What led to the current African poverty?

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
22,750
SoCal
The author of the blog is an American that does not like African-Americans and tries to find ways to denigrate them for any area in which they are behind other American groups.
I'm not sure that she dislikes African-Americans as a group. However, Yes, she is displeased by African-American performance on various things--whether on academic tests or even the likelihood that one is going to put seatbelts on one's children.

As for the comments on her blog, well, she is not responsible for the thoughts of other people. Plus, it's clear that in the comments section she rejects things such as ethnic cleansing and re-colonizing Africa. Indeed, her solutions for Africa's problems actually appear to be pretty good:

"
"

Not all of these are going to be easy (for instance, the second point won't be easy), but all of this seems like perfectly reasonable and practical advice. Someone who genuinely wishes to harm Africans wouldn't give such advice to them.

That is beyond obvious. It is outright hostility to them as a group which is the animating factor behind all the stuff in the post about African Americans and why she gets into the issue of IQ. It is a deep-seated racial animosity toward African Americans as a group - something which is hardly rare in the U.S. Even in the comments section of her post it becomes blatantly obvious just how severe her racial bias is, with the comments about the phenomenon of "baby mamas" (that is, single motherhood) that she and others take from the African American case and try to apply to the Nigerian case, not even realizing that most of Nigeria has a relatively low single motherhood rate (with the exception of perhaps Borno state, but even that state's supposed single motherhood rate of 35% is still nearly half of the current single motherhood rate among African Americans).
What I am curious about is if the rate of single motherhood among African-Americans was always so high or if it was much lower in the past. For instance, I wonder if the move from a rural to an urban environment significantly increased African-American single motherhood rates.

Indeed, we'll see what happens to Africa's single motherhood rates once the continent urbanizes. Also, for that matter, if there is going to be a massive exodus of Africans to the West (not merely the cognitive elite, but a lot of ordinary Africans as well), it would be nice to look at the single motherhood rates for that group.

African American single motherhood rates resemble those of southern African countries, not those of the west African countries whose various peoples African Americans are actually more closely related to. A disinterested observer, who is not simply animated by hatred toward African Americans, might try to figure out why African American single motherhood rates closely resemble those of African countries that went through apartheid, or which saw large scale male labor migrations create a single motherhood trend, and why African American single motherhood rates do not resemble the single motherhood rates of the groups of people (west Africans) that they are more closely related to. But to stop and engage in any sort of informed thought about that issue is apparently too much work. Even the first step - to actually ascertain how single motherhood rates are distributed in Africa and why - which is something that can be accomplished with a few searches in a search engine, apparently requires too much effort for someone blinded by bias.
Here's a hypothesis--African-Americans and Blacks in the southern part of Africa have higher single motherhood rates because they live in more urban environments than West Africans live in. I don't know if this hypothesis is accurate, but it's at least worth exploring.

As for your hypothesis, it would be interesting to compare single motherhood rates in the Southern U.S. with those in the Northern U.S. Based on your hypothesis, one would think that single motherhood rates would be higher in the Southern U.S. since that is where the worst racism and segregation in the U.S. historically was.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
22,750
SoCal
She also seems unaware that west African immigrants to the U.S. (such as Nigerians & Ghanaians) perform at a somewhat similar level in terms of scholastic achievement as most other immigrant groups that are viewed as academically and economically successful in the U.S. Why she thinks the middle or upper class descendants of more recent Asian immigrants into the U.S. should be compared with African Americans (who have only had better opportunities for socioeconomic improvement since the 70s) in terms of achievement in this or that test in order to draw conclusions about Africa is incomprehensible. If she was going to talk about the implications of this or that test in the U.S. in terms of what it means for Africa, then conveniently skipping over the academic performance of African immigrants or their children in the U.S. while including the performance of Asian immigrants or their children to make her argument is just baffling. Not that any of this is so relevant to the issue of African development, but her side-stepping of anything about the scholastic performance of African immigrants/children of immigrants which might go against her narrative, while including information about Asian immigrants/children of immigrants is either deliberate or just due to ignorance.
Yes, it is true that African immigrants to the West often perform pretty well. I don't know if she is unaware of this fact, though. Anyway, though, Yes, both Asian immigrants and African immigrants are self-selected groups and thus one can't use them to make conclusions about the populations that they come from (which, for that matter, is also true for Ashkenazi Jews in the U.S., since the Ashkenazi Jews who came here might not have been a good representation of Ashkenazi Jews as a whole--though obviously the Holocaust changed the calculation in regards to this since most of the Ashkenazi Jews outside of the West were wiped out). What I think that this author is going for, however, is that various Asian countries have managed to perform very well over the last several decades (both on academic tests and in terms of their GDP per capita and level of economic growth) while various African countries didn't perform very well in recent years and recent decades. In turn, this author proceeds to speculate as to why exactly East Asia has succeeded while large parts of Africa had failed.

