IMDb: Another Eurocentric Safe Haven Masquerading as a Resourceful platform

Introduction:

Perhaps the basic evolutionary trajectory of human lifestyle is variably understood in the following manner: a so-called "stone-age", and in some cases, "nomadic" or "hunter-gatherer" sustenance, gives way to "sedentary", "agriculture" and/or "animal husbandry", and then to "community-building" or "urbanization", thereby possibly paving way for "social stratification" and "nation-building", which in turn may well have served as a basic ingredient for the flourishing of "cottage industry" and "trade", to be succeeded by "industrialization" and "commerce" (larger-scale trade). In that vein, it is commonly understood that "industrialization" has been followed by the "information/technology age", as another stage in human development. As it concerns this "information age", particularly with the coming of age of the internet, many "social" platforms of various stripes and self-professed functions have popped over the years.

As the "information age" matures, so does the plethora of "social media" grow in number. This, like any other undertaking by humans, comes with the good and the bad.

Unity, Harmony and Peace?

Introduction:

In the natural world, from the very onset of its existence, life has been sustained through a constant battle of what biological arrangement or form can stick it through the challenge(s) that a given environment—which is ever-changing in our universe—throws its way. It's from this earthly-pervasive phenomenon, that the now common saying of "survival of the fittest" was coined, once the human mind was eventually able to pick it up [think for example, Darwin].

In a given environment, some biological units died out, and some managed to live on. In the biological world, this was made possible by what are—technically speaking—errors in DNA coding during the attempt at self-replication, i.e. another but crucial mode, by which life has been able to sustain and preserve itself to this point.

So, as it turns out, we humans and practically every other known life form owe our very existence to "imperfection" in the natural world. Without these "mistakes", it is safe to say that we would not be here. Yes, there are schools of thought which will argue otherwise and say that we owe our existence to a purposeful conscience, which has pre-programmed life to ride along the way it has, but that's another discussion [for related matter, see: link]. It's perhaps then natural to see why many multicellular organisms are competitive with one another, whether within or across species; why we see animals marking their territory for the attentive minds of those from both within and out of their own species, competing for a mate and for food. Humans are apparently no exception to this basic arrangement of existence: It's perhaps why humans would rather kill their own kind for natural resources than share, and for the purpose of the present entry, why we have so many more competitive or antagonizing social events than consolidating or unifying social events.

Knowledgebase Tool Kit: Ways to Test Just How Secular One's Nation is!

Image Caption: Coin with "In God We Trust". Click on the image for a higher resolution version

Introduction

Many nations, especially those in the so-called "west", have societies that routinely pride themselves with the self-promoting perception that their respective country is the epitome example of secular bustling "democracy" and "civil-liberty friendly" social setup that is supposedly found nowhere else...so go the trumpets of patriotism. However, if one wants to get a truly sober assessment of one's own country, of which one is determined to be a citizen, then there are clear ways of testing the veracity of perception commonly pressed forward by the media and ruling circles of one's own nationality; let's take self-anointment proclamations of secularism for instance, and discuss that.

The Coming of Age of the Olympic Games

Introduction: 

It's hard to resist the temptation of having something to say about the Olympics, now that the summer Olympic Games are here again. Greece holds a special nostalgic place in the circles of the Olympic Games, that have been by tradition, held every four years for both summer and winter, respectively; the reason being, that these games are said to have been inspired by ancient Greek Olympic games. In the midst of accompanying jubilation around these games, Greece is often touted as the "birth place of sports", as particularly exemplified by media talk on those occasions when Greece took on the role as the host nation for the games, like the recent events that took place in Athens eight years ago. Such glorification rarely pay mind to history of organized sports events going even further back in time, as exemplified by those in say, ancient Egypt.

Rebuttal to: The "Correction" of the Supposed "10 Economic Myths" about Capitalism

Introduction: 

The development of modern capitalism in "western" nations has been accompanied by damaging consequences for Africa, as it has elsewhere, paving way to such destructive phenomena like the explosive and conflict-prone balkanization of Africa, ripping the continent off sizable chunks of its able-bodied workforce through the promotion and practice of slavery,  not leaving out brain-drain, disintegration of preexisting socio-cultural institutions [e.g. school systems, architectural concepts, dress codes, writing systems, preexisting trade networks, local industry, and the like] that had long served the peoples of the continent and replacing them with "western" counterparts/variants, thereby inducing people of the continent to become dependent on European economies, draining natural resources and compelling many localities on the continent to become net exporters of capital rather than net consumers of capital, rewriting history to serve the oppressors, and so forth. Since capitalism has had disastrous effects on the continent, it is only fitting to set some things straight about this system of economy.

