Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How the West is losing Africa and Latin America
The Telegraph ^ | Jeremy Warner

Posted on 04/26/2011 2:27:56 PM PDT by AfricanChristian

Edited on 04/26/2011 3:18:05 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]

On one level, it’s a familiar tale; advanced Western economies elbowed out by pushy Chinese. Yawn. Not much new in that. What’s not generally appreciated, however, is the speed with which this is occuring in many parts of the world, or the scale of it. In both Africa and Latin America, markets which Europe and the US have traditionally regarded as their own preserves, Western interests are being eclipsed by newer, brasher trading relationships with the fast growing economies of China and the rest of Asia. As in so much else, advanced economies are losing out to the developing world. A new study by Renaissance Capital’s Charles Robertson in conjunction with the consultant, Lucy Corkin, has had an in depth look at the phenomenon, and for Western economies, it doesn’t look great. Last year, China surpassed the US as Africa’s largest trading partner, and the relationship is growing at an exponential rate. From Nigeria to Sierra Leone, Angola, Kenya and Ghana, the Chinese seem to be taking over.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: africa; china; latinamerica

1 posted on 04/26/2011 2:28:03 PM PDT by AfricanChristian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

Ping.


2 posted on 04/26/2011 2:37:39 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four fried chickens and a coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AfricanChristian

President Trump will march right into Africa, kick out the Chinese, and take whatever the Africans have as “payment”.

Of course, that will have to wait until he marches into Iraq and Libya and takes all the oil that is “owed to us”.


3 posted on 04/26/2011 2:38:17 PM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AfricanChristian

Now the Chinese can learn for themselves why the West gave up on Africa.


4 posted on 04/26/2011 2:44:11 PM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2; AfricanChristian

Nations are free to make their own choices, even foolish ones.

With Obama as POTUS, I’m not surprised we are losing formerly friendly nations as partners. Obama has stabbed allies in the back - Israel, England, to just name two - and for now other nations are looking elsewhere.

China is trying hard to break out of its formerly isolationist shell, as that nation has rarely if ever extended its influence far beyond the area of near Asia.

We will see what happens, and most likely soon. China has over a billion people who need to keep working, otherwise the Chinese government (which is huge!) will not be sustained.

We live in interesting times.


5 posted on 04/26/2011 2:56:25 PM PDT by SatinDoll (NO FOREIGN NATIONALS AS OUR PRESIDENT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2

If we assume, like you do that Africa is lost cause what about Latin America?


6 posted on 04/26/2011 3:01:45 PM PDT by AfricanChristian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Army Air Corps

Not losing.... ignoring.


7 posted on 04/26/2011 3:02:53 PM PDT by Ouderkirk (Democrats...the party of Slavery, Segregation, Sodomy, and Sedition)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AfricanChristian

Were they ever ours? I think it’s a good thing.When we are deprived of minerals etc.we will be spurred to self sufficiency. The Chinese don’t have oil.They need to import most of their stuff. The US and Canada have most of the minerals and oil we need right here. It’s time we get pushed in that direction.


8 posted on 04/26/2011 3:15:01 PM PDT by Cacique (quos Deus vult perdere, prius dementat ( Islamia Delenda Est ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AfricanChristian
If we assume, like you do that Africa is lost cause what about Latin America?

For better or worse, Latin America has more or less erased its pre-Columbian history. All of the animosities of the indigenous past have disappeared down the rabbit hole of 5 centuries of forced assimilation (into Spanish or Portuguese culture) and inter-marriage between natives and African and European settlers. Latin Americans are basically either Spaniards (LA ex-Brazil) or Portuguese (Brazil) with black, Amerindian, white or racially-mixed features. For the most part, they speak Spanish or Portuguese as their sole native language, worship in Catholic Churches (although it has to be said that evangelical churches are making great strides) and are philosophically and culturally Spanish or Portuguese. This mostly limits the scope of domestic strife to differences arising from ideological disagreements or power struggles. In Africa, the struggles involve blood-and-soil and religious issues of the kind that characterized Hitler's great purge of European Jewry and Islam's murderous rampages (in antiquity) through North Africa, the Middle East, Central Asia and South Asia. Rwanda and Congo were blood-and-soil. Sudan was both blood-and-soil and religious.

