From: mjkugel@iastate.edu (Michael J Kugel)
Subject: Re: Article: 'Africa's dysfunctional politics'
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 19:47:32 GMT

In article <C0r37q.2s4@panix.com> mukasa@panix.com (Michael K Mukasa) writes:
>In <1993Jan12.012443.28648@nas.nasa.gov> bross@splatter.nas.nasa.gov (Bill Ross) writes:
>
>>        Africa's dysfunctional politics
>
>>        Robert D. Kaplan , _New Republic_, Dec 28 1992
>
>>Summarized/excerpted by Bill Ross
>
>>  [In 1915 U.S. marines occupied Haiti at a point of complete anarchy
>>after 102 revolutions & coups in the previous 72 years. They left in
>>1934 after the modernizing the infrastructure: roads, health, civil
>>service, national guard & more.]
>
>I guess this is what you prescribe for us Africans, call in the US to fix
>all our problems and leave the place smelling like fresh roses????
>
>
>>  "... Military intervention can do little to heal the body politic
>>of a land that lacks the basis of a modern political culture--thanks
>>to geographical isolation, low literacy rates, and a history of rape
>>and desertion by colonists. The French quit Haiti in 1804. The only
>>outside political influence the Haitians experienced before the Marines
>>invaded were the Bourbon & Jacobin varieties. To blame Haiti's problems
>>on U.S. support for this or that Haitian ruler ... is a grave
>>simplification.
>
>>  " ... Somalia and Liberia are only the first of many African nations
>>doomed to go over the edge into anarchy and destitution for the same
>>reasons Haiti has ..."
>
>
>>  [Political correctness keeps us from discussing how the African ethnic
>>and national cultures contribute to the problems. In contrast,] "To say
>>that there is something wrong with Bosnian Serb culture would elicit a
>>yawn at this point."
>
>Why should you be PC?, please say what you have to say so that we may hear
>it in your own words.
>
>
>>  [North African Arab cultures are omitted from what follows for a variety
>>of reasons; mainly, they are better organized.]
>
>In what ways?? Politically ???, Economically??, socially?? what??
>
>>In the world business perspective, in contrast to Africa,] "The Balkans,
>>on the other hand, despite the fighting, figure prominently as lucrative
>>market of the future. The Balkans, which have much higher rates of
>>literacy and industrialization, can be discussed honestly by business
>>and political types. If the same honesty is applied to Africa, the
>>charge is racism. So discussion is immobilized, [[sound familiar?]],
>>people get fed up, and they apply their energies and investment skills
>>elsewhere."
>
>You Excuse white on white tribal warefare in Bosnia with a wave of the hand
>because it shows that europeans can be more barbaric than any other
>people, a condition that had solely been applied to Africans.
> 
>>  [The more successful African countries depend on the former colonist
>>nationalities and Asians; when they are driven out things go downhill.]
>
>You have to have a very weird measuring stick for success.  Name these
>countries that you claim are successful.
>
>>  [Next category: post-colonial rule by "Big Men:" violent (Amin, Obote,
>>Mobutu, Doe, Barre, Mengistu)
>
>NOT ONE OF THESE LEADERS WAS ELECTED BY AN AFRICAN, NOT ONE.  THEY WERE
>ALL INSTALLED BY NON-AFRICANS.


The west is now---long overdue in my opinion---starting to push for
democracy in Africa.  The end of the cold war will result in policies
which are more in the interests of Africans as opposed to the rulers.


> or economic crackpot (Nyere, Kuanda).]
>
>Nyerere and KK fought long and hard against apartheid and their countries
>payed the price economically. Market socialism, IMO, is a good idea.  Look
>at the scandanavian countries.

Who are now abandoning market socialism.  Look at Sweden: Once one of the
richest nations on earth it now has a per capita income less than the
OECD average (source: The Economist).


> "All contributed to polities that have become barren ground for any
>democratic >or even barely functioning political future."
>
>African post-colonial politics has been controlled by the constant
>intervention of London, Paris, Washington and Lisbon.  If there had been
>little or no interfeerence the situatioon would not be as it is today.
>
>>  ... "... one thing I've learned in Africa is to never, never assume
>>that things can't get worse ..."
>
>I said the same thing about America when Bush took over from Reagan and
>guess what?? I WAS CORRECT
>
>>"These iniquities are themselves being overshadowed by the rapid
>>advance of AIDS, which is undeniably reflective of a deeper societal
>>chaos: specifically a family structure under attack by the rush of
>>African men to the cities in search of work. The tradition of polygamy,
>>coupled with the long periods of tim,e men stay away from their villages,
>>helps create a situation whereby it is common for men to have multiple
>>female partners. Then, of course, there is tribalism, or ethnic conflict,
>>which is the real cause of famines. ...
>
>>  "My fear is that what lies beyond the stabilizing presence of the last
>>Big Men is nothing, simply nothing, and that Somalia and Liberia are
>>merely the first to fall. ..."
>
>>  "Though U.S. policy in Liberia and elsewhere was critical in propping
>>up nasty dictatorships, cold war realpolitik is not the source of the
>>trouble. The empirical evidence, whether it be in literacy rates,
>>infant mortality rates, economic statistics, or whatever, proclaims a
>>grim truth that the whole issue of race in Africa makes us afraid to
>>utter: African culture, in a modern political sense, is simply
>>dysfunctional ..."
>
>>  "... billions of dollars of American aid was effective in postwar
>>Europe precisely because there was a literate and relatively sophisticated
>>bureacratic tradition among the nations for absorbing and using the funds,
>>with a minimum of corruption and mismanagement; so the aid didn't
>>dissolve into the sand as it did in Haiti earlier in the century."
>
>>  "... I suspect that Somalia will, like Haiti, slip back into chaos as
>>it becomes apparent that there is no political process to restart there.
>>..."
>
>>  "... In the final analysis, private investment will do more for the
>>continent than government aid ... As one World Bank official told me,
>>'How can you aid governments that loot their own treasuries?' ..."
>
>>---
>The whole premis of the above post is that Africans are politically,
>socially, morally, economically, and whatever other "ally" you care to
>choose, inferior.
>Africans do not deny that they have serious problems that need solutions
>not dictated to us but by reflection from within as well as without.
>To start with a premis of superiority based on "modern political culture",
>"low literacy" or amount of "industialisation", is to reveal your mental
>deficiency and stupidity of the world both contemporary and historically.
>Unless you know what you are talking about keep your thoughts to your self
>and listen.  Then when you have formed an opinion based on some kind of
>educated principle, you may air it.  But spewing the verbal dihorrea that
>you did will confuse us as to which orrafice you use to think.
>
>Kiggundu.
>
  
I don't understand who you are arguing with.  The person who posted the
article did not (at least according to my understanding) indicate that
he agreed with it.

I, BTW, didn't find the arguments or the conclusions of the New Republic
article very compelling.


Mike.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african