Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

filosoful OP t1_iu97p0q wrote

By the end of the century, Africa will be home to 40% of the world’s population – and nowhere is this breakneck-pace development happening faster than this 600-mile stretch between Abidjan and Lagos.

88

Fraun_Pollen t1_iu99c7b wrote

With the amount of untapped resources the continent has, I have no doubt that the African West Coast of the 22nd century will see a similar dramatic climb in power and wealth like China has experienced this century. Hopefully they’ll be able to implement some of our lessons learned with rapid industrialization and implement green fuels, building practices, and sustainable farming early in its growth.

Chinas extensive financial interest in many of these developing nations will also be interesting to follow as Africa grows its own influence.

46

can1exy t1_iu9b7xf wrote

You should doubt because those alone aren't enough. China also had political stability, competent administration, huge government investment in infrastructure and low crime rates.

40

Fraun_Pollen t1_iu9gz10 wrote

All of those “strengths” of Chinas can be explained by centuries of oppressive authoritarianism. If African nations want to go/continue down that route, that’s fine, but it’s not the best foundation for a humanitarian society, which has to count for something

−4

Southern-Trip-1102 t1_iucnfk4 wrote

Investing in infestructure is authoritarianism? Lol peak reddit. China has lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty if that isn't humanitarian then nothing is.

2

_Iro_ t1_iua10i1 wrote

Vast mineral wealth is not conducive to national wealth, peace, or development. It actually has the opposite effect. It’s a phenomenon called the Resource Curse and it’s extremely well-documented in the context of Africa.

32

GreatArchitect t1_iuc9jwu wrote

Actually, not really. The resource curse has been well documenred elsewhere, like the Middle East and Southeast Asia but Africa has been to disunified and plagued by conflict anyway for the curse to take place. The resources in these nations are squandered through corruption but most are still untapped by their fledgling economies.

1

_Iro_ t1_iucjgu5 wrote

What are you mean? The DRC is one of the primary sources of resource curse scholarship in regards to the role of conflict resources (blood diamonds) in sustaining intrastate conflict. I think you might be thinking of a very narrow definition of the resource curse in the context of rentierism

3

Southern-Trip-1102 t1_iucnbyq wrote

How does it account for the colonization and exploitation of Africa? It seems like a confounding variables if you want to propose resources as the reason for their poor development.

1

_Iro_ t1_iue4bz3 wrote

I’m not “proposing” anything as a single explanation for Africa’s underdevelopment because it’s obviously not that simple. I’m just saying that resources exacerbate Africa’s existing problems instead of solving them. That’s how the resource curse works, it only entrenches intrastate conflict and corruption but it doesn’t create it out of nowhere.

1

GooseHandsClarence t1_iua5v1m wrote

I visited friends in the peace corps stationed in Cameroon and Uganda respectively. The Chinese are EVERYWHERE. Building roads and infrastructure all over the place and offering it "on loan" that they'll use to basically hamstring the countries to do as they please. China is going to own Africa.

9

Dantheking94 t1_iua7igo wrote

Yeh but those countries don’t care if they don’t pay those loans back. China had already started forgiving some of those loans. so it’s doubtful they’ll be allowed to use it to hamstring anyone.

7

brendonmilligan t1_iuag1h8 wrote

Just because China is playing nice currently, doesn’t mean they’ll not expect a return on investment.

European traders were relatively peaceful when they started trading with African nations. That didn’t exactly last long

7

Southern-Trip-1102 t1_iucnlpg wrote

The return on investment is having those African nations allied with itself. Simply having them as allies and aiding them to become even more valuable trading partners is the return. Overall china has no incentive to exploit Africa simply because they are not beholden to profit driven corps.

2

cyrathil t1_iucy3of wrote

They are the profit driven corp masquerading as a state.

1

Southern-Trip-1102 t1_iue4pro wrote

How so? Numerous of their economic policies point opposite to them being profit driven, such as poverty alleviation, hsr, protectionist trade policies, etc.

1

trahyrc t1_iua9ac2 wrote

Very strongly doubt that. The levels of poverty, violence, political instability, ethnic diversity, corruption and ever growing population will make that very challenging.

Other countries in Africa could have becomed very developd if it wasn't for pretty much the same issues, countries such as Algeria or even Lybia.

6

proxyproxyomega t1_iudnc64 wrote

the key difference between Asia/India's growth and participation in the global market was their emphasis on education and hard labour being part of the culture for centuries. African countries and cultures are known for chill and easy going vibe. not saying Africans are not hard working or education focused, not at all. but China and India had been centre of global commerce and education for thousands of years. how Africa will participate in the global market will be interesting. Africa is natural resource heavy, so that will be a large focus. agriculture and manufacturing is already dominated by other continents that have favourable context. global climate change will have a large say. if it's favourable to African continent, they can have a huge agricultural boom. if not, and costal cities are inundated, we might be looking at a massive shitshow.

1