Strolling down Memory Lane: African Labour Movement

Introduction: 

So what's new? The answer is a disappointing "nothing", as far as the ensuing subject matter is concerned. This grand continent (Africa), which has the distinction of being the default home of humanity and many other magnificent species, has been inflicted with gross propaganda-driven disinformation, along with a good amount of apathy; mostly of the willful kind, ever since the common era rise to significance of previously isolated west European countries in the globe's geopolitical landscape. Many examples of this trend have been covered on this site, ranging from DNA studies to historical analysis. For instance, it has become something of a cultic ritual of sycophants of 'western' imperialism and associated chauvinism to insinuate that African labour forces were granted "freedom" or "independence" on a silver platter, supposedly as a "goodwill" gesture on the part of occupying intruders (colonists) from outside, particularly from Europe, who had nothing at heart but thinking only of the people they came to inhumanely colonize. The same sycophants have a tendency to blame social misery in the continent on the supposed "premature withdrawal" of colonial presence.

Apathy has spurred others to opine away that Africans rarely stand up for themselves, thereby suggesting that Africans are somehow innately submissive to oppression. Such personalities assume that just because their local TV news networks don't cover it, African labour movements must then be all but non-existent, not leaving out that they all-too-often than not have a screwed up idea of what entails Africa as a geological entity. Of course, a sober research is all that is needed to render any of these assumptive opinions as nothing more than emotional bunk, and avoidable, by anyone with a genuine desire to acquire knowledge.

How are the Media and Schools catching up with Scientific Progress? Pt.5

Introduction:

We proceed on from the last segment, wherein we looked at how nationalism and like ideology continues to plague science. No science has infamously suffered from this more than the discipline of human palaeontology. In the "west", the venture into this field started with getting to know remains of the European Neanderthal, and the sparking thereof, the belief that Europe was the hub of human origins.

How are the Media and Schools catching up with Scientific Progress? Pt.4

Introduction:

In the previous segment, a good deal of space was dedicated to a straightforward preliminary look at the portrayal of non-European peoples, especially Africans, in "western" media not merely as a loosely connected hodgepodge of unconscious and conscious underlying motives, ranging from economic considerations to racism, but rather, as a conscious undertaking of "western" imperialism, of which the 'western' establishments are quite mindful.

How are the Media and Schools catching up with Scientific Progress? Pt.3

Introduction:

In the previous segments of the this blog entry, much attention was paid to History channel documentary reenactments of the ancients of Africa, particularly the Ancient Egyptians. Ancient Egypt has been the most popular subject of 'western' fascination and romanticism, but this sort of thing has not been limited to just Egypt. It has been extended to other African complexes, from Timbuktu, the Great Zimbabwe, to ancient Abyssinia (modern day Ethiopia). A good example of this can be seen in the portrayal of an Ancient Abyssinian kingdom in the now 9 year old comedy flick of the title "The Hot Chick".

How are the Media and Schools catching up with Scientific Progress?-Pt2

Carried on from the first entry.

Introduction recap:

The taking up of African historiography by Europeans has long been mired with disinformation, as scholars of European descent sought to accommodate imperialist designs of their governments around the African continent. This matter had been particularly brushed on briefly in an earlier entry discussing the significance of additional Timbuktu chronicles that were brought to light in recent times and the corresponding rush to preserve those relics, whereby we come across the systematic construction of the "Ghana Conquest Theory", at a time when European polities had their eye set on colonizing African territories and fuel their growth with African resources. The historiography of Ancient Ghana, and Western Sudan (otherwise now recognized as "West Africa") in general, was but just one element of this disinformation campaign; the policy had extended to other elements of African historiography, Ancient Egypt being the most popular and enduring example of this. Complexes from Kush, Abyssinia or Aksum to the Great Zimbabwe had all become casualties of European disinformation.

How are the Media and Schools catching up with Scientific Progress?

Introduction:

The taking up of African historiography by Europeans has long been mired with disinformation, as scholars of European descent sought to accommodate imperialist designs of their governments around the African continent. This matter had been particularly brushed on briefly in an earlier entry discussing the significance of additional Timbuktu chronicles that were brought to light in recent times and the corresponding rush to preserve those relics, whereby we come across the systematic construction of the "Ghana Conquest Theory", at a time when European polities had their eye set on colonizing African territories and fuel their growth with African resources. The historiography of Ancient Ghana, and Western Sudan (otherwise now recognized as "West Africa") in general, was but just one element of this disinformation campaign; the policy had extended to other elements of African historiography, Ancient Egypt being the most popular and enduring example of this. Complexes from Kush, Abyssinia or Aksum to the Great Zimbabwe had all become casualties of European disinformation.