9 posted on 04/26/2011 3:52:07 PM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Cacique
The Chinese don’t have oil.They need to import most of their stuff. The US and Canada have most of the minerals and oil we need right here. It’s time we get pushed in that direction.

Actually, the Chinese do have oil. Unfortunately, they produce about 4m barrels per day and use 10m barrels, which means they have a shortfall of 6m barrels per day that they must import. We use 18.7m barrels per day and produce 5.5m barrels per day, for a shortfall of 13m barrels - or twice the Chinese shortfall. The Chinese probably have oil elsewhere, since they've not been producing for very long. The problem is that they want to keep all the profits from striking oil while leaving it to foreign companies to pay for the dry holes - which means few foreign companies want to get involved in Chinese projects:

China is home to some of the world’s richest offshore oil and gas reserves, with proven reserves of 24 billion tons of crude oil and 14 trillion cubic meters of natural gas, equivalent to 126 times the country’s crude oil output and 184 times its natural gas output in 2008.

However, China’s offshore oil development is still hampered by technological and equipment constraints.

“In the current stage, our offshore exploration has been heavily dependent on foreign technology and equipment. It usually costs around $70 million to $100 million for us to drill a new offshore oil well,” said Zhou Baixiu, former assistant to Sinopec’s general manager.

Zhou said the company has been actively involved in international offshore oil development projects in order to acquire modern exploration technology and advanced platform management skills. The company is currently participating in six offshore exploration projects, most of which have a depth of 500-1000 meters.


10 posted on 04/26/2011 4:11:08 PM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Cacique

But if America is anything it is a nation of businesses. Are you advocating that America should withdraw into its shell?

America created the international system after the Second World War because She was confident of being competitive. What do you think America gains from withdrawing from two continents?


11 posted on 04/26/2011 4:54:04 PM PDT by AfricanChristian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: AfricanChristian

Yes, it is. China, on the other hand, is more of a fascist state. American businesses are not interested in risking capital investment in places, such as Africa, where tribal violence and civil wars are all too common. China, on the other hand, will have no problem defending its investments with the PLA in one guise or another.
As for South America, there are a number of American business interests and investments including American investment in some companies. That said, there are some areas of South America where American companies are not keen to do business because American businesses, in the past, were chased out of the nation (usually by communist/nationalist movements).


12 posted on 04/26/2011 6:06:23 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four fried chickens and a coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: AfricanChristian
How the West is losing Africa – and Latin America

Yes, the Chinese won't be trying to respect their thralls in South America and Africa as human beings.

13 posted on 04/26/2011 6:18:42 PM PDT by Mike Darancette (The heresy of heresies was common sense - Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Army Air Corps

I’m not sure you understand “Africa”, there is no such thing as “Africa”. There are fifty three vastly different countries, most of which have been at peace for the past thirty years.

Jim Rogers is one of the very few Americans who has any understanding of “Africa”. He has travelled extensively through the African continent and China, so he understands the issues well. He is also one of the most successful investors and we can see why.


14 posted on 04/26/2011 6:21:43 PM PDT by AfricanChristian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: AfricanChristian

So, what do you expect America to do? You criticise anyone who mentions reasons why AMerican businesses shy away from the continent, yet I read few affirmative statements aside from “America should be in Africa.”


15 posted on 04/26/2011 6:31:58 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four fried chickens and a coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: AfricanChristian

I do know that Africa is a continent with scores of seperate nations. You should also consider that much of what Americans, on average, know of African nations comes from reports about violence in Zimbabwe, violence in Kenya, etc.


16 posted on 04/26/2011 6:37:49 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four fried chickens and a coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: AfricanChristian

I don’t assume Africa is a lost cause; the Western governments did. Africa has a lot of natural resources (gold, oil, diamonds), incredible agricultural potential, and a large number of educated people in some countries.

