I do accept that Africa is the least developed continent. What I do not accept is that the term "basket case" became appropriate when the European empires were replaced by native rule 60 years ago which is your point expressed here.
"
What have Africans ever done for us?
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
MTM
"We can "backdate" it if you like, fine by me."
A rather grudging acceptance of the fact that you are wrong i.e. if you are going to use the term "basket case" for an entire continent such as Africa, it applies just as well to the centuries Africa was under the control of European countries as it does to the 60 years since.
So your comment that it only applies in the last 60 years since independence is incorrect by your own definitions.
Once you accept that "we can backdate the term "basket case", your second argument goes out of the window i.e. that Africa hasn't progressed as much as it should have in the last 60 years.
First if the European empires did very little to avoid Africa being described the "basket case" despite being in control for centuries, we can hardly berate the native African governments who had previously been given limited or zero involvement in nation building from not making large advances in 60 years.
Particularly in an environment in which political imperialism has been often replaced by economic imperialism in which the huge European multinationals dominate and offshore their profits as they do in many countries and maintain their positions of power with huge bribes as they do in Asia.
Even then it is worth pointing out that over the past decade six of the world's ten fastest-growing countries were African. Admittedly coming off a very low base. In eight of the past ten years, Africa has grown faster than East Asia, including Japan. Even allowing for the knock-on effect of the northern hemisphere's slowdown, the IMF expects Africa to grow by 6% about the same as Asia.
A rather grudging acceptance of the fact that you are wrong i.e. if you are going to use the term "basket case" for an entire continent such as Africa, it applies just as well to the centuries Africa was under the control of European countries as it does to the 60 years since.
So your comment that it only applies in the last 60 years since independence is incorrect by your own definitions.
Once you accept that "we can backdate the term "basket case", your second argument goes out of the window i.e. that Africa hasn't progressed as much as it should have in the last 60 years.
First if the European empires did very little to avoid Africa being described the "basket case" despite being in control for centuries, we can hardly berate the native African governments who had previously been given limited or zero involvement in nation building from not making large advances in 60 years.
Particularly in an environment in which political imperialism has been often replaced by economic imperialism in which the huge European multinationals dominate and offshore their profits as they do in many countries and maintain their positions of power with huge bribes as they do in Asia.
Even then it is worth pointing out that over the past decade six of the world's ten fastest-growing countries were African. Admittedly coming off a very low base. In eight of the past ten years, Africa has grown faster than East Asia, including Japan. Even allowing for the knock-on effect of the northern hemisphere's slowdown, the IMF expects Africa to grow by 6% about the same as Asia.
-
Milk Tray Man
- Posts: 240
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: MTM
David Johnson wrote:
> A rather grudging acceptance of the fact that you are wrong
> i.e. if you are going to use the term "basket case" for an
> entire continent such as Africa, it applies just as well to the
> centuries Africa was under the control of European countries as
> it does to the 60 years since.
No, this is just quibbling over the time scale. Agreeing with your point that things were far from perfect under the empires does not negate my original point that African states have by and large failed miserably since gaining their independence.
> Once you accept that "we can backdate the term "basket case",
> your second argument goes out of the window i.e. that Africa
> hasn't progressed as much as it should have in the last 60
> years.
>
> First if the European empires did very little to avoid Africa
> being described the "basket case" despite being in control for
> centuries, we can hardly berate the native African governments
> who had previously been given limited or zero involvement in
> nation building from not making large advances in 60 years.
Except that can berate them. They have systematically failed on a massive scale due to incompetence & corruption. Irrespective of "economic imperialism" or whaterver you want to call it, and despite the billions upon billions that western countries have pumped into the place over the past 6 decades.
> Particularly in an environment in which political imperialism
> has been often replaced by economic imperialism in which the
> huge European multinationals dominate and offshore their
> profits as they do in many countries and maintain their
> positions of power with huge bribes as they do in Asia.
And yet Asia is still more prosperous (albeit far from perfect).
> Even then it is worth pointing out that over the past decade
> six of the world's ten fastest-growing countries were African.
> Admittedly coming off a very low base. In eight of the past
> ten years, Africa has grown faster than East Asia, including
> Japan. Even allowing for the knock-on effect of the northern
> hemisphere's slowdown, the IMF expects Africa to grow by 6%
> about the same as Asia.
all relative though.
> A rather grudging acceptance of the fact that you are wrong
> i.e. if you are going to use the term "basket case" for an
> entire continent such as Africa, it applies just as well to the
> centuries Africa was under the control of European countries as
> it does to the 60 years since.
No, this is just quibbling over the time scale. Agreeing with your point that things were far from perfect under the empires does not negate my original point that African states have by and large failed miserably since gaining their independence.
> Once you accept that "we can backdate the term "basket case",
> your second argument goes out of the window i.e. that Africa
> hasn't progressed as much as it should have in the last 60
> years.
