Quote:
Originally posted by CDSmith
People have been living in Africa for thousands of years. Long before there was any UK or N. American societies, at least as far as we know them today.
They've had time. Time to form nations, form governments, develop and modernize. I'm not sure how anyone can disagree with that.
Admittedly it took Great Britain 500 years or so to actually develop a working democtratic model of government (thank you Oliver Cromwell et al), but you'll notice that basically the first thing other than survival on the minds of those that hit the shores of Australia and the N. American East coast was to create social order and begin developing the region into something liveable. The question is, why hasen't any of the African peoples accomplished anything close to that and made it last into the modern world? Why?
Sorry, they certainly HAVE had thousands of years.
|
The current African nations have only existed for a short period of time. That's a fact. So those didn't have time to develop into what the western world looks like today.
When Europe was inhabited by barbarians, Africa had civilizations. That's a fact. So they did develop civilizations.
Now, on to the point you are missing. America and Australia both had the benefit of the natives pretty much being wiped out or outnumbered by colonists. These colonists were Europeans that continued adhering to European culture and social structures (or things very close to that).
The general populace quite quickly changed into Europeans, without a vast majority of natives that were brought into semi-slavery. No ruling minority based on race was installed.
So, when the Australian and North American colonies became independant, the majority, which was also the ruling racial class, stayed.
When the African colonies became independant, the ruling racial class left and the majority consisting of semi-slaves were left in charge. All capital disappeared with the racial ruling class, as did any form of stable government they had.
When N-America and Australia became independant, they could just carry on with a form of government much like the one they were used to, and could for a large part stick to their old traditions. Africa, however, had to build up an entirely new form of government and had to create an entirely new culture.
Building on an old tradition is a lot easier than creating a new one, especially when you've had more time (the African colonies became independant a very short while ago).
Now, on to why Africa didn't build the same kind of culture as Europe earlier already... there are tons of factors in this, but I'll explain a few of the main ones:
#1: Europe has a different climate than Africa. The African climate is far more suitable for a nomadic way of life, while the European climate is more suitable for a static way of farming. The European situation therefore makes the forming of large villages, towns and cities more likely, and cities contribute a lot to an advancing civilization.
#2: European culture is largely based on large scale warfare and expansionism. This makes larger nations much more likely to develop, and larger nations tend to display a faster development than small communities. Also, it adds a lot to technological advancement, which also brings along many other benefits.
#3: European culture is largely based on Roman culture, which was largely based on Greek culture, etc. A tradition of technology, politics and warfare greatly aids the development of nations.
So, all matters considered, it's simply impossible to compare the two. The "thousands of years" have much less to do with development than a combination of random and coincidental factors. If Africans had lived in Europe, chances are they had developed advanced civilizations.