I am not going to get into the whole issue of the IQ stuff. I am not aware of any really thorough study on IQ that has been performed in Nigeria. The paper that you provided a link to is basically something aimed at refuting some of the wild claims (like "the average IQ in Nigeria is 67" and so on) from Richard Lynn, a British pseudoscientist. But just because it goes to some length to debunk years of Lynn's academic diarrhea about IQ scores, that does not mean I agree with the notion that all of the studies reviewed there are truly representative and useful enough to draw definite conclusions from. You would need something far more rigorous and thorough than anything cited there to make a more definite statement.
That I agree with and it certainly would be nice to get more up-to-date IQ data for Africa. Indeed, it is very regrettable that Sub-Saharan African countries generally don't participate in academic tests such as PISA or TIMSS. In addition, it would be nice to combat things such as malnutrition, parasitic disease load, and iodine deficiency in Sub-Saharan Africa and other parts of the Third World in order to improve the quality of life and increase the IQs of the people who live there. I'm serious; improving the quality of life and increasing IQs is certainly a good thing. If this were done, we could see just how much Sub-Saharan African IQs will rise.

The work of Garrett Jones, Anatoly Karkin, etc. is not historically informed. There is nothing worth addressing there. On Karkin's graph you can see where Ghana is in terms of GDP right? Well have you read what I posted in this thread about Ghana? Read through the whole thread. Some people just didn't want Ghana to be great. The result of Ghana aligning itself excessively with the West after 1966 and reversing all that had been done prior to that was massive decline - they had 1 million of their people in Nigeria (which was itself not even well run) by the early 1980s in search of economic opportunities, at a time when Ghana's population was less than 12 million, because of how badly their country was doing. That's nearly one-tenth of their population having to leave. They were in spectacular decline once they went down the path they did of abandoning their attempt at industrialization, and although Jerry Rawlings (himself an admirer of Nkrumah, even if not an outright Nkrumaist) was able to stop the bleeding for a while (after bringing an end to the series of unsuccessful governments that had come into power since Nkrumah's overthrow), they have only started to recover from that decline in the last two decades.
That's rather sad what happened to Ghana. :( Anyway, it's entirely possible that Ghana's average IQ is being depressed by environmental factors--though I don't think that emigration has reduced its average IQ by more than a couple of points since even emigration of the top 12% doesn't have that much of an impact on average IQ. Indeed, for what it's worth, Anatoly Karlin doesn't say that Ghana is currently performing at its full potential; rather, he is simply saying (or implying) that Ghana's current poor economic performance is the result of its low average IQ--which I certainly consider to be a plausible hypothesis.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
22,750
SoCal
Do you know how many ethnic rebellions and separatists Ethiopia has had to forcefully suppress? What are you even talking about?
Those insurgencies began before ethnic federalization took effect, no? Plus, even with ethnic federalization, one actually has to make sure that it is actually implemented as opposed to it being in name only.

If you are talking about creating states within the country that correspond to ethnic divisions or cultural divisions, that has already happened in many African countries. For example Nigeria is already divided into 36 federal states, which largely conform to linguistic/cultural lines (with a few notable exceptions) and it did that decades ago, so if that is the sort of thing you are talking about that has already been done.
Yes, that is what I am talking about here. Also, the exceptions in Nigeria might be notable ones; for instance, the Igbos are divided among several Nigerian states instead of being put into one Nigerian state.

If you are talking about actual full autonomy within a country for specific states or regions, that does not exist in Ethiopia, and if such a thing were implemented in a country with unequal distribution of resources (and access to the sea), it would likely result in the eventual breakup of that country (unless some sort of elaborate resource sharing agreement was worked out).
The resource-sharing idea certainly seems like it's worth exploring. Of course, a breakup itself might not be too bad as long as it's peaceful and as long as the new states are not hostile towards one another--which admittedly are big conditions. Even access to the sea can be acquired through peaceful negotiations with neighboring countries. For instance, how does Hungary get access to the sea right now?
 

