does anybody know the bad things in african imperelism?
969672
1. I presume that you do really mean African imperialism, which includes such empires as the Ashanti Empire, the Dahomey Empire, Great Zimbabwe etc. \n\n2. In which case, these are some of the "bad things":\na) slave labour of captured prisoners-of-war;\nb) punitive taxation of conquered tribes;\nc) forcing attractive women to be concubines;\nd) ruthless suppression of dissent.\n\n3. If you had meant European imperialism in Africa, then your question was very poorly drafted.
376309
Don't know. However there have been a lot of scams involving banks that supposedly exist on the African Continent.
1019591
Is Africa the epitomy of retarded evolution?
714395
Yes there is something wrong with african people, but it is not their fault as individuals it is a result of living in a difficult continent and not being properly helped by their country or the world at large.\n\n Africa is very big and poor and is susceptible to disease and natural disasters such as drought leading to famine. Corruption; poor infrastructure: transport, education, medicine and agricultural practices; civil wars, a tribal mentality and bad government slows development and often only make these matters worse.\n In particular Aids today is killing a whole generation:\n\nInto 2005, UNAIDS estimates suggests that the situation does not look much better. In Sub-Saharan Africa, there were\n\n25.8 million (out of 40 million worldwide) living with HIV\n3.2 million (out of 4.9 million worldwide) new HIV infections\n2.4 million (out of 3.1 million worlwide) AIDS deaths
635149
I think so.  And it's a shame that more people haven't answered this question.  It's horrible what goes on in those regions, and people don't seem to care because Africans tend to be seen as lesser people.  Hence, the lack of action.
324702
It would be unfair to categorize people as stupid, lazy or any other name without having a more in depth grasp of the situation people in these countries are living. I'm from Senegal, West Africa, English is my third language, yet I feel I have more brains than certain people that will use such a medium to speak nonsense.\nAnyway mulumbu, to your question the answer is yes, but certain elements will have to be in place. Neither the US, nor any of the Western developed countries made it to this level of development in one day. No need to expand the historical tangent, but many African nations have had their so called Independence less than half a century ago -Senegal's was in 1960. After years of exploitation via colonization those countries owe a financial debt to the countries that colonize them in the first place, talking about irony. This makes it virtually impossible to fashion any internal policies that will favor the growth of those countries because the interests that needs to be considered first are the one of those other nations. \nSo when you ignorant people use the N word freely, or call people names in the comfort of your own cozy homes, my striving self for a better world via knowledge will be busy being curious about things that governs and affects the well being of our society.
158333
That's like asking what makes babies cry.  There are too many different causes to explain it fully, but the origin of many of these problems came from "the scramble for africa," when at the Berlin Conference of 1885, European nations including Britain, France, Portugal, Germany, Denmark, Spain, and Belgium met in order to divide up the African continent amongst themselves.  In the process, they paid no attention to the territories of various ethnic groups.  Some groups found themselves neighbors of others they had long warred with - some groups found themselves split down the middle.  This all relates back to interstate conflict via the issue of sovereignty.  Ethnic groups war with each other over land as well as the resources reaped from these lands.  On a continent where drought and famine run rampant, land is the most important resource.  \n\nThis explanation really referrs to small-scale conflict, but large-scale conflict, meaning that which involves heads of state and/or military involvement, also is based on sovereignty.  Think about it.  Most of these countries are only 40-50 years into their independence, which they had to fight global superpowers to achieve.  Even the African UNION's charter is devoted mostly to respecting one another's borders and rights to rule their own lands - SOVEREIGNTY.  It's about resources, it's about machismo, it's about ethnic conflit and high-level corruption... interstate conflict in Africa is a huge topic.  If you narrow your question down a little, I'd be happy to help.  Email me (I have a Master's Degree in African Politics, so you can trust me!)
271709
try the CIA Website, you have to know what the countries of Africa are though !
930199
Yes some African Governments are corrupt,but who is teaching them?You,ve got it,Governments like the Labour Party.Corrupt from top to bottom and only interested in their own well being.They are all hypocrites @ HOGS.
1160044
wow! You live in Africa, what's it like? I'm from the USA.
1004989
Sigh.  It is frustrating to see though the West might have the best intentions, they still have no idea what is going on in Africa. How will redrawing borders solve any problems at all? It is certainly not borders that are causing the immense amount of poverty and disease that plagues Africa.  Redrawing borders will only cause confusion, especially considering that there are thousands of tribes in Africa: 73 in Zambia alone.  Most African tribes get along swell, and they got along even better before colonialism.  \n     What Africa needs is not United Nations intervention (Oh God that would be a nightmare), or religion, or democracy (almost, if not all the countries in Africa, are "democracies", at least assert that they are), or birth control, or whatever other easy solutions Westerners come up with.They need justice: an equal share of the worlds resources so that they can have money to feed their families, educate their children, and fight the diseases that plague their continent.\nBut, as Bono says, Westerners are good at charity, they are terrible at justice.  So, we'll see what happens.
1064525
I would not think would be a correct generality.  Africa has the worse cases of widespread Aids in the world.  \n\nhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/africa/2000/aids_in_africa/default.stm\n\nhttp://www.csmonitor.com/2004/1201/p06s01-woaf.html\n\nhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4052531.stm\n\nMost of this is contributed to sexual relations outside of marriage and with many partners.   (And that does not sound like "good moral values, to me)\n\nI think you can find kind, moral, polite, responsible men in any country and within any race... you just have to demand it and not take less.