>
> First if the European empires did very little to avoid Africa
> being described the "basket case" despite being in control for
> centuries, we can hardly berate the native African governments
> who had previously been given limited or zero involvement in
> nation building from not making large advances in 60 years.
Except that can berate them. They have systematically failed on a massive scale due to incompetence & corruption. Irrespective of "economic imperialism" or whaterver you want to call it, and despite the billions upon billions that western countries have pumped into the place over the past 6 decades.
> Particularly in an environment in which political imperialism
> has been often replaced by economic imperialism in which the
> huge European multinationals dominate and offshore their
> profits as they do in many countries and maintain their
> positions of power with huge bribes as they do in Asia.
And yet Asia is still more prosperous (albeit far from perfect).
> Even then it is worth pointing out that over the past decade
> six of the world's ten fastest-growing countries were African.
> Admittedly coming off a very low base. In eight of the past
> ten years, Africa has grown faster than East Asia, including
> Japan. Even allowing for the knock-on effect of the northern
> hemisphere's slowdown, the IMF expects Africa to grow by 6%
> about the same as Asia.
all relative though.
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: MTM
"No, this is just quibbling over the time scale. Agreeing with your point that things were far from perfect under the empires does not negate my original point that African states have by and large failed miserably since gaining their independence. "
No. This is a key point. You are not "just quibbling over the time scale" you have accepted that the term "basket case" could be backdated to describe Africa under various European countries.
So if a country like Britain with its centuries' long experience of parliamentary democracy, economic growth, the most powerful country in the world, can control African countries for centuries whilst still producing "basket cases" what chances do people who had little or no experience/training in good governance have of succeeding in the level of improvements you appear to be looking for in a period of 60 years?
Very little.
As for Asia, this only applies if you are very selective. People seem to think South Korea is typical of Asian success stories. It isn't. It is the exception rather than the rule. Are Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Afghanistan, Burma, Cambodia etc. experiencing large levels of improvements in the lot of the ordinary people? I don't think so.
No. This is a key point. You are not "just quibbling over the time scale" you have accepted that the term "basket case" could be backdated to describe Africa under various European countries.
So if a country like Britain with its centuries' long experience of parliamentary democracy, economic growth, the most powerful country in the world, can control African countries for centuries whilst still producing "basket cases" what chances do people who had little or no experience/training in good governance have of succeeding in the level of improvements you appear to be looking for in a period of 60 years?
Very little.
As for Asia, this only applies if you are very selective. People seem to think South Korea is typical of Asian success stories. It isn't. It is the exception rather than the rule. Are Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Afghanistan, Burma, Cambodia etc. experiencing large levels of improvements in the lot of the ordinary people? I don't think so.
-
Milk Tray Man
- Posts: 240
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: What have Africans ever done for us?
Game of chess now.
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: What have Africans ever done for us?
Maybe, but that is what discussions/debates are about, aren't they?
Testing out people's viewpoints and highlighting flaws in their arguments/defences to use the chess analogy?
Testing out people's viewpoints and highlighting flaws in their arguments/defences to use the chess analogy?
-
Milk Tray Man
- Posts: 240
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: MTM
David Johnson wrote:
> So if a country like Britain with its centuries' long
> experience of parliamentary democracy, economic growth, the
> most powerful country in the world, can control African
> countries for centuries whilst still producing "basket cases"
> what chances do people who had little or no experience/training
> in good governance have of succeeding in the level of
> improvements you appear to be looking for in a period of 60
> years?
I agree that Africa's problems predate independence.
You agree that Africa is still today by far the least developed continent.
I am of the opinion that post-independence governments could and should have done far more to improve the lots of their people and make their countries more prosperous, and that they have for the most part utterly failed their people over the past 50 or 60 years.
You on the other hand prefer to blame most of it on centuries of imperial rule by the "white man" and largely excuse all the corruption and infighting of the past 6 decades because it was "our" fault and hey, they've only had 60 years in which to start sorting their shit out.
That seems to me to be the main point on which we disagree.
All that stuff about the underdeveloped Asian countries you keep mentioning is irrelevant really. Yes they exist but in the context of this discussion so what? This is about africa.
> So if a country like Britain with its centuries' long
> experience of parliamentary democracy, economic growth, the
> most powerful country in the world, can control African
> countries for centuries whilst still producing "basket cases"
> what chances do people who had little or no experience/training
> in good governance have of succeeding in the level of
> improvements you appear to be looking for in a period of 60
> years?
I agree that Africa's problems predate independence.
You agree that Africa is still today by far the least developed continent.
I am of the opinion that post-independence governments could and should have done far more to improve the lots of their people and make their countries more prosperous, and that they have for the most part utterly failed their people over the past 50 or 60 years.
