AH Challenge: Create a stable Africa

You kidding right, that's just offensive...toward Africans. Americans blacks ain't the same ethnicty as Africans, Africans is a multitude of different ethnic and cultural groups, while American Blacks is a European "descendent" (cultural) Creole culture made up of people with significant ethnic white heritage. This is just a White Man burden just in a Blackface-costume instead of the usual tropical clothing.

Valdemar II

More to the point the story has American blacks [i.e. negroes] coming to rule and identify with a predominantly Arabic region, where they have traditionally viewed as 2nd class citizens if that.

I think that's a more serious flaw in the story than suggesting that ideas from the west are in some way fundamentally alien to people from other lands.

Steve
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't one of Lesotho's main parties advocated joining South Africa since the end of apartheid? I think it's only because of apartheid that South Africa today doesn't have 16 provinces - the nine plus Lesotho, Namibia, Botswana, Matabeleland, Midlands, Masvingo and Mashonaland.
And colonial policy: keeping Lesotho seperate was British policy, and Zimbabwe (then S Rhodeisa) not joining the Union of South Africa was the result of a settler referendum,
 
It should be pointed out that Botswana is a small nation with a large amount of resources, which had a visionary first leader whose successors made democracy part of what separated Botswana from it white supremacist autocratic neighbors on three sides and war-torn northern neighbor.

I think there are a lot of diverse factors: not one African "problem". Angola has more resources than Botswana, and they have been fought over. Chad had civil war for decades before anyone knew there was oil there. African wars and problems, like European ones, tend to derive from a wide range of causes.

Some countries are considered stable - but that is not the same thing as democratic or prosperous: Gabon currently, Cote D'Ivoire until 5 years ago.
 
... and some of it is about time for nation-building, development etc. I mean South America was not exactly I byword for stability in the first 100 years of their independence - and need I mention a variety of European countries that became independent around the turn of the previous century. The balkans certianly did not become "stable" within their first 40 years of independence.

Another difference between Europe and Africa is two continent-spanning wars vs. none - and their influence on subsequent history.
 
Why do you think that?

Do you know what a massive effort it will be to establish new states, with new identities etc. And think of the costs.

I don't think I would have the same loyalty to some hypothetical new Southern African state, foisted on us by the West, as I currently have to the present South African state.

And the idea of people living in an ethnic exclusive state has been used before.

The concept was called apartheid.
 
Plus the OAU didn't like this idea, nor does the AU. It was one of the main goals of the Orgnisation in fact.


I draw your attention to the Articles II and III

Article III, Principle 3, in particular:

Respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of each State and for its
inalienable right to independent existence.
 
If the west really and honestly wanted to help Africa it would and could. 5000 troops from each nato country ( or more ) could help rebuild a country at a time, would of been a more visionary concept than taking out saddams invisible weapons of mass delusion.
 
Top