Africa is a lost cause.

I think that we must understand the past to be able to progress into the future.

First, some of these SEA countries that you mentioned like Singapore have next to no natural resources. So, a sustained push to maintain the colonial connections to them will be different to African nations. Which imperial nation will want to see Singapore fail, in order to remain a docile nation that is open to international looting. However, there are nations that will not want some African nations to progress, so that it will be easier for them to sell their resources for less than 1% of the real value. Let us not act naive in the game of international politics and economics. It is in the best interest of some nations not to see other nations prosper.

Let me give you an example, there are large quantities of Uranium in Niger (an African nation and a former colony of France). Now, France has a lot of nuclear reactors that provide energy for its citizens, where some uranium comes from Niger at a cheap price. So, imagine if Niger was a stable and functioning country according to Western standards, it will be almost unaffordable for France to sustain their reactors using Uranium from these sorts of nations. I am not stating that France is an evil country or does dodgy deals. I am just giving an example of weak economic and political situations that can help other countries to acquire resources in the easiest possible way. There are many other examples, including Nigeria’s oil to the US and South African diamonds to the UK.

Colonization is a factor that has caused some of the problems in Africa. The divide and rule approach used by colonial powers helped to weaken the community cohesion in many nations in Africa. Unfortunately, they are still experiencing new forms of colonization in many African nations thorugh economic debt and dependence. For example, many African countries with citizens living below the poverty line have their governments struggling to pay the debts that were incurred many decades, some of which had little to do with the people. Even now, we still see some countries such economic debt as leverage to influence local political decisions within these same nations. Imagine causing some trouble in a nation, selling them weapons plus giving them loans and then asking for their resources in exchange for "economic reform", which is often a gimmick to sell national resources and infrastructure to private corporations owned by the allies of these same nations.

Two, it was during the colonial times that many tiny African nations were merged together to form larger nations for better governance by the Colonial Powers. For example, Nigeria was formally joined together in 1914 by a random dude known as Fredrick Lugard. Now, this man and his cronies amalgamated very distinct communities and nation states with very different beliefs, traditions and values to form a country. This in turn has caused the nation to be very difficult to govern. You know how the tension is between Scotland, Wales, Ireland and England with Westminster and governance? Try to multiply that by 100 times and you will not even get close to the situation that tribalism affects nation-building in Nigeria. If you have the time to do some research, attempt to study the tribalism in Nigeria’s regions and you will see how messed up the situation has become. Now, you think that Colonization should not be brought up, I think that it should.

Three, the effects of colonization and corruption encouraged by some Western leaders has encouraged the existence of poor infrastructure. Weak infrastructure and poor security have caused basic economic activities to be difficult to conduct. The problems in African nations have evolved over time. The root cause may have now become grey, but it is still a cause.

Now, I understand that there should not be an excuse for failure, but I hope that you can appreciate that many countries are still reeking from the effects of colonization.

I am optimistic about the future for Africans and their homeland of Africa.

At least you seem reasonable, so I can talk to you civilly. I agree with some points, but will highlight those I disagree with:

Now this is contradictory and faulty reasoning; you first make the claim that Singapore has no natural resources, then followed by saying its good that Singapore does not fail so it can remain open to looting.

Looting is the taking away of resources, and you just stated Singapore has no resources.

This might be true in the past, but presently the western world doesnt really need to do much to inflame the situation. In fact, most troubles post-colonialism is caused by tribal war. This simply means the western powers took advantage of the situation. Even in colonial times, Imperial powers did not cause tribal tension-they merely exacerbated it.

This is true, but this was a strategy used in every Asian colony as well. The British were training Malays (bumiputra policy) to be political leaders, whilst systemically discriminating against the wealthy chinese. This is the same for Thailand, Indonesia etc etc where races were played off against each other. This is not unique to Africa.

What is different however, is that Asians (and the Chinese) are extremely adaptive-The Chinese have been insulted and ridiculed for not holding on to culture, and infact assimilated ridiculously quick, adopting thai and indo identities, which explains the success Chinese have in the region up to today. In contrast, African nations are extremely tribal-it seems that out of pride, most would rather die defending traditions. This is the problem-which was what I said from the start: Colonization did cause problems, made some worse but ultimately, Africa is in such a state because of its own cultures and traditions.

Exactly the same in Southeast Asia.

You can be, but Im not particularly optimistic about countries which recently passed bills supporting the killing and jailing of homosexuals

Hello.

Allow me to attempt to provide comments to your post

For Singapore: I do not think that I contradicted myself. I meant that Singapore not having resources did not provide any strategic interest on the nation with respect to any resources. As a result, many global powers did not see it fit or good investment to stir up issues in the country as a tactic to destabilize the country.