Could Religion be an Outmoded Institution?

Perhaps there were moments in humanity's social evolutionary history when religion served a progressive purpose, in the sense that it allowed humans to make that transition to begin asking questions of how they got here, how our world came to be and so forth. The turn towards burying the dead love ones by our pre-historic ancestors testifies to this abstract thought in human development, and hence, must have marked a turning point in human thinking. This was to serve as the prelude to the concept of scientific inquiry of our existence and how our world came to be.

Perspective on the so-called "Witchcraft" Practices

Just like the other romanticized media concoctions of Africa to 'western' and/or 'western influenced' audiences around the world, another typification of Africans is the practice of 'witchcraft'. A burgeoning trend in 'western' media outlets, is the progressive building up of a narrative of "increasing witchcraft" violence on the continent, whereby 'witchcraft' may be defined as follows: "defining witch craft as superstitious behavior that would traditionally be considered deviant".

Knowledge-base Tool Kit: The Convenient "Illegal Alien"

Many of us in our formative years, or else at some point in our adulthood, have become familiar with the mythical super-human personality known as Superman, amongst a number of other fictional characters with extraordinary strength and/or supernatural powers. The character was reportedly conceived in the early 30s by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, themselves immediate descendants of Jewish immigrants. Superman's first comic publication appearance is said to have occurred in 1938, in an Action Comics No.1. The so-called Superman had soon gained quite a following in American society and other corners of the globe, and had become something of a cultural icon in the U.S.—that is to say, a symbol of the United States of America. Photo stills or renditions of this super-human figure with either the American flag in the background, or the figure holding the American flag, had subsequently become a common sight in this country (U.S.A.). Even the popular Superman movies of the late seventies and eighties, which have somewhat immortalized Christopher Reeve—who played the alter-egos of the super-hero, elements of this jingoism can be detected, like for instance, in Superman's now familiar lines of; “Truth, Justice and the American Way”. This phenomenon had not been lost on observers, like Timothy Aaron Pevey for instance, who reportedly said as follows in his work, From Superman to Superbland: The Man of Steel's Popular Decline Among Postmodern Youth: "an immigrant figure whose desire was to fit into American culture as an American".

Knowledge-base Tool Kit: What's with all this not Getting "Africa" Right?

It is a familiar name for one of the largest tectonic plates on the planet and something that primary school kids can easily place on the map. There are very few places on the globe where the name "Africa" has not been heard, yet it seems to be the most inexplicably misconstrued and misused name. Thanks to basic geography lessons in schools, kids can pretty much get the basic idea of Africa right; so why can't full grown adults?

Knowledge-base Tool Kit: More on Social Positioning

Just another motoring report of an exclusive car, or is there more to it than meets the eye? As an illustrative example of how the aforementioned manipulation of the wage workforce by corporations and the plutocrats is at work, i.e. mass lay-offs so as to bring down wages and raise productivity with slimmer workforces [see the topic: Knowledge-base Tool Kit: Social Bargaining positions], the following came to attention...

High (volume) Roller — Rolls-Royce is on something of a...roll, with remarkable growth in many markets and all its designated models sold out until September.

Knowledge-base Tool Kit: Social Bargaining positions

Image caption: Cartoon inspired by artwork of Scott Adams, United Feature Syndicate, Inc.

In the existing interconnected global social complex, there are two main types of business entities: 1) Owners and/or overseers of profit-driven concerns that supply commodities of various forms, and 2) suppliers of labor. The former group ranges from financiers to the management of manufacturing, service and retail concerns, while the latter essentially comprises of the wage-worker. The global social setup is of course complex enough to obscure the obviousness of its interconnected business relations in all its facets to an ordinary observer, beyond that observer's own immediate role in society and relations directly linked to that, e.g. employer-employee social relations....so, where does that leave an ordinary wage-worker?