481467
Africans need to reject tribalism and work towards national unity.  Corruption is rampant, but in many situations is accepted because that corruption is good for whatever particular tribal group you belong to.  Also, the other nations of the world cannot lift africa up, africans must do it themselves.
545207
Starcrossing40, Iraq and Iran and Syria are all part of the African continent. Check your map. However, Saddam is no longer in power, so he isn't currently a dictator.\n\nParade ranked the Sudan’s Omar al-Bashir as the world’s worst dictator. During his reign OECD countries gave his regime more than $6 billion in non-military aid. The U.S. accounted for more than $1 billion of that aid. Kim Jong-Il was ranked as the second worst dictator and received a little over $1 billion in aid, with more than half of it coming from the U.S. Than Shwe of Myanmar, Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, and Islam Karimov of Uzbekistan round out the top five dictators on the list. The U.S. contributed $32 million to Myanmar, $1.1 billion to Zimbabwe, and $385 million to Uzbekistan.\n\nOverall, OECD countries contributed aid to every one of Parade’s 20 worst dictators. Combined, these leaders received nearly $55 billion in aid. The U.S. contributed to 19 of the 20 worst dictators; King Abdulla of Saudi Arabia was somehow left off of the U.S. gravy train. In total, the U.S. contributed more than $7 billion in aid to these leaders. In North Korea, Belarus, Ethiopia, Swaziland, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan the U.S. contributed more than 20 percent of the total aid these countries received from OECD countries.\n\nGovernment-sponsored aid has failed to promote economic growth in the third world. From 1970 to 2000, more than $400 billion poured into poor African countries with no development to show for it. Parade’s list of dictators makes our foreign aid record even more disturbing. Not only has it failed to promote development, in many cases our aid has supported oppressive dictatorships.\n\nFollowing Hamas’s recent victory in Palestine’s elections, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice threatened to cut off aid to Palestine, saying, “The United States is not prepared to fund an organization that advocates the destruction of Israel, that advocates violence and that refuses its obligations.” Perhaps the U.S. should apply that policy to the dictators on Parade’s list as well. By providing aid to these dictators the U.S. has given them a source of funds to use to secure political support and likely prolonged their oppressive reigns.\n\nThe first rule of development policy should be to do no harm. Unfortunately OECD and U.S. aid have failed to promote development and actively promoted harm by aiding oppressive dictatorships. This kind of aid also unfortunately tends to undermine economic freedom by politicizing economic life in the recipient country and by preserving inefficient regimes. Over the last 30 years development aid has lowered measures of economic freedom in both dictatorships and democracies. To better promote freedom, and consequently development, we should end economic development aid to dictators and democracies alike.\n\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nBenjamin Powell, Ph.D., is the Director of the Center on Entrepreneurial Innovation at the Independent Institute, an Oakland-based policy think tank and a professor of economics at San Jose State University. \n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nMatt Ryan is an adjunct fellow with the Independent Institute in Oakland, Calif. and holds a Masters degree in Economics from San Jose State University. \n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2764
Witness heart-breaking poverty,unemployment and practice voodoo?
597819
There are a few good answers here, but in general many are not well-thought at all. Even Dan Rather had said it was inexcusable that the world media was focused on Bill Clinton's fling while 3 million people died in central Africa over a two year period alone. Africa's problems are immense, and perhaps that is the biggest problem: no one knows where to begin that will have any affect at all.\n\nTo be fair, President Bush has taken an initiative to begin helping those African nations that have taken steps to help themselves. This might seem harsh, sending aid to those that need it supposedly least, but in a way it is not. The countries that are in the worst shape are bad primarily because their leadership and their governing institutions are so rotten to the core that any money or aid sent to them will just be wasted or stolen or worse, and while that might make us feel less guilty it will not really help anyone (just like Live Aid, which gave most of the money raised to a genocidal and corrupt Communist government that was mass murdering its enemies under cover of a manufactured famine).\n\nIt is difficult to mobilize public support for Africa for a number of generally embarassing reasons. The continent has very few 'sexy' resources to trade so we Americans are not directly affected in our daily lives by turmoil (except for a few nations in central Africa, there is very little oil to make us pay more at the pump, we as a rule don't eat the food that they grow so we don't miss anything at the dinner table, we only buy diamonds at very rare occasions, all of the minerals are available from other sources, and for the last hundred years the migration from Africa has largely been to Europe so there is no indigenous ethnic lobby in the United States). The entire continent seems to be so mired in catastrophes of such monumental size that it looks absolutely hopeless, and even thinking of beginning any sort of radical help is completely daunting. Every time foreign armies have tried to intervene (France and England, Soviet Union and Cuba, USA in Somalia) the outcome is nothing but horror stories that would make Freddy Krueger throw up all over himself - prisoners hacked to pieces, infants have arms and legs cut off by rebels simply because they think it is fun, soldiers dragged through the streets to the cheers of little children, etc. Every time a major aid project begins, the material elements are immediately stolen and therefor nothing gets done.\n\nIf the United States is going to intervene, it will have to be with massive amounts of force and social reconstruction on every level, and it will look like colonialism. I can tell you that, from the way we are responding to the relatively benign American behavior in Iraq and the relatively weak opposition we are reacting to, WE DO NOT HAVE THE STOMACH FOR THIS!!!!!!!\n\nSometimes doing something poorly can be worse than doing nothing at all.
123505
WHAT IS BAD ABOUT IT?