...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
Enrique Cardova says Nkrumah, Nyerere, Kaunda failures all,
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by The Explorer: [QB] A bit wordy, but here's how I put the basic outline of the trajectory of African colonies from nominal "independence": Super-exploitation of Africans under colonial totalitarianism had the effect of converting the preexisting core African populations into a new working class under an industrial-capitalist framework. With this modern workforce in place, the ongoing super-exploitation had another effect: the radicalization of the African workforce, in protest against dehumanizing and oppressive conditions. Then came the World Wars, wherein Africans drawn from colonies were made participants, as supplementary military personnel to those drawn from the core European populations. In the aftermath of the 2nd World War, and as a consequence of the wars, the economies of many of the participating European nations weakened. At the same time, African workforces became more militant in their protests against colonial totalitarianism, and the use of Africans as personnel in the World Wars could only have served a supplementary role to this increasing militancy. Aspirant would-be bourgeois personalities saw opportunity in this increased militancy against colonial totalitarianism, as a platform to make way for the African bourgeoisie [since pretty much all layers of the African societies were denied the fruits of local natural resources], and hence, got on-board [the struggles]. In their usually self-appointed roles as mouth-pieces of social militancy, the said personalities would act as liaisons of some sort between the local totalitarian colonial administrations and protesting African workforces. With weakened economies and rising local militancy in colonies, few totalitarian colonial regimes had the stomach to live with the expenses of putting down social militancy and the unstable environment of exploiting resources of the colonies. The development of the USSR as a superpower only compounded these difficulties for many of western European imperialists. Hence, begrudging negotiation with the said mouth-pieces of African militancy was entertained, and with it, the willingness to "compromise", which in many of these cases, was the preparation to concede nominal independence from colonial totalitarianism. Thereon, many of said mouth-pieces assumed the role of leadership of the newly "independent" African societies, and inheriting the socio-economic devastations left by colonial totalitarianism. Many of these leaders of the newly independent countries therefore had to borrow money, and where did they generally turn to? The same totalitarian regimes they supposedly just regained independence from. The latter would only loan money with strings attached, usually done via IMF "structuring" policies, World Bank and WTO dictates. Many of the leaders of the newly independent nations were bent on accelerating conditions ripe for the African bourgeoisie and with it, an effective middle class, spurring them to considerable spending of borrowed dough. Social spending that does not directly generate profit for the donor regimes, does not go well with the likes of the IMF. Therefore, pressure to adhere to stringent "restructuring" policies is meted out, which as a general rule of thumb, results in fairly reduced social spending. Said African leading personalities are then generally enticed to find ways to save face locally, when economies take a dip...partaking in anti-colonial rhetoric is usually seen as a convenient way of achieving this, while embarking on totalitarianism as a means to put down social dissent. Trying to stifle local social dissent can at times lead to said African leading figures to become at odds with former totalitarian colonial players, when the turn towards their own totalitarian responses to social disquiet leads to increasing social instability, which is generally bad for the exploitation business of former colonies. When this happens, it is enticing to replace them [said African leaders], possibly with a new figure that is reputed to be on better terms with the core local populations, but still pliant [to imperialist dictates]. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3