Knowledge-base Tool Kit: Extraterrestrial Projection

On the surface, what is being discussed here may seem lighthearted and all, but we've all seen sensationalism around extraterrestrial beings at one point or another, be it from fringe cult groups who advocate personal UFO encounters or sightings, or entertainment mass media concerns. It seems that people are fascinated by the desire to find out, and some are even obsessed with the notion of 'we are not alone' in the universe, i.e., life outside planet earth, perhaps higher forms of life such as those typified by various depictions of the often 'big-headed" and "bulgy-eyed" extraterrestrial creatures generally identified with manned UFOs.The question then becomes, how much do humans project themselves onto these "beings", directly or indirectly? What paradoxes can one glean from such projections?

On the last point about the fascination around exotic "beings" beyond planet earth and the feeling of "not being alone in the universe", one can't help but get a sense of hypocrisy about the whole affair to the extent that humans cannot even get along amongst themselves within their very own species and show tolerance to that some .1% genomic differences—if not even less when taking just the superficial outwardly-manifested physiological differences into account—between humans. Nationalistic and xenophobic backwardness abound human societies, creating a situation wherein a person's very "being" can become an "illegal" entity just for "being" somewhere other than his/her place of birth. Such is the attitude of humans towards fellow humans. With such animosity and intellectual backwardness of humans towards their very own kind, usually justified on the account of cultural and bio-physical differences that presumably come with birth rights to social privileges over "others", can one not objectively admit that there is a tad bit hypocrisy in human eagerness to encounter even more exotic "beings" of vastly distinct species, from outside planet earth, and to confirm their beliefs of "not being alone" in the vast universe? Why can't the same eagerness be applied to the differences that already exist within humanity itself, right here on planet earth? The paradox here is obvious: "You can't handle differences among yourselves right here on the same planet, yet you yearn and lust for even more different folks, presumably from somewhere else in the universe, where one from earth is bound to get lost".

It is hard to pass up, when one comes across extraterrestrial themes in movies and games, that these exotic "beings" are generally humanoid in character. Is that accidental, or is it yet another reflection of human projection onto would-be extraterrestrial beings? Take Sci-fi shows like say, Star Trek, The Forbidden Planet, Space Odyssey, Space 1999, etc; in each of these shows, exotic beings are endowed with humanoid characteristics in some fashion or another. In Star Trek for one, the majority of their encounters are with "exotic" beings from planets afar, if not galaxies afar, which are of human physiques and generally like what some would call, "white people", on planet earth.  Furthermore, what's wonderful about most of these exotic beings, is that they readily speak human language rather fluently, particularly in English! Even with the small biological differences amongst humans on this planet alone, humans don't all speak, or importantly, readily speak the same singular language without first integrating into a group, community or society different from their own, and learning a language different from their own primary one. Nor do all humans even speak English with the same accent like say, some Anglo-Saxon personality.Yet, exotic beings of vastly different species, notwithstanding their remarkable physical resemblances to planet earth humans, are supposed to be able to instantly speak some singular human language form fluently, usually in English—which is no longer just a language of planet earth itself, but somehow promoted to the language of the universe and spoken by virtually all the discrete extraterrestrial beings—not just from planets afar, but also possibly from different galaxies, and thereby able to speak with their "foreign" earthling counterparts—the humans! Much of the time these humanoid extraterrestrial beings invariably speak with the very same English accent(s) as some "Anglo-Saxon" space crew, it should be noted. Even supposing there are chances, within different galaxies, for a situation akin to our own galaxy, wherein the environment is ripe for the sustenance of life, is one to take it for granted that in literally across discrete countless galaxies, that one would run into the very same path to evolution as that which occurred on planet earth in our own galaxy, with little to no deviation, thereby culminating in planets respective to each galaxy eventually being inhabited by vastly distinct species but ones which display the very same physique or body plans as humans, who can even possibly get lost among humans? In viewing shows like Star Trek, this is the impression that one is bound to get, if he/she is to take time to think about it for a moment. One would have to assume that in some distant galaxy, to which an 'exotic' being—who is virtually physically indistinguishable from say, a "white" male or female of planet earth—belongs, as is often the case in the aforementioned show, there lies a planet of origin which essentially resembled that of planet earth, hosting evolutionary paths that is virtually indistinguishable from that of planet earth, including the evolution of anatomically modern human-like "beings" from ape-like creatures—again just like planet earth, wherein some interplay between glacialization and solar radiation environment culminated in the evolution of beings that look no different from planet earth's own "white" people of European descent. Of course, this is not to say that one does not comes across humanoid-beings of "color" [complexion] in the said TV show, but these are generally on occasional basis. Even more remarkable perhaps, is that these vastly distinct species and the human space crews mutually find each other sexually-appealing, to going as far as even becoming love interests, in various occasions; but of course, none of this should be taken seriously, because after all, these theatrics are just fiction, which need not make any sense at all, right?! Whatever the case may be, it is hard to pass up the significance of the popular portrayal of extra-terrestrial beings—generally purported to be of "high intellect"—in the guise of the humanoid form, i.e. the anatomically modern human physique in particular, as a reflection of human projection onto would-be extraterrestrial beings.

