A durable solution for Africa

[Fragony]

I can think of only one, and it's rather drastic, let's recolonise parts of the damn place, with force if needed. Birthrates are too high it can never be sustainable, but we can hardly let them starve either. We have the expertise to make sure there is enough food, and the military capacity to ensure the stability. In a period of 30 years we can build it up the and teach them how to do it themselves, after that we leave. We would be taking away their freedom and dignity, but in the long term we would help them. Africa will not improve when left to their own devices

[Major Robert Dump]

If there were a way to move the continent farther away from Yemen well that would be a start.

[Papewaio]

Isn't the overall stats for Africa improving... not as fast as India or let alone China, but overall Africa as a continent is getting better... particularly the non-oil countries.

[Cute Wolf]

well. africa is pretty up right now, but who can tell that China, no more than 30 years ago is also still up as well and now they are better than USA in some aspects?

[HoreTore]

Isn't the overall stats for Africa improving... not as fast as India or let alone China, but overall Africa as a continent is getting better... particularly the non-oil countries.

7 of the countries on the top 10 list for highest expected economic growth in the next 10 years are african.

They are all relatively politically stavle, howevr. That is the main factor in Africa, not economic system or resources, but stability and peace.

[Adrian II]

They are all relatively politically stavle, howevr.

You mean 'stable' dictatorships in which the undeserving few usurp all the riches.

I wouldn't mind colonising any backward dictatorship, if only it were feasible. There will be tremendous resistance however, and even in places where there isn't, it will be impossible to enforce democracy, install a middle class, raise education levels and improve productivity without the whole operation spiralling into chaos. I mean, whom would you entrust with mission? Ngo's?

AII

[Centurion1]

You mean 'stable' dictatorships in which the undeserving few usurp all the riches.

I wouldn't mind colonising any backward dictatorship, if only it were feasible. There will be tremendous resistance however, and even in places where there isn't, it will be impossible to enforce democracy, install a middle class, raise education levels and improve productivity without the whole operation spiralling into chaos. I mean, whom would you entrust with mission? Ngo's?

AII

Don't we all dream for that one Cinncinnatus esque military genius? A man (or woman) who is smart enough to rule and fix somewhere like this but who is incorruptible and truly wishes to bring the nation up......

Unfortunately such individuals with the ability to seize power are few and far between and those who could do so are usually found within the worlds western militaries. Which is nearly worthless because what fragony is suggesting is likely to never happen.

[HoreTore]

You mean 'stable' dictatorships in which the undeserving few usurp all the riches.

AII

No, I do not.

[classical_hero]

I can think of only one, and it's rather drastic, let's recolonise parts of the damn place, with force if needed. Birthrates are too high it can never be sustainable, but we can hardly let them starve either. We have the expertise to make sure there is enough food, and the military capacity to ensure the stability. In a period of 30 years we can build it up the and teach them how to do it themselves, after that we leave. We would be taking away their freedom and dignity, but in the long term we would help them. Africa will not improve when left to their own devices

And if they don't comply we can just send them to concentration camps. Yeah.

[Fragony]

And if they don't comply we can just send them to concentration camps. Yeah.

Why if we just stop feeding them they die out of theirselves no

[Skullheadhq]

The most durable solution for Africa is just to not care, look the other way and let them solve everything themselves like we did ourselves. Placing them on a food-and-money infuse isn't helping anyone and is just killing any impulse to let them do anything themselves, it is just a neverending cycle. Africa is fertile enough, they should manage.

[Fragony]

The most durable solution for Africa is just to not care, look the other way and let them solve everything themselves like we did ourselves. Placing them on a food-and-money infuse isn't helping anyone and is just killing any impulse to let them do anything themselves, it is just a neverending cycle. Africa is fertile enough, they should manage.

Horrible but true, but we got to be able to help somehow, you don't just let your fellow humans die

[Skullheadhq]

Horrible but true, but we got to be able to help somehow, you don't just let your fellow humans die

If we feed them now, the next food crisis will be 8 times worse. Somalia obviously can't handle this huge number of inhabitants.

[rory_20_uk]

Yes, leave them alone.

The reasons loads of africans die in the famines is because there are too many people for the land to support and the rulers can also use famine as a weapon in itself.

We let our fellow humans die all the time. But it would be better for them to die once rather than cling on to life, have a litter of malnourished children and for the cycle to continue.

The concept of a country taking over a piece of Africa, replacing the existing beaurocratic apparatus with something that works better, possibly even redefining borders and then leaving the locals to sort themselves out is tantamount to Racism as you are clearly saying that the locals are less able to do this than Europeans.

[Skullheadhq]

The concept of a country taking over a piece of Africa, replacing the existing beaurocratic apparatus with something that works better, possibly even redefining borders and then leaving the locals to sort themselves out is tantamount to Racism as you are clearly saying that the locals are less able to do this than Europeans.

Because it is regarded as racist doesn't mean it doesn't work better. And the locals have, over the course of 60 years, clearly shown that they are less able. The permanent state of civil war and food crises just proves it.