You on the other hand prefer to blame most of it on centuries of imperial rule by the "white man" and largely excuse all the corruption and infighting of the past 6 decades because it was "our" fault and hey, they've only had 60 years in which to start sorting their shit out.
That seems to me to be the main point on which we disagree.
All that stuff about the underdeveloped Asian countries you keep mentioning is irrelevant really. Yes they exist but in the context of this discussion so what? This is about africa.
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: MTM
"You agree that Africa is still today by far the least developed continent"
I think I said it was the least developed continent. I can't recall using the phrase "by far". Maybe I did.
"You on the other hand prefer to blame most of it on centuries of imperial rule by the "white man" and largely excuse all the corruption and infighting of the past 6 decades because it was "our" fault and hey, they've only had 60 years in which to start sorting their shit out."
This is a misrepresentation. I do not "excuse all the corruption and infighting of the past 6 decades because it was our fault". WHere have I stated anything like that?
I have merely made the point that if the richest country in the world with huge economic power and long lasting parliamentary government can run a country for centuries and it is still a "basket case" (and you agreed with the use of this term) what chance has a native government with no such history, limited or no government experience/expertise have in turning things round in 60 years.
THat is nothing like the words that you are putting into my mouth.
"All that stuff about the underdeveloped Asian countries you keep mentioning is irrelevant really. Yes they exist but in the context of this discussion so what? This is about africa."
Err, you were the one who stated "And yet Asia is still more prosperous" I simply stated that it depends how selective you are in terms of which countries you choose for comparison and whether or not Asian countries were more prosperous anyway, under Empire than African ones.
I think I said it was the least developed continent. I can't recall using the phrase "by far". Maybe I did.
"You on the other hand prefer to blame most of it on centuries of imperial rule by the "white man" and largely excuse all the corruption and infighting of the past 6 decades because it was "our" fault and hey, they've only had 60 years in which to start sorting their shit out."
This is a misrepresentation. I do not "excuse all the corruption and infighting of the past 6 decades because it was our fault". WHere have I stated anything like that?
I have merely made the point that if the richest country in the world with huge economic power and long lasting parliamentary government can run a country for centuries and it is still a "basket case" (and you agreed with the use of this term) what chance has a native government with no such history, limited or no government experience/expertise have in turning things round in 60 years.
THat is nothing like the words that you are putting into my mouth.
"All that stuff about the underdeveloped Asian countries you keep mentioning is irrelevant really. Yes they exist but in the context of this discussion so what? This is about africa."
Err, you were the one who stated "And yet Asia is still more prosperous" I simply stated that it depends how selective you are in terms of which countries you choose for comparison and whether or not Asian countries were more prosperous anyway, under Empire than African ones.
-
Milk Tray Man
- Posts: 240
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: MTM
David Johnson wrote:
> Err, you were the one who stated "And yet Asia is still more
> prosperous"
Yes ... but only in response to this from you:
> Particularly in an environment in which political imperialism
> has been often replaced by economic imperialism in which the
> huge European multinationals dominate and offshore their
> profits as they do in many countries and maintain their
> positions of power with huge bribes as they do in Asia.
> Err, you were the one who stated "And yet Asia is still more
> prosperous"
Yes ... but only in response to this from you:
> Particularly in an environment in which political imperialism
> has been often replaced by economic imperialism in which the
> huge European multinationals dominate and offshore their
> profits as they do in many countries and maintain their
> positions of power with huge bribes as they do in Asia.
-
Milk Tray Man
- Posts: 240
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: MTM
David Johnson wrote:
> This is a misrepresentation. I do not "excuse all the
> corruption and infighting of the past 6 decades because it was
> our fault". WHere have I stated anything like that?
Apologies. I realised after I'd posted it that I'd phrased that badly. What I meant wasn't that you were claiming that the corruption etc. was our fault.
What I meant was that you appear (to me) to be dismissing the post-colonial corruption & infighting as minor/irrelevant issues because really, it was the empires that were the main cause of Africa's problems and that 60 years is no time at all to start putting your house in order.
I don't agree with that - I think that a LOT more could and should have been done in that time - but clearly i'm not going to change your mind and you aren't going to change mine so as you suggested above, maybe time to agree to disagree.
> This is a misrepresentation. I do not "excuse all the
> corruption and infighting of the past 6 decades because it was
> our fault". WHere have I stated anything like that?
Apologies. I realised after I'd posted it that I'd phrased that badly. What I meant wasn't that you were claiming that the corruption etc. was our fault.
What I meant was that you appear (to me) to be dismissing the post-colonial corruption & infighting as minor/irrelevant issues because really, it was the empires that were the main cause of Africa's problems and that 60 years is no time at all to start putting your house in order.
I don't agree with that - I think that a LOT more could and should have been done in that time - but clearly i'm not going to change your mind and you aren't going to change mine so as you suggested above, maybe time to agree to disagree.