Revisiting the issue of nationalism and associated chauvinism, one is hard-pressed to take no notice of the condition of the earlier Star Trek releases of having had regular space crews or casts that bespoke a certain socio-ethnic variety; one had for example, a "Black" female regular (Uhura), an "East Asian" male regular (Sulu), an "East European" male regular (Chekov), an "extraterrestrial"—or at least part "extraterrestrial—regular (Spock), and "Western or West European" regulars (Scott & Kirk). One can suppose that such an ensemble of space crew is not all that out of character of the real world or that far-fetched, especially if they were to have been recruited largely from the same nation-state; however, could such a diverse crew—who, for those who are familiar with the TV series, are generally portrayed as working in harmony, wherein no regard is given to "racialist" and/or nationalist differences—be equally cohesive, were the crews recruited from different nation states with competing national interests? It is certainly a question worth pondering, but to take note of the status quo of the real world, while joint "international" space programs had been mounted, such as the fairly modest existing International Space Station (the so-called ISS), these have been plagued by competing national interests of individual member states, and the interplay between such interests and budgetary restrictions placed on member states for some reason or another. One need only look at the spacecraft models invoked in the likes of Star Trek Sci-fi concerns, and realize that such massive space vehicles are likely to entail not only great technological leap from that currently in place, but also likely to be prohibitively expensive crafts to put together by today's political standards, and one that would require unwavering international cooperation and consistent joint funding, spanning years upon years, if not decades upon decades; can today's competing or antagonistic nation-states pull something of that feat off? Questionable, at the very least! The very notion of nation-states is itself outmoded and can only find expression in the form of competing polities, each pushing for respective "national interests" of not so much as ordinary citizens, but largely those of the generally smaller ruling and business layers of society.

Hypothetically speaking [obviously], i.e. from experience on earth, if extraterrestrial beings indeed exist elsewhere, it would perhaps be in their best interest not to be 'discovered' by those "Humans" from earth. For if they do exist in a certain planet "discovered" by "humans", then those humans are going to deduce one thing from this, without wasting much time on the thought: availability of resources on the newly "discovered" planet. From experience on earth, such a development would likely soon translate into GENOCIDE, unless the new found inhabitants are many more times technologically superior to the "earthlings".

Is it any wonder that most science fiction movies about extraterrestrial invaders, interestingly seem to depict said extraterrestrials in a negative light, usually as resource-driven genocidal maniacs? However, when a movie storyline involves a "human" intrusion into a foreign planet, it almost always depicts that person as the saint on the planet, who just so happens to have gotten off on the wrong foot, generating unwarranted hostility from the natives. Such antagonistic depictions of the extraterrestrial beings vs. human characters are in fact reflections of paradoxes that exist in human behavior and attitudes. If one didn't know any better, one would say that these reflect [including all the above-mentioned] the unconscious (though sometimes conscious) desire of storytellers and movie producers to paint extraterrestrial creatures in "human" image. As mentioned earlier, i.e., from experience on earth, it is quite plain to see the relationship: history has shown on various occasions, that when certain human groups "discover" (so they claim) new territories on earth, the next thing that comes into the picture, is the step towards genocide, i.e., ruthless efforts to wipe out pre-existing inhabitants, so that the invaders can have all the resources in their “new found” territory(s) to themselves. The funny thing about this (if it weren't so tragic), is that these invaders often paint themselves as the righteous ones, while depicting the hostility towards their blatantly unsavory presence as being unwarranted; yet still, when this very same behavior is ascribed to extraterrestrial beings, it no longer becomes righteous, but evil and out to do humanity harm, while the hostility towards such invasion is interpreted as fully justified. Henceforth, the paradox in the matter of an action being righteous on one hand, and then that very same action becoming evil on another, is part and parcel of human projection of itself onto extraterrestrial beings, and the propaganda value of such caricaturization depends on who is telling the story, and when & where; i.e. perception from the oppressor's angle, or from the lens of the oppressed!

It may sound silly, but if the present author were an extraterrestrial creature residing somewhere in the mysterious universe, the last thing that this author would probably want, is to meet ‘discoverers’ from planet earth.
 ___________________________________________________________________
*References:

—Insights based on personal notes from 2005 (clickable link).