[Strike For The South]

Europe installs ruthless colonial regimes which pillage the natural resources, all the while pllaying ethnic and tribal strife against eachother

Then Europe leaves in the dead of night leaving the colonial head crackers in charge. They in turn become ruthless despots...surprise

Now we should do it again?

[Jolt]

Europe installs ruthless colonial regimes which pillage the natural resources, all the while pllaying ethnic and tribal strife against eachother

Then Europe leaves in the dead of night leaving the colonial head crackers in charge. They in turn become ruthless despots...surprise

Now we should do it again?

Quite a few countries had a choice between becoming South Africa or Zaire.

I do distinctly recall Belgian government in the 60's having a phased plan for independence, where they would build up the country and actually build up a pluralist-minded ruling elite, who would little by little take-over and assume control, starting with the municipal administrative regions. Elections would be held repeatedly while still under Belgian sovereignty, which would make sure that those who ventured politics in Congo were not unaccountable warlords or people with blatant disregard for the rule of Law or autocratic tendencies. So as the people and ruling elites would gain some measure of pluralist culture over the decades, with the appearance of different parties et al. and the appearance of accountability of the Congo politicians to the people, Congo would become actually a viable country, some sort of African Brazil. Instead the elites wanted immediate power, played upon the frustrations of the people, and massacred enough Belgians that the events surpassed the Belgian plans and they got what they wanted: Total and immediate power. The rest of the history can be guessed. It's just about the same thing as your average African country. Worse even.

Plans had been made for roughly the same purpose in the Portuguese African colonies.

[Adrian II]

I do distinctly recall Belgian government in the 60's having a phased plan for independence, where they would build up the country and actually build up a pluralist-minded ruling elite [..]

Hahahahaha!

Seriously, Belgian rule of the Congo is generally recognised as being among the worst colonial regimes ever. The Belgians made a total mess of it, they left in a hurry and all they could do was pick a probable winner in the ensuing power struggle in which the US, the Soviets and South Africa were already involved as rival outside forces.

AII

[Banquo's Ghost]

Advocates of imperialism should always consider how keen they would be for the situation to be reversed. To be consistent, European imperialists should welcome the armed intervention of the People's Liberation Army to come and sort out our inability to run our own countries.

Unwanted colonisation seems to be a subject that exercises Fragony most of the time - odd to see him advocating it as a solution for others.

[Subotan]

I'm going to be obscenely pretentious, and quote some poetry to make my point. It's Kipling, funnily enough.

Take up the White Man's Burden
The Savage wars of peace-
Fill the mouth full of famine
And bid the sickness cease.

[HoreTore]

Hahahahaha!

Seriously, Belgian rule of the Congo is generally recognised as being among the worst colonial regimes ever. The Belgians made a total mess of it, they left in a hurry and all they could do was pick a probable winner in the ensuing power struggle in which the US, the Soviets and South Africa were already involved as rival outside forces.

AII

The source of Congo's problems is not that the colonists left too soon, but that they have never left.

[Jolt]

Hahahahaha!

Seriously, Belgian rule of the Congo is generally recognised as being among the worst colonial regimes ever. The Belgians made a total mess of it, they left in a hurry and all they could do was pick a probable winner in the ensuing power struggle in which the US, the Soviets and South Africa were already involved as rival outside forces.

AII

Oh, I'm quite aware of that. Not one of the worst, but up to par with the German methods, it is THE worst. Nevertheless, the massive brutality ended after the transfer of sovereignty from the King to the country, and improved after World War 2. The 50's/60's saw a gradual improvement in the treatment of the African population, which is exactly when there was the discussions to build up the native elite to rule.

Portuguese colonization on the other hand, always placed a great deal of influence on the intermingling between colonial and native populations. So much that when the revolt started in Angola (Imported from Belgian Congo, where they thought that with similar handful massacres they could also scare the Portuguese into running away.) a lot of the native population actually sided with the Portuguese. So much that there were plenty more dead black people (Portuguese supporters) than white people in those initial massacres. Plus there was a broad support from the native population to maintaining the Portuguese administration. The expansion of infrastructure and native education in the colony withered away the support that the independence movements had. But obviously the economy was mostly agricultural and small-scale industry.

That is the type of colonization I do propose, with the adaptations needed to suit the modern day's challenges and opportunities.

[Papewaio]

Meh I think Gandhi and India is a better choice of colonial transition.

Mind you I think the reason Gandhi looked such a good option was a choice to go violent and then have to front up against the Seikhs... something even Indian Prime Minister have regretted doing.

[Papewaio]

Gees which country rebelled again and in it's document of rebellion complained about the use of mercenaries?

Mercs have a dirty name because they are used as security guards and get into all sorts of trouble like Fallujah, shooting into markets because they are full of people like that is an unusual thing for a market or they are used for really unsavory things.

Mercs are the dictionary definition of money grabbing greed by violence.
They are an expensive way to create, to train, to inflame and to justify asymmetric warfare against the state that pays for them.