As young countries (many less than 60 years old), their growing pains have disillusioned people who expected a lot more from them. Time will tell, but they have large obstacles to surmount.

Latin America, though not as young, has many of the same problems, though to a smaller extent. In both cases, the countries involved have to sort out their futures themselves - foreign involvement isn’t bringing about stability without the use of anti-democratic strongmen.


17 posted on 04/26/2011 7:23:16 PM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SatinDoll

China is in the position of manufacturing more than the US market could absorb, so it needs new markets. At the same time it needs natural resources to power the manufacturing, so it is looking in those places in particular.


18 posted on 04/26/2011 7:25:15 PM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AfricanChristian

Last time I checked, Africa and Latin America were made up of sovereign nations and belonged to no one. So, the term “lost” seems a bit strong.


19 posted on 04/26/2011 11:41:51 PM PDT by ponder life
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman; AfricanChristian
President Trump? No way. That blowhard is a phony right from his combover to his shiny patent leather shoes.

Palin is the better bet

Besides which, quite frankly this is a diplomatic and economic issue and the Chinese are winning -- for now.

However, there is also discontent in African countries among the populace of the ways in which the Chinese run their business. The leaders may be happy that someone will do business without bothering about human rights, but the populace don't quite agree..

20 posted on 04/27/2011 3:14:14 AM PDT by Cronos (Christian, redneck, rube and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SatinDoll; kearnyirish2; AfricanChristian

Don’t forget that Indians have always had a significant and deeper presence in Africa than the Chinese.


21 posted on 04/27/2011 3:15:24 AM PDT by Cronos (Christian, redneck, rube and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

“Don’t forget that Indians have always had a significant and deeper presence in Africa than the Chinese.”

They’ve been purged from some of the former British colonies when they attained independence; Uganda & Kenya felt they had no use for them. Also, they weren’t serving as representatives of India itself.


22 posted on 04/27/2011 3:50:09 AM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2
True about being racially attacked -- but many are back, even in Uganda. When Uganda and Kenya kicked out the Indians, their economies collapsed as the businesses were run by Indians.

True also that they were/are not representatives of India itself, but they serve as the initial persons for Indian companies to set up shop here. It would be far more permanent than the Chinese attempts.

23 posted on 04/27/2011 3:52:40 AM PDT by Cronos (Christian, redneck, rube and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

The blacks felt that the Indians had profited from their labor while not working the soil themselves; they also felt that they could do the same function themselves.

This is how Freddy Mercury’s family ended up in England - they were expelled from Zanzibar. It wasn’t really a violent expulsion, but those Asians (unlike the British that left) could take nothing with them.

The former British East Africa has paid the price for that policy ever since.


24 posted on 04/27/2011 3:58:02 AM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei
United States > Energy 2007
Oil > Consumption 20,680,000 bbl/day Time series [1st of 212]
Oil > Exports 1,165,000 bbl/day Time series [16th of 184]
Oil > Production 8,457,000 bbl/day Time series [3rd of 212]
Oil imports > Net 10,400,000 barrels per day [1st of 21]

http://www.nationmaster.com/country/us-united-states/ene-energy

25 posted on 04/27/2011 3:58:04 AM PDT by dennisw (nzt - "works better if you're already smart")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2; AfricanChristian
they also felt that they could do the same function themselves.

True. And AfricanChristian is correct that Africa has a number of different cultures, etc. The Ethiopians and North Africans in particular can't be clubbed with the sub-Saharan africans as their cultures and civilisations have always been in step with the Eurasian land-mass.

I see the problem of the native Americans and Aborigines as related to a civilisation at an earlier stage of development coming upon a civilisation at a much later stage.

What happens is classic -- the women adapt, but the men feel that they can no longer be bread-winners and so sink into alcohol or other substance abuse.

It's not so bad if the civilisation is just a few "steps" behind. But the problem is that much of West Africa and Southern Africa that was not in contact with the Arabs by the 14th century was still very much behind Eurasian powers. In fact, with the notable exceptions of West African Ghana etc states the rest of sub-saharan africa and africa south of Ethiopia was still tribal and nomadic and had not evolved socially beyond that.