Knowledge-base Tool Kit:

Nation States of Africa in Antiquity: Did National—GeoPolitical—Boundaries exist Here in Antiquity?

A new feature on this site will be the occasional and recurring posting of matters that come up every now and then in discussions as questions but are otherwise generally considered basic knowledge, under the "Knowledge-base Tool Kit" heading. Our first such topic here, will be on: Nation States of Africa in Antiquity: Did National—GeoPolitical—Boundaries exist Here in Antiquity? In search of answers to this question, turning to antiquated maps will do little to help us, if for no other reason than, that the further back in time one goes, the lesser acquainted with the world's actual geographical breadth and depth were people. Heck, back in the era of humanity's earliest centralized polities known to us today, the average person was more than likely not even conscious of the apparatus of geopolitical unity in terms of affiliation-by-continent, or in various cases, the extent of continents and worlds beyond their own immediate local confines and those of their neighbors. The following is a portion of western Africa, fairly decent-looking—especially given the time or era in question and the relatively narrower scope of people awareness of the world's geographical extent or extremes beyond their own immediate shores and surrounding areas thereof, featuring the well-known sketch of Mansa Musa; presumably one of Spanish origin, dating to the 14th century (ca. 1375):

Click on the image to get a better resolution.

The metmuseum website notes that the original map can be located in France; it site notes: Facsimilie of a map drawn in Spain and dated to 1375, showing the king of Mali holding a gold nugget. Image courtesy of the British Library. The original is held by the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris.

Below, is a fairly odd representation of the northern portion of Africa and neighboring areas, reportedly of some European [southern European] origin and dating to the Medieval era...

Click on the image to get a better resolution.

Below, we have a 15th century map by Giovanni Leardo:

Click on the image to get a better resolution.

A circa 17th century rendition of Africa...

Click on the image to get a better resolution.

What's notable about all these mapping manifestations of world geography, is that they all reflect different perceptions by different observers, and at different points in time. Therefore any assessment about any early maps of the sorts exemplified herein, while serving useful historical purpose, can only be subjective in reality, in accordance to the observer who created or authored the maps in question; they are subjective, because they would have been impacted by the limitations of the observers then knowledge base, whose views in most cases, would have been shaped by the world of the era they belonged to. It is safe to say that the different shapes of the maps above exemplify this. Therefore, the "accuracy of the maps" in question, can only reflect the scope of knowledge of the observer, and their intent in creating said maps. Furthermore, none of these maps reflect the geopolitical status quo of complexes traced considerably further back into antiquity, like say—the ancient Egyptian era, which had long gone by then. Any maps of the African continent or at least portions of it in the ancient Egyptian period, would have been even cruder than those shown above, because folks' knowledge of the world's geography was even more limited than that of their counterparts who proceeded them much later in time, in the "medieval" and contemporary times. However, one need not have these maps to ascertain that there were nation states in antiquity that had their own political boundaries, before the European imperialism that gained momentum after the 15th century. As noted here before, we have tangible evidence to this end, in terms of militarized border fortifications in the ancient Egyptian case. Furthermore, in the so-called medieval period, complexes like the Songhai empire, or even ancient Mali, apparently had their own political borders, which other western African complexes to their north for example, would have had to recognize, and could therefore only infringe on their sovereignty by use of force, if they had the means to. Recalling the harassment meted out to the ancient Ghanaian state by armed Tamazigh-speaking semi-nomads (reportedly affiliated with the Almoravid group) of the Sahel; what was all that about? Ancient Ghana had cavalry—why? What about the invasion of Songhai by the ancient Moroccan Kingdom under al Mansur. Again, it had to take force, for the Moroccan kingdom to lay any claim on territory under the Songhai polity, precisely because prior to that, Songhai would have been recognized as a sovereign socio-political entity, with borders that needed to be respected. Same assessments could be made for the conflicts between the Kushites and the ancient Egyptians, and between the Romans and the Kushites over Nile Valley territory, and so forth. Otherwise, there would be no need for such conflict; people can just come and go as they pleased. Hopefully, the intended point here is clear. An empire without borders has never existed—at least not to the knowledge of the present author.