No, I think that the western world does things to inflame matters. This occurs not only in Africa, but other places including the Middle East, where you see nations supporting both sides with weapons and rhetoric and then watching the nation to implode. For example, if in the UK an anti-Scotland politician like Nigel Farage became a “Secretary” in charge of Scotland, do you think that it will settle well with the Scots? This has happened in many African countries, where western powers "select" a radical or dodgy person from a tiny tribal group to lead the nation. This is in turn causes political infractions and then conflicts. It is just a game that they play; everyone knows it.

I agree that the issue of cultural adaptation with the Chinese may be different to the Africans, but these are two different places with very different cultures. Yes, Africans need to become more adaptable to changing international situations, but I think that historical issues have caused many Africans to stick fastidiously to their ways of life.

No offense to you, but I think that the issue of homosexual relationship or the LGBT community is the least of Africa’s problems right now. Just like what the Kenyan and Nigerian Presidents told Barack Obama, there are many issues in Africa including poor education, recurring civil conflicts, religiously conflicts, mass epidemics including Ebola, rubbish infrastructure, health care, women’s rights, infant mortality, diseases, low life expectancy and numerous other problems; the issue of homosexuality is a non-issue to most Africans. In Kenya and Nigerian, the topic of homosexual rights has been debated openly in their respective parliaments and the votes banning it passed.

I do not think that it is the right move for the African Governments to make and I personally have nothing against the LGBT community, but I think that the presence of homosexuality in Africa must pass through several forms of consciousness, like it did in the West. Many decades ago, we had homosexuals being lynched and killed on the streets of Western nations, then it was made legal and the LGBT community, where given Civil Partnership rights. Just like racial relations that merely 70 years ago, blacks were treated like animals in the US and are now gradually being accepted. The countries passed through several stages of consciousness with regard to racial relationships. it was just recently (last year in the UK and this year in the US) that gay marriage was made legal. I think that Africans should be allowed to progress through the stages of acceptance like the Westerners did. It does not make sense for Westerners and their leaders to debate the topic of gay rights in their Parliaments and Courts and pass it, then force other countries to accept it out of whim. Africans are not animals that should be told what to do.

The reason why I am optimistic about Africa and Africans is because they will accept the cultural changes. It may not be today, but it will definitely happen. Unfortunately, some people may suffer or die to see significant change happen, like race revolution in the West. Africa is currently undergoing a cultural revolution and the West should help to guide it and not try to force rapid change like the colonial times.

well, the first part is almost correct.

Singapore has no natural resources like diamonds, or coal, or gas. But it has a unique resource-people. This is a different and hard to categorize thing; you cannot extract people the way you can diamonds; yet slavery also shows it is possible to some extent to do so.

In Singapore and Malaysia, the way the colonial British government 'stirred up' issues to control the colony (the only real resource this region had at the time was deep waters, a strategic location crucial to sea trading) and thus exploit the harbour was, as I mentioned, the 'bumiputra' policy which pitted Malays against Chinese. So it is not correct to say they did not stir up things they way they did in Africa.

Second: We know geopolitics is a thing. We know countries can be selective in how they deal with others; everyone does it. What im saying is that due to Africa's underlying tribal culture, which does not manifest as strongly in just about every other part of the world, things escalate very, very easily. This tribal culture was not created by colonial powers. It is merely a facet (a bad one at that) of African culture. What Africans should realize, right now, is that culture is not always a good thing. Most people are proud of their traditions and cultures, and would defend it to the death-which is exactly the problem. Pretending all cultures are equal and refusing to accept some can be better than others is merely ignoring the problem, which is a common thing I see with Africans in general (of course, exceptions exist-M.L. King for example).

Lastly, my problem with homosexual rights is not that gay marriage is not allowed. I do understand it times take to progress. But look around the Western world. Look around conservative Asia. Everyone else, save Africa and Russia, there is progress. But in Africa, there is regression. New laws are being implemented to further oppress an already marginalized group. It is not, as Nigeria's president claims, simply ignoring LGBT rights for the moment and focusing on more important economic/political issues. In fact, this reeks of Nazisim where Hitler specifically choose to target crippled and homosexual Germans.

It might seem like a small issue to you, but for those homosexuals living under the threat of torture and execution, I doubt they will be much placated by your flimsy rebuttal

I repeat, it is not only that there is no progress, there is regression. This did not happen in Europe.

So, while we are on the topic of progress, I still fail to see progress, at least on the social side of things. If anything, there is regression.

The problem with Africa is the mentality of Africans.

I understand that most government or ministers are corrupt to some extent, but African politicians are on a whole different level. Genocides against other tribes/races are commonplace. Corruption is near absolute at all levels of government. The people are backwards and stubborn (think LGBT/Women's rights).

