As always when Africa is in the news, the letters papers of newspapers and BBC's Have Your Say and so on are full of peoples' opinions on the subject.
A distressingly common opinion is something along the lines of this: "Africa is based on primitive tribal societies, so cannot ever, ever support normal functioning democracy. Look, they've had genocides!" There are variations, but they tend to fixate on two things; that African societies have not historically been democracy, and that atrocities have been committed in Africa. This is true as far as it goes. They then make the rather peculiar leap of faith that this means that African countries
can not become modern democracies, or that democracy is simply not suitable for Africa, or whatever.
This is a simplistic idea, but I can see that it would be attractive to some people. There's one little catch. Sure, historically, Africa
has not been very nice. No question of that. The trouble is that nor have Europe, America or Asia.
Until the early part of last century, most European countries maintained, by force, vast empires for the purpose of exploiting the locals. In the 18th and 19th century, the United States committed multiple genocides of that country's native population; in the mid 20th century Germany did the same to the Jews. The US finally lifted apartheid in the 60s. Most of our lovely modern European democracies, along with the US, finally actually managed universal suffrage some time early last century. Russia has never been democratic, unless you count the current post-Soviet period. South Korea has been democratic, for the first time ever, for the last twenty years or so; Japan a little longer, China still isn't.
Sure, Europe, the US and most of Asia are doing better than most parts of Africa. However, this is a very recent phenomenon. You'd think, listening to idiots say that Africans are intrinsically unsuited to democracy, that the Western world has been some sort of amazing paradise of democracy and equality and prosperity for the last five hundred years or so; this is simply rubbish. The world's first modern democracies only emerged in the last century. And, of course, Africa has the tiny little disadvantage that the rest of the world has been brutally exploiting it for a couple of millennia, reaching a peak in the last two hundred years.
The reaction to temporary problems is also terribly biased. America starts torturing people? Some embarrassment, some tut-tutting from elsewhere. Thailand becomes military dictatorship? Barely noticed; assumed will go away soon, people continue to go on holidays there, invest etc. Military dictatorship emerges in an African nation?
"Oh, look at those ignorant savages; it'll be like that forever; they'd be better off as colonies, blah, blah, blah"
Of course, what this is all really based on is racism. It is almost openly stated; this concept that Africa is somehow inherently defective. The real problem is that it's not just an irritant to see from BNP members writing into the paper; it has become part of the common mythos, that nothing good can ever come of Africa, and that it would be insane to, say, invest in industry there, or indeed do anything except send a bit of aid to assuage guilt. I wonder what the effect of this thinking has been on people in Africa? Can't be encouraging.