Social Democracy for Africa? Part 4

Carried on from Part 3; also see: Part 1 and Part 2

Today, “Cold War-like” proxy battlegrounds are being prepared in Africa against emerging opportunistic bourgeois rivals from the East, notably China, to the big business interests of the major capitalist colonial economies. Earlier elsewhere (clickable), the present author said:

“With the growth of local industry through "protectionism" [and fueled by the Slave Trade, in the case of capitalist colonial economic powers], as was the case in the capitalist colonial economic powers, nations were able to develop sufficiently large home markets for their local industry, and only when they became large enough to compete globally, did governments relax "protectionism", but all the while doing everything possible to deter fledgling industries of the economically less advantaged nations from flourishing, by telling the governments of those nations to not resort to "protectionism" for the sake of "fair trade". The capitalist jargon for that concept is, “free-market trade”, wherein capitalist economic powers proceed to sell manufactured goods at competitive prices—facing virtually no trade barriers with the lifting of tariffs in the destination economies—and thereby crushing fledgling local industries therein, which are overwhelmed by unfettered stiff competition from bigger foreign corporations, while at the same time, buying cheap or free colonial-allocated land and exploiting abundant pool of “cheap” labor at what ultimately amounts to slave-labor wages. Variably, governments of those "less advantaged nations" of course cooperated accordingly, to the peril of their own economies—this seems to be the case for many economies in Africa.

Part of the reason [of the spineless compromise by ruling bourgeois African layers] had to do with military pressure from the capitalist colonial economic powers, and part of it had to do with debt-regime leveraging by those same colonial economic powers. When many of the formerly colonized regions of Africa got their so-called "independence", many of them also inherited debts incurred by their local colonial regimes. Moreover, as many sections of their societies were devastated by lack of social spending under colonial occupation, many of the "newly independent" African regimes had to borrow money, in many cases from the very same colonial regimes that they sought to free themselves from, for social reconstruction programs. As a result, many ended up incurring hefty debts, which former colonial regimes sought to exploit and use as economic leverage to place dictates on the "newly independent" and usually weak economies. The vehicles used to utilize debt-regimes as leverage, are the likes of IMF and World Bank. Political leverage was continued through the setting up of institutions like the United Nations, and the undemocratic and "permanent" membership of certain "wealthy" nations therein.”

Additionally, with respect to those debts, it is necessary to revisit how capitalist colonial economic powers begrudgingly gave out loans, and so-called financial assistance; In light of the Cold War, Ann Talbot spells it out:

“In this situation [Cold War environment] they realised that they must rely on the Pan-African movement to control the growing protests. The [British] Foreign Office pointed out that “Pan-Africanism, in itself, is not necessarily a force that we need regard with suspicion and fear. On the contrary, if we can avoid alienating it and guide it on lines generally sympathetic to the free world, it may well prove in the longer term a strong, *indigenous barrier to the penetration of Africa by the Soviet Union.*”

A necessary part of this perspective was to provide the independent African regimes with aid. “If Africa is to remain loyal to the Western cause, its economic interests must coincide with, and reinforce, its political sympathies; and one of the major problems of the relationship between the West and Africa will be to ensure an adequate flow of economic assistance, and particularly capital, through various channels to the newly emerging States. On any reckoning the amounts required will be considerable; and, if the Western Powers are unreasonably insensitive to the economic aspirations of independent Africa, the Governments of the new states may be compelled to turn to the Soviet Union for the assistance that they will certainly need...”

As already noted above, the capitalist colonial economic powers knew very well that governments of the “newly independent” states “certainly needed” financial assistance, given that they [the colonial regimes] were the ones responsible for total economic devastation in those states. So, it was up to them to jump in quickly to fill up the role that would have otherwise been open to the Soviet Union, given the colonial legacy of capitalist colonial economic powers. Today, China and others from the East seek to fill up the vacancy created by the demise of the Soviet Union in exploiting gaps in the capitalist colonial economic powers’ ever diminishing financial assistance to bourgeois regimes in Africa. The “free world” mentioned in the British Foreign Office’s statement is capitalist jargon for “free-market”, which entails privatization and deregulation of big business spanning the entire industrial sector and the agricultural sector, and even to social sectors, thereby “making the government as small as possible”— capitalist jargon for effectively reducing, if not eliminating, the role of government in consolidation of the aforementioned sectors via nationalization and spending on social welfare. As one might recall, the Soviets were relatively late in building up military bases in Africa, and started out largely with exploiting calls for assistance in the then emerging so-called “newly independent” African states. So, there is talk of the need for resurgent effort by the capitalist colonial economic powers to consolidate their role and presence in Africa. In the US for instance, presidential-hopeful Barack Obama says this:

“The Chinese are everywhere throughout Africa. They are building roads...bridges...government buildings...hospitals...We’re not doing that because we don’t think it is important and, over time, that’s going to have an enormous impact on us”

But in all this, one aspect should not allowed to be lost; the opportunistic embracing of Pan-African nationalism by the capitalist colonial economic powers.