Ighayere

Ad Honorem
Jul 2012
2,653
Benin City, Nigeria
Not all of these are going to be easy (for instance, the second point won't be easy), but all of this seems like perfectly reasonable and practical advice. Someone who genuinely wishes to harm Africans wouldn't give such advice to them.
From here on out I'm only going to give brief replies on most things since I simply have much better things to do with my time. I can only recommend that you try and search for better sources of information.

I'm not sure that she dislikes African-Americans as a group.
My point was (although my wording wasn't ideal) that she dislikes black people generally, and in her case, being American, African-Americans are a particular target of her animosity (something which, once again, is not rare), and that is why there is so much material against them in her post.
 
Last edited:

Ighayere

Ad Honorem
Jul 2012
2,653
Benin City, Nigeria
Someone who genuinely wishes to harm Africans wouldn't give such advice to them.
You are mistaking a certain style of condemnation (it could be described as a falsely sympathetic form of denunciation) for genuine empathy or interest in the well being of another group. I can't believe you actually believe there is some sort of genuine concern there.

And she is not "giving advice to them". No one except similarly minded loons reads that obscure blog.
 

Ighayere

Ad Honorem
Jul 2012
2,653
Benin City, Nigeria
What I am curious about is if the rate of single motherhood among African-Americans was always so high or if it was much lower in the past. For instance, I wonder if the move from a rural to an urban environment significantly increased African-American single motherhood rates.

Indeed, we'll see what happens to Africa's single motherhood rates once the continent urbanizes. Also, for that matter, if there is going to be a massive exodus of Africans to the West (not merely the cognitive elite, but a lot of ordinary Africans as well), it would be nice to look at the single motherhood rates for that group.
I already discussed African-American single motherhood rates in this thread: How'd the civil rights movement compare to earlier attempts to attain black rights?

But it was closed before I could reply. As for the move to an urban environment, I doubt that that is the real explanation in and of itself. I suspect it has more to do with restricted/limited employment opportunities among male youth for multiple generations and how that affected the sort of partners women had available (and therefore the sort of relationships that could be formed).

Here's a hypothesis--African-Americans and Blacks in the southern part of Africa have higher single motherhood rates because they live in more urban environments than West Africans live in. I don't know if this hypothesis is accurate, but it's at least worth exploring.
What sort of idea do you have of what west Africa is like as far as how people are living (rural vs. urban)? I do not see any close correspondence between living in urban environments and single motherhood in Africa. Only South Africa and Botswana are more urbanized than west African countries generally are and the degree of greater urban living in those countries does not seem so great that that alone could explain the difference.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
22,750
SoCal
I already discussed African-American single motherhood rates in this thread: How'd the civil rights movement compare to earlier attempts to attain black rights?

But it was closed before I could reply. As for the move to an urban environment, I doubt that that is the real explanation in and of itself. I suspect it has more to do with restricted/limited employment opportunities among male youth for multiple generations and how that affected the sort of partners women had available (and therefore the sort of relationships that could be formed).

What sort of idea do you have of what west Africa is like as far as how people are living (rural vs. urban)? I do not see any close correspondence between living in urban environments and single motherhood in Africa. Only South Africa and Botswana are more urbanized than west African countries generally are and the degree of greater urban living in those countries does not seem so great that that alone could explain the difference.
After looking at that thread, I suspect that your explanation is more likely to be the correct one.

That said, though, it would be interesting if there was data breaking down single motherhood rates for both African-Americans and Black immigrants to the U.S. based on IQ. Specifically, it would be interesting to see if their rates for this differ once IQ is taken into account.
 

Ighayere

Ad Honorem
Jul 2012
2,653
Benin City, Nigeria
Those insurgencies began before ethnic federalization took effect, no? Plus, even with ethnic federalization, one actually has to make sure that it is actually implemented as opposed to it being in name only.
There are ongoing separatist movements, which are still being suppressed. Zenawi's ethnic federalization policy did not change that fact.

If true ethnic federalization is implemented, it might work (if a sort of "confederation" is established), or it might lead to the break up of the country. It's not clear how that would go.

