasn't establish an effective centralized control kingdom and nation state in their own culture.
Totally respect the First Nations, there are whole peoples extinct because of this country.
My man. Dropping the hotep lol.
I can see what they are trying to say, but they were over there and we were over here. It is simply more beneficial for us to pursue success where we have been for the past 400 years. We built alot of wealth for other people in that time.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Well the Egyptian empire could have, but it declined in influence in the region and the Greeks and Romans took over. African nations never were quite seafaring ones, and their land access to the Middle East and hence Asia was mainly through a narrow passage through the Holy Land, hence through Rome. So basically there was really no other way. Egypt expanding westward would have never succeeded as again they would have been encircled and divided eventually by the seafaring empires that emerged from Europe.
Africa has huge expanses of land that would have made it difficult to control, compared to the smaller high density land of Europe where the clash of cultures were frequent and over short distances. Those clashes lead to a sort of innovation and reformation. It was bound to lead to the emergence of empires.
The only part of the world where unification could have really changed history would have been China, but they secluded themselves. For Africa, it was never going to play out differently.
If Hannibal had conquered the Greek nations things might have been entirely different but of course, what ifs and all.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Greece could never manage to be used as a base to project power from for long. Its geographic location and constituency makes it very difficult to defend once seafaring has developed enough. They were limited to the Mediterranean while nations in the west of Europe could attack it from the land and sea, Asia from the east, and Europe could send its ships to Africa or wherever.
The way history played itself out was mostly due to geographical reasons. Western Europe was extremely advantaged geographically, so one way or another, other than Russia taking over northern Europe, things could probably not have played out very differently.
Black Africa also suffers from a massive brain drain. The cream of the crop bails out.
Foreign invading leaders from strong empires tended to die.
Resource scarcity forced urbanization.
-lead to war, famine, tons of death from disease and forced technological advancements.
Europe also benefited from a few things and flukes.
Foreign invading leaders from strong empires tended to die.
Resource scarcity forced urbanization.
-lead to war, famine, tons of death from disease and forced technological advancements.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Not to mention those are all north African nations, which historically are very much separate from sub-Saharan Africa.
Also this article is super weird in general. A successful African country that approached Western living standards wouldn't give a fuck about black Americans any more than the UK cares that much about white people in Montenegro or whatnot.
Also this article is super weird in general. A successful African country that approached Western living standards wouldn't give a fuck about black Americans any more than the UK cares that much about white people in Montenegro or whatnot.
Zantetsuken
Member
I have to say, I agree with this. I really don't think we're respected anywhere.
Speaking of my anecdotes in Ghana through Peace Corps, reverse-racism is a very real and harmful piece of culture there. Whitening cream is hugely popular. I remember one Ghanaian trying to explain why reverse-racism exists: white people are "more evolved". My opinion as someone with light skin was far more respected.
I think it's a two-way deal here: African-Americans and Africans need to boost each other up together. Obama is a real inspiration for many people in Africa. Now, in the minds of some I've discussed with, black people can do more than hip-hop and sports. It's not just white people who can go far.
Perhaps something similar to Peace Corps, but for African-Americans mainly, would be beneficial. That could go a long way. The culture in Ghana, and several other parts of Africa, is complacent in not pushing a more capitalist (contentious word, I know) society. It's collective to a damaging degree. You don't save money if you have it; you must give it to those who say they need that money.
The book African Friends and Money Matters explains some of these issues very well. There's a culture trap, brought about by all the pillaging, slave-raiding, etc., that the first-world wrought on Africa.
I think it's a two-way deal here: African-Americans and Africans need to boost each other up together. Obama is a real inspiration for many people in Africa. Now, in the minds of some I've discussed with, black people can do more than hip-hop and sports. It's not just white people who can go far.
Perhaps something similar to Peace Corps, but for African-Americans mainly, would be beneficial. That could go a long way. The culture in Ghana, and several other parts of Africa, is complacent in not pushing a more capitalist (contentious word, I know) society. It's collective to a damaging degree. You don't save money if you have it; you must give it to those who say they need that money.
The book African Friends and Money Matters explains some of these issues very well. There's a culture trap, brought about by all the pillaging, slave-raiding, etc., that the first-world wrought on Africa.
AetherZX
Member
lolno
The article argues for the need for a first world nation in Africa for black Americams, but the author seems to view Africa as monolithic, thus making a shared interest between Africans and black Americans easy.
There's no guarantee a successful wealthy first world nation in sub Saharan Africa would altruistically care for the rest of the region, or continent, let alone populations of non-nationals abroad because of shared skin color in a Western racial paradigm.
Weird indeed.
I think this is a huge factor that is often forgotten.
Shit, on a micro scale, you see this in my city (Baton Rouge).
gutter_trash
Banned
isn't Senegal successful?
... they're allied with the USSR?
JordanN
Banned
Based on???
If that was true then stuff like Germany invading Poland, Japan invading Korea/China or America invading Iraq would never happen.
Having a successful background has never meant much if the reason you're being targeted to begin with is because people hate your guts.
Even within America, blacks being successful doesn't end racism/gain more respect. See what happen to Black wall street.
We also read stories that even the poorest poor white person, still has an infinitely higher chance of getting employment over a black person who holds a degree.
Other than being an example they wouldn't do shit for African Americans.
I don't think you understand what Carthage as an entity was....they kept the nomads of the Sahara at bay by using mercenaries from other parts of North Africa. Carthage spent its efforts in the Mediterranean basin as its mother nation, Phoenicia, did. They were a Punic culture, like their mother nation, Phoenicia. They're about as African as the Hittites were. The Mediterranean basin was its own geopolitical sphere of the day, and everything outside of it and the Levant, be it Germany, the Sahara, or Arabia functioning as 'others' to be enslaved, traded with, or payed off.
Not to mention, Carthage was a power in the Western Mediterranean with colonies in Spain, Sardinia and the like. While yes, Sicily was Greek at the time, I don't think you'd have seen him march into Greece anytime soon. Far more likely to march into what was then Provence or Rome and leave Carthage fulfilled for a generation or two.
Hey, having a strong example can be a powerful thing.
Plus future tech and bitch slapping the rest of the world from time to time
- Status