With regards to military pressure on bourgeois regimes in less economically advantaged economies, this has particularly increased since the demise of the Soviet Union; the US has particularly become more ruthlessly reckless in its foreign policy, upon assuming the role of “sole superpower”. With respect to uncooperative bourgeois regimes of minor economies, the approach usually goes like this:

*First economic isolation and [double-standard] propaganda against the regime, to energize local dissident political elements [usually by propping up "western"-friendly bourgeoisie elements] and instill popular uprising which would collapse the regime; if that doesn’t work, then:

* paramilitary action via covert coup or assassination attempts; and if that doesn’t work, then:

*full blown military action to toss out the regime.

These steps can be seen in the example of the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein, a former “Western stooge”, when he was compelled to make the “wrong decision” in attaining more capital. One or the other of these steps now seem to be under play or is under way in Zimbabwe, in attempts to root out another former unwavering “Western stooge” turned “anti-western“ tyrant: Robert Mugabe, who also made the wrong “decisions” in an attempt to attain capital for his crumbling economy, brought about by his resolute subservience to IMF and World Bank instructions.

On this point, again Talbot chimes in:

“While relations were often tense between the new Pan-Africanist leaders and the West, there was a general recognition that their apparently socialist policies, particularly the provision of welfare measures, were the price to be paid for preventing a further upsurge of popular protest and strikes.

Pan-Africanist leaders were able to maintain a certain ability to maneuver because of the Cold War, which allowed them to extract more concessions from the West than would otherwise have been possible. But if they overstepped a fine line they could find themselves victim of a Western backed coup, as did Nkrumah, or even of assassination. The Belgian, British and US governments all concluded that Patrice Lumumba had to be murdered when he called on the Soviet Union to send troops to support his government in the Congo. Others such as Nyerere survived because they proved their usefulness to the West in the Cold War. Whatever befell them later does not alter the fact that these “African Socialists” were put in power by the colonial regimes because of their ability to prevent a genuine socialist movement developing in Africa.

The power-aspiring bourgeois figures who joined popular anti-colonial uprisings by self-appointing themselves as the articulators of popular dissent, were able “to prevent a genuine socialist movement”, precisely because they sought to draw phenomenal personal wealth within the framework of the socio-economic order set up by local colonial regimes by way of shallow populist rhetoric of Pan-African tinged “nationalism”; they didn't seek doing away with the said socio-economic order. It is no wonder then, colonial drawn political boundaries have virtually been left untouched by bourgeois regimes in “newly independent” African states; this even as they speak of “Pan-Africanism” and “African Union”. So, in this day and age, when one sees ruling African bourgeois give unfettered access to big business interests of capitalist colonial economic powers, it must be understood that they do so, with the understanding that a thin layer of the African bourgeois also benefits from this, at the expense of the African proletariat. This brings us to the importance of mass popular anti-colonial uprising in compelling local colonial regimes to issue symbolic “independence”:

“With the end of the Cold War the West has been emboldened to pull the plug on the policies that its aid has financed in Africa. Yet there remains a certain anxiety in Lancaster's mind. She implicitly recognizes that it was the growth of strikes and social movements that obliged the colonial powers to grant independence. The “African socialists” [Lancaster’s jargon for the African bourgeois] she condemns played a vital role in containing this development within the framework of nationalism. She expresses the concern that in dispensing with Pan-Africanism, the West may have replaced “an economically unsustainable development model with one that could eventually prove to be politically unsustainable if the pace of economic progress failed to accelerate.” With an instinct for the interests of the ruling class, she is aware that the real threat to corporate profits came not from the Pan-Africanists, but from the African working class and impoverished masses—and can do so again.” - Ann Talbot

A swell summarization; Pan-African “nationalism”, as has other forms of nationalism, has ended up disarming the African masses while leaving the socio-economic order set up by local colonial regimes intact. With its promises of a revolutionary development for the African proletariat, it actually ended up being counterrevolutionary. Notwithstanding its all-inclusive catchphrase, “Pan-Africanism” in Africa has largely taken the shape of nationalism at state level as opposed to continental-wide level; that is to say, ‘nationalism in one country’. This can be readily seen from the fact that colonial-drawn political boundaries have virtually been left untouched, since the so-called “independence” of African states. This was also a sure sign, that Pan-Africanist