They could not cope as a society (note as a society -- individuals brought up in a different culture would act differently -- this is not a race thing) with the heightened development and social needs for industrial farming or trading etc.

The trading was done by the Indians, specifically Gujaratis and Marwaris who have been traders for millenia.

This is similar to the position in Western Europe in the 5th-7th centuries, in Scandanavia from the 7th to the 13th centuries and in Central Europe until the 12th century. The Jews performed the same part in Europe as Indians do in Africa (this of course means that AFrica CAN catch up).

26 posted on 04/27/2011 4:59:52 AM PDT by Cronos (Christian, redneck, rube and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
Thanks. I think Nationmaster's numbers are out-of-date, though. Both domestic demand and supply are too high. My numbers are DOE numbers, of varying vintage, but relatively current. The latest ones came out a couple of weeks ago:

U.S. Liquid Fuels Consumption. Total consumption of petroleum and non-petroleum liquid fuels increased by 380,000 bbl/d (2.0 percent) to 19.1 million bbl/d in 2010 (U.S. Liquid Fuels Consumption Growth Chart). Projected total U.S. liquid fuels consumption increases by 210,000 bbl/d (1.1 percent) in 2011, and by a further 160,000 bbl/d (0.9 percent), to 19.5 million bbl/d, in 2012. Transportation fuels (motor gasoline distillate fuel, and jet fuel) account for about 75 percent of the growth in total consumption in 2011 and almost all of the growth in 2012.

U.S. Liquid Fuels Supply and Imports. Domestic crude oil production, which increased by 150,000 bbl/d in 2010 to 5.51 million bbl/d, declines by 30,000 bbl/d in 2011 and by a further 120,000 bbl/d in 2012 (U.S. Crude Oil Production Chart). The forecast includes Alaska production declines of 60,000 bbl/d in 2011 and 10,000 bbl/d in 2012. EIA expects production from the Federal Gulf of Mexico (GOM) to fall by 190,000 bbl/d in both 2011 and 2012. The forecast production declines in Alaska and the GOM are partially offset by projected increases in lower-48 non-GOM production of 220,000 bbl/d in 2011 and 70,000 bbl/d in 2012.

27 posted on 04/27/2011 5:54:51 AM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

Yeah the nationmaster numbers were 2007 when the economy was a lot better and we didn’t have a Kenyan president sabotaging oil production on US soil


28 posted on 04/27/2011 6:14:56 AM PDT by dennisw (nzt - "works better if you're already smart")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

Your knowledge of Africa is admirable. However, there are a few points I would like to raise.

1. West Africa was the home to many large states in the pre-colonial era with highly developed social systems. Examples include the Yoruba states, Dahomey, the Benin Kingdom and the Kwarafa Kingdom. Central Africa also had many large states like the Kongo kingdom. The Zulus and Xhosas in South Africa also had relatively well developed societies.

2. I agree that there are communities like the Masai, the Pygmies and Kalahari Bushmen who find it extremely difficult to adapt to modern society. Unfortunately, Western media tends to concentrate on these groups creating a warped view of African society.

3. I don’t agree that African have the same problems with adapting to modern society as the native Americans and Aborigines. The success of the African diaspora in Europe and North America shows that the problem is not the inability to adapt to the twenty first century, but the absence of opportunities at home.

4. Indian immigrants are very active economically in Africa but there are other major players like the Lebanese, the Igbo and the Hausa in West Africa and the Kikiyu in East Africa. Kano in Northern Nigeria was and still is a hub of trade between Northern Africa and the Sudan. The Igbo of Nigeria also have play a large role in trade in West Africa.

It is instructive that the richest African is a Hausa-Fulani from Kano.

5. I believe that the Chinese will be more successful than the Indians in the long run. The Indians have a very long history in Africa but have remained a very closed society. The Chinese (this might surprise you), are considered more open the Indians. You are more likely to see Chinese making attempts to interact with the locals than the Indians (they don’t carry the baggage of the Indian caste system with them). In addition, Chinese are more likely to marry local girls than Indians (Jean Ping, head of the African Union is the son of a Chinese trader).