Yes, that is what I am talking about here. Also, the exceptions in Nigeria might be notable ones; for instance, the Igbos are divided among several Nigerian states instead of being put into one Nigerian state.
One of the main purposes of separating groups into multiple states in Nigeria was to prevent there from being essentially three or four countries within a country, since that level of autonomy for large groups within the country could increase the risk of major disputes/conflicts along regional lines, and thereby lead to a secession that might lead to a second civil war.

The resource-sharing idea certainly seems like it's worth exploring. Of course, a breakup itself might not be too bad as long as it's peaceful and as long as the new states are not hostile towards one another--which admittedly are big conditions. Even access to the sea can be acquired through peaceful negotiations with neighboring countries. For instance, how does Hungary get access to the sea right now?
A peaceful break up of Nigeria would most likely be a good thing, as long as the states that make up northern Nigeria are not just left high and dry. And perhaps some other countries like Cameroon or the Central African Republic could be broken up as well, but the issue of resource sharing is probably going to be a major point of contention.
 
Last edited:

JpO

Jan 2019
53
Norway
Sub-Saharan Africa has always been poor compared to other regions of the world. The only exception to this was the Horn of Africa which is the only region of Sub-Saharan Africa with pre-colonial history(Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea etc..). Before the arrival of colonists, the other parts of Sub-Saharan Africa didn't even develop nations or governments and instead lived in acephalous societies.

So when colonists arrived, the very concept of government was alien to the Africans whose only known institutions were tribal. At a certain moment, Africans wanted to have independence, but it was too early to have independence because of the context in which they were :
  1. It was during the cold war, and an arms proliferation problem was to be expected.
  2. Educated citizens were a minority compared to all the potential warlords
Africans should thus have waited a bit for independence from the colonial master. History has shown to us that freedom is a gradual process that takes time. People will probably claim that "they will just be oppressed by the colonists", but considering the election of anti-imperialist parties in both Britain and France at this time, this is unlikely. What will happen is that Africans will see a incredible expansion of trade and agricultural production with the colonists helping them with cash crops such as cocoa, coffee, and cotton.

Infact, this is something that was already happening during colonial rule. European companies and missionaries promoted cash-crops and constructed botanical gardens. They even created agricultural research stations and institutes to study and promote the adoption of higher yielding and disease-resistant varieties of seeds. By doing this, they made countries like Ghana the most productive cocoa producer, and Rhodesia a "breadbasket" :

The volume of cotton exports from French West Africa rose from an average of 189 tons in 1910–14 to 495,000 tons in 1935–39, while that of coffee soared from 5,300 tons in 1935 to 495,000 tons in 1936. The volume of groundnuts (peanuts) exported from Senegal alone increased from 500,000 in the 1890s to 723,000 tons in 1937. However, the great- est success story was that of cocoa production in Ghana whose volume of exports rose from only 80 lbs in 1881 to 2 million lbs in 1901 and 88.9 million lbs in 1911. This made Ghana the leading producer of cocoa in the world, and the quantity continued to rise until it reached a record figure of 305,000 tons in 1936
como.png
This agricultural development in cocoa production in Ghana was however stopped short as soon as Nkrumah took the power.

Finally, another reason for this is the unsustainable population growth of Africa. Africa has a population growth of 2.6 percent a year, and African economies need to share the income that they generate among this ever-growing number of people. Africans have a culture that promotes making a lot of children and it create an unsustainable economy.
 

Ighayere

Ad Honorem
Jul 2012
2,653
Benin City, Nigeria
Sub-Saharan Africa has always been poor compared to other regions of the world. The only exception to this was the Horn of Africa which is the only region of Sub-Saharan Africa with pre-colonial history(Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea etc..). Before the arrival of colonists, the other parts of Sub-Saharan Africa didn't even develop nations or governments and instead lived in acephalous societies.
This is totally and completely wrong. It's really so absurd that I can't waste time on it. Seriously, pick up a book.

This agricultural development in cocoa production in Ghana was however stopped short as soon as Nkrumah took the power.
This is colossally idiotic and false. I'm not going to bother responding to the misinformation in the rest of the post but I had to single this out as a particularly dumb statement.

You're clearly some kind of troll, perhaps a previously banned account.

To revive this thread just to post this kind of stupidity. . .