No amount of aid can solve these fundamental problems. It might just be better for them to each other (i.e western powers simply need to keep out and watch); it wouldnt take long, and rebuilding from scratch would be far easier than trying to resolve deep-seated prejudice and stupidity

Sorry to pry into your private life, but are you are member of the LGBT community? This is because most of your posts on this thread seem to align along the lines of Africa and Africans are backwards because they do not like gay people.

If you are member of the LGBT community, I understand and respect your desire to bring this issue to the fore front. All I can ask is that you put the issue of gay rights aside (while agreeing that it must addressed) and focus on the positives that Africans are currently possessing in their pursuit for self-sufficiency and development.

I hate to think that the reason for your comments on Africa may be because of a perceived emotional outburst on the issues of LGBT rights within Africa. This may result in having a biased view on the situation in Africa. If it is not the case, then I apologise for assuming. I have read a lot of your comments and they all appear to have a recurring theme surrounding gay rights.

I am, but more broadly Libertarian. That said, what I believe or do not believe in has no real impact on my arguments. LGBT rights are a pretty strong indicator of social progress, along with things like women's rights etc etc-all of at which Africa lags behind just about every part of the world. And for certain issues, regression is observed.

Before you claim this is a 'minority issue' where only a few loud and bigoted individuals tar the reputation of everyone,

In 2013, just before Obama’s trip, the Pew Research Center polled nearly 38,000 people in 39 countries and territories, asking them, “Should society accept homosexuality?” Three in five Americans said “yes.” At least 80 percent of Spaniards, Germans, Czechs and Canadians agreed. Pew found very different results in the eight African countries where it polled: In seven of them — including Kenya and two Saharan countries, Egypt and Tunisia — 90 percent or more of respondents answered “no.”

Also, there is a pretty large pool of scientific evidence showing that homosexuality is genetic, or that genetics contribute largely (though not decisively) to a person's orientation-Africans thus either

1) Reject clear scientific evidence
2) Inspite of knowing the homosexuality is by and large not a choice, lynch them anyway

This is the most privileged, ill-thought out and downright disgusting pile of opinions I've heard in a while. "Lost cause" and "wasting money"? "I don't think we should be sending aid"? This is West-centric, racist and capitalist propaganda at its finest.

For a start, the West is directly responsible for much of the suffering African countries are undergoing at the moment (think slavery, colonialism and Western arms dealing) so if you don't think we're obligated to help because it's "nothing to do with us" then you're wrong. Secondly, not even considering the historical background to much of Africa's current situation, just being a human should dictate we help. Your life, your privileged and wealthy (even if only relatively) life, is not worth any more than any African's. Morally and ethically it is so wrong to even suggest what you suggest - in itself it is a form of eugenics and genocide. You are suggesting a passive choosing of those to die to "cleanse" and "liberate" the world of their economic and social demands. It's disgusting. I can't even comprehend how you even think that sacrificing human life is an acceptable suggestion.

Also, there'll be more disease? Sending aid is supposed to combat this disease, for a start. When aid is sent much of it is medication - this eliminates disease and therefore decreases world levels. Also, if disease were to grow, it would be very likely indeed that regardless of how many more people there were it would stay contained within Africa. The economic plight of these people, even with aid, dictates a lack of movement internationally for them.

This post basically translates to "I think I, and people like me who live in similar situations, are worth more than those who suffer as a direct consequence of my ancestors actions. Please don't let them not suffer. I want to stay in a position where I can pretend I'm better than them". Maybe when you're next ill or hurt and you get help or medication or treatment, imagine life without those liberties and privileges. Then think about what you've wished on others and ask for some forgiveness.

I'm tempted to say "had". There are a lot of resources, but Western Companies are sucking most areas bone dry and keeping the profits to themselves. If we remove aid and all forms of western intervention at the same time, that trade might actually pay off (for Africa, that is. Us? we'd be screwed)

Lastly, my problem with homosexual rights is not that gay marriage is not allowed. I do understand it times take to progress. But look around the Western world. Look around conservative Asia. Everyone else, save Africa and Russia, there is progress. But in Africa, there is regresion. New laws are being implemented to further oppress an already marginalized group. It is not, as Nigeria's president claims, simply ignoring LGBT rights for the moment and focusing on more important economic/political issues. In fact, this reeks of Nazisim where Hitler specifically choose to target crippled and homosexual Germans.

It might seem like a small issue to you, but for those homosexuals living under the threat of torture and execution, I doubt they will be much placated by your flimsy rebuttal

I repeat, it is not only that there is no progress, there is regression. This did not happen in Europe.

So, while we are on the topic of progress, I still fail to see progress, at least on the social side of things. If anything, there is regression.