Hello ohsee. I take it from the blog that you're Igbo, from Nigeria, or perhaps your parents are from Nigeria, since your profile says you're from Canada. In which case, daalu! (I assume that's a proper greeting, but you can correct me on that - I don't know much more than a few Igbo words).
Now I have to ask, is that really an "African history blog"? I mean, you do uncritically cite Archibald Dalzel as a source - something which someone with a bit more familiarity with the subject (Dahomey) would not do without any caveat - and you often diverge into the history of other parts of the world.
I think that if you really have an interest in Dahomey, and in the history of the region that it was located in, an important study that you should read is Robin Law's book
The Slave Coast of West Africa, 1550-1750: the impact of the Atlantic slave trade on an African society. Despite the title, the book is not simply an analysis of the slave trade and its impact. It discusses much more than that. The author takes a very meticulous approach to his use of sources and is able to construct a detailed and basically objective picture of the societies in that region (a region corresponding to the modern Republic of Benin) over the course of two centuries as a result. Simply reading (or quote-mining from) Dalzel is not good enough to gain an understanding of what Dahomean society was like, for a number of reasons which multiple researchers on that state have noted.
To give an idea of what I mean, in I. A. Akinjogbin's book
Dahomey and Its Neighbours (1967), the author mentions (on p. 137) how a certain David Mills, a former governor of Cape Coast Castle who visited an important Dahomean town in 1777 "admired what he saw so much that he said he would have settled in Dahomey had it not been for the consideration he had for his friends and family." Mills stated of the Dahomeans there that "The natives both males and females are most civil, good kind people I ever saw" and that "the country appears amazingly populous, and they appear happy, contented and cheerful". There is really no way to reconcile this with the sort of picture that Dalzel paints of Dahomean society and life of course, but Mills' firsthand experience - which is from around the same time that Dalzel's book was published - cannot just be denied or dismissed. It was a complex place with its negatives and positives, and although my own personal view of Dahomey is considerably more negative than positive, it is also clear to me that one needs to seek some sort of balance and not simply go with everything found in "extreme" accounts without any scrutiny of those sources.
Akinjogbin's book is a bit too pro-Dahomean, although still highly informative and with several parts of the book still being basically objective. Dalzel's book from centuries earlier is too anti-Dahomean to give a realistic picture, although some of his negative views do have some basis in reality despite his agenda. I think that it's best to read Law's book to get a more objective and balanced picture however, since he tackles the subject without an agenda in favor of or against the places he writes about.
I will not comment on your attempt to portray your people (the Igbo) as basically having been cannibals, except to say that Basden never actually saw anyone eating human flesh. He just made inquiries and interpretations, but the actual act was somehow unseen by him despite all the years he spent among the Igbo people. Maybe it existed, but then it must have been on such a small scale for him to never see it happen and only find out about its supposed existence second or third hand.
Regarding the Aztecs (that you mention in your blog) and the issue of cannibalism, I think you should read this:
The Cannibalism Paradigm: Assessing Contact Period Ethnohistorical Discourse.
It gives some insight into the biases at work in some of those accounts. It's doubtful that "industrial scale cannibalism" really existed in Mexico.
As for Walter Rodney's book on Africa's underdevelopment, there are multiple things in it that I disagree with, but one certainly does not have to look at Rodney's book to make an argument about certain issues caused by colonialism. I've never referenced it even once on this forum for example (because it is not especially relevant to any argument I might make, in addition to being simply wrong in certain facts) and I have mentioned colonialism multiple times on this forum.
I think that making a blog to attack the argument of Rodney's book amounts to fighting a shadow. Although one of his other books (which is also a bit outdated and which does contain some errors as well),
History of the Upper Guinea Coast, 1545-1800, remains something of a classic, I think that the book of his that you have devoted a blog to grappling with, is not really that important. The field of African history has already moved on well beyond what he wrote in that book and nobody even has to reference that book to highlight any issues caused by colonialism. Obviously Africa, like much of the rest of world, was not some paradise, but debunking (or trying to debunk) Rodney, will not somehow prove that colonialism caused no major problems.
Another book you might want to look at (because it takes a diametrically opposite position to what you seem to be arguing for) is
How Colonialism Preempted Modernity in Africa (2011) by Olufemi Taiwo
. The author's perspective is quite unique and I didn't find myself agreeing with everything in the book. But his approach and perspective is quite distinct and different from Walter Rodney's arguments and you might find it interesting.