6. A major problem (some say the major problem) with the modern African state is that most African states are artificial. Borders of African states merely reflect French, British, Portuguese and Spanish areas of influence decided in 1884 - 1885 Berlin conference. For example, the British grouped the traditional slave raiders (the Northern Sudanese) with people who traditionally resisted slave raiding (the Southern Sudanese). The Southern Sudanese had much more in common with the Nilotic peoples of East Africa (like the Luo of Kenya) than with the Arabised Sudanese, yet the British still stuck to their guns.

The end result was that 2.5 million people had to lose their lives before a Southern Sudanese state (which should have been created in 1956) came to be.

So much energy is expended in fighting between different ethnic groups in artificial states that development often takes a back seat. A similar situation existed in Europe until the peace of Westphalia was signed and Africa is moving in that direction, albeit violently.

7. The next few decades in Africa are likely to be more peaceful than the previous two for the simple reason that there is finite amount of violence people can take and the growing role of civil society. I cannot see a situation in which Rwanda would revert to the levels of the 1994 massacre in the next two generations and Nigeria has been spared a full blown Civil War because the memory of the last Civil War in which 1 million people died is still fresh. The 2007 crisis in Kenya was resolved because Kenyan Civil society did not want the gains of steady economic growth to be erased by inter-ethnic fighting and the Congo War is frankly speaking, running out of steam.


29 posted on 04/27/2011 8:27:36 AM PDT by AfricanChristian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

Your knowledge of Africa is admirable. However, there are a few points I would like to raise.

1. West Africa was the home to many large states in the pre-colonial era with highly developed social systems. Examples include the Yoruba states, Dahomey, the Benin Kingdom and the Kwarafa Kingdom. Central Africa also had many large states like the Kongo kingdom. The Zulus and Xhosas in South Africa also had relatively well developed societies.

2. I agree that there are communities like the Masai, the Pygmies and Kalahari Bushmen who find it extremely difficult to adapt to modern society. Unfortunately, Western media tends to concentrate on these groups creating a warped view of African society.

3. I don’t agree that African have the same problems with adapting to modern society as the native Americans and Aborigines. The success of the African diaspora in Europe and North America shows that the problem is not the inability to adapt to the twenty first century, but the absence of opportunities at home.

4. Indian immigrants are very active economically in Africa but there are other major players like the Lebanese, the Igbo and the Hausa in West Africa and the Kikiyu in East Africa. Kano in Northern Nigeria was and still is a hub of trade between Northern Africa and the Sudan. The Igbo of Nigeria also have play a large role in trade in West Africa.

It is instructive that the richest African is a Hausa-Fulani from Kano.

5. I believe that the Chinese will be more successful than the Indians in the long run. The Indians have a very long history in Africa but have remained a very closed society. The Chinese (this might surprise you), are considered more open the Indians. You are more likely to see Chinese making attempts to interact with the locals than the Indians (they don’t carry the baggage of the Indian caste system with them). In addition, Chinese are more likely to marry local girls than Indians (Jean Ping, head of the African Union is the son of a Chinese trader).

6. A major problem (some say the major problem) with the modern African state is that most African states are artificial. Borders of African states merely reflect French, British, Portuguese and Spanish areas of influence decided in 1884 - 1885 Berlin conference. For example, the British grouped the traditional slave raiders (the Northern Sudanese) with people who traditionally resisted slave raiding (the Southern Sudanese). The Southern Sudanese had much more in common with the Nilotic peoples of East Africa (like the Luo of Kenya) than with the Arabised Sudanese, yet the British still stuck to their guns.

The end result was that 2.5 million people had to lose their lives before a Southern Sudanese state (which should have been created in 1956) came to be.

So much energy is expended in fighting between different ethnic groups in artificial states that development often takes a back seat. A similar situation existed in Europe until the peace of Westphalia was signed and Africa is moving in that direction, albeit violently.

7. The next few decades in Africa are likely to be more peaceful than the previous two for the simple reason that there is finite amount of violence people can take and the growing role of civil society. I cannot see a situation in which Rwanda would revert to the levels of the 1994 massacre in the next two generations and Nigeria has been spared a full blown Civil War because the memory of the last Civil War in which 1 million people died is still fresh. The 2007 crisis in Kenya was resolved because Kenyan Civil society did not want the gains of steady economic growth to be erased by inter-ethnic fighting and the Congo War is frankly speaking, running out of steam.


30 posted on 04/27/2011 8:54:37 AM PDT by AfricanChristian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: AfricanChristian
Thank you for that compliment, but really, my knowledge of Africa south of the Sahara and Ethiopia is poor and inadequate. My knowledge of this pales to insignificance compared to my knowledge of Eurasian (bar China/Japan/Korea) history.

To respond to your points:

  1. 1. West African states -- there is not much information about this and a lot of them were still influenced by the more advanced Arab and Berber cultures. The Zulus and Xhosa were still warlords at the time of the Battle of Isandlwana -- they were in 1879, the same position the English were in the 10th-11th centuries -- not a stable state as it had no defined bureaucratic system or boundaries etc.

  2. I wouldn't club the Masai who had a defined society with rules etc. with the Pygmies and Bushmen who are/were hunter-gatherers. Also, the Masai being Buntu are of a different race from the Pygmies and Bushmen, both of which are of different races from each other. Yes, I agree that the Western media creates a warped view of African society -- but it does that about all societies, reducing everyone to a caricature

  3. Some Africans definitely do -- the Bushmen and pygmies in particular and secondarily the peoples of the Congo. The North Africans and East Africans were sufficiently advanced to not have their culture devastated when they interacted with Arabs or Europeans or Indians. West Africa is a mix of the two situations above. Also, please do note that you talk about the AFrican diaspora -- I specifically pointed out that this was to do with societal groups and not individuals. Individual black Africans can be as smart or dumb, cultured or barbaric as whites or browns or East Asians. Again, I humbly state that you also use the collective term "African diaspora in ..." -- the Somalis are not doing so well as the Kenyans or West Africans as they bring their culture across which is endemic war. The North Africans do better than folks from Congo etc.

    The absence of opportunities -- this is caused due to bad boundaries cutting across tribal lines and also because some societies haven't progressed beyond clan lines. This is not only an "African problem" but also visible in Afghanistan, Albania etc.

  4. Thanks -- I did not know about the other groups. Who is this Hausa-Fulani from Kano that you refer to?

  5. Possibly. Indians are racist, but I thought the Chinese were racist as well and didn't know about Chinese marrying local girls

  6. Yes, I agree, as I referred to in point 4.

  7. We can only pray -- predicting over decades is really no more than a guessing game. Nearly anything is possible.

31 posted on 04/28/2011 12:01:55 AM PDT by Cronos (Christian, redneck, rube and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

Benin and the Yoruba states for example, were not influenced by Arab and Berber culture - they were forest states.

The Masai, Pygmies and Khoi Khoi represent the Western caricature of Africa. These groups are largely resistant to the modern World so the West assumes that Africa is resistant to the modern World. (the Masai like the Luo are usually classed as Nilotic, not Bantu).

The problem with the Somali diaspora is similar to the problem with certain segments of the Pakistani and Algerian diaspora - the impact of a flavour of Islam that is yet to reconcile itself with the 21st Century.

The Hausa-Fulani I referred to is Aliko Dangote.

The Chinese carry much less cultural baggage than Indians, they don’t have a caste system and religious mythology built around caste. This is not say that Chinese are not racist but I do not know a society as obsessed with caste and class as Indian society.

There are pockets of the Indian diaspora in Africa that are more open to interaction such as the Indian community in South Africa but in general, Indians do not interact socially with locals.

Please also note that Western expatriates interact even less with locals than either the Chinese or the Indians. Do not let National Geographic documentary film makers, graduate researchers and movie stars fool you. These people have only a transient interest in Africa and they don’t represent the average Westerner in Africa.


32 posted on 04/28/2011 6:54:00 AM PDT by AfricanChristian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: AfricanChristian
Benin and the Yoruba states for example, were not influenced by Arab and Berber culture - they were forest states.

Thank you -- I need to read more about these

The Masai, Pygmies and Khoi Khoi represent the Western caricature of Africa. These groups are largely resistant to the modern World so the West assumes that Africa is resistant to the modern World -- not completely correct. The Masai, Pygmies, Khoi-Khoi in fact are viewed positively in the West. What gives Africa a bad name in the West is the actions in Liberia, Sierra Leone, the Congo, Zimbabwe and also now in South Africa -- the senseless murders, cutting off of handing, rapes etc. That gives all "Africa" a bad name

The problem with the Somali diaspora is similar to the problem with certain segments of the Pakistani and Algerian diaspora - the impact of a flavour of Islam that is yet to reconcile itself with the 21st Century. -- somewhat correct, it is not just a "flavour" of Islam but Islam itself.

The Hausa-Fulani I referred to is Aliko Dangote thank you for that reference -- more for me to read up on

These people have only a transient interest in Africa and they don’t represent the average Westerner in Africa. -- I'm sure they don't. What then is the impression of the average Westerner in AFrica?

Also, on the other foot, AFricans too have stereotypes of the West -- for them this is mostly either American or British or French (depending on the part of AFrica) -- the rest of the "western World" doesn't ring a bell :)

33 posted on 04/28/2011 7:01:10 AM PDT by Cronos (Christian, redneck, rube and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

Old story from the Times about Chinese men and Tanzanian women: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article6871900.ece


34 posted on 04/28/2011 7:27:51 AM PDT by AfricanChristian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

The average Westerner in Africa works for a multinational company, lives in secluded quarters and has very little interaction with the locals.

To understand the interaction of the West with Africa you need to understand how colonial society was structured. For example, when Nigeria was a British colony there were only about 40,000 British administering a colony of 40 million so even then probability of an ordinary Nigerian coming in contact with a “flesh and blood” Briton was pretty slim.

As a result, when independence was granted there were very few person to person bonds with the British people (Bonds with English and Irish missionaries are an exception).

The French, as I understand were more invested in their African colonies so the person to person interaction was greater (I cannot talk about that authoritatively).

In present day Lagos, 90% of Westerners live the Ikoyi, Victoria Island and Lekki axis. The reasons are different (security), but the parallels between the European Quarters of the Colonial era are there. Most Westerners live in a constant state of siege, with security reports from the US, British, French and German embassies telling them to stay at home. So they end up not interacting with the locals even if they want to.

I worked at two Fortune 500 companies in Lagos, Nigeria and the unwritten rule is that you don’t expect Westerners to come for your social events (apart from after work meetings at the bar) and Westerners also don’t expect you to come for their own social events. Westerners don’t know where and how the locals live and vice versa.

This is tragic, because in many cases the opportunity for meaningful social interaction is lost. (African society is much more communal than Western society).

The result is that the average local does not interact with or appreciate the difference between Germans, British, Americans or French expatriates - they are all “Oyibo”. They have their lifestyle and we have ours.

Consequently, most locals obtain their impression of the West from either Africans abroad or from Hollywood and Western Media. Britain comes off very badly because the British have a reputation for being cold, distant and socially awkward. The Americans are seen as being warm and friendly.

For socio-economic reasons the Chinese have closer interaction with the locals than Western expatriates. They are poorer and they are more likely to live in the same neighbourhood as the locals (I have a couple of Chinese neighbours). Their businesses also depend more on interaction with the locals (there is a Chinese market a few hundred metres from my housing estate).

I expect that in the next few decades the Chinese will have a much better understanding of African society (not an academic understanding) than the French or British ever had.


35 posted on 04/28/2011 8:34:44 AM PDT by AfricanChristian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Cronos
Fyi.

Examples of Yoruba art work (Ife Art). ife1 ife2 ife3

Some of these pieces date from the 13th-14th Century. They are unmistakably African (no Arab influence) and the level of craftsmanship is very high.

36 posted on 04/28/2011 9:48:09 AM PDT by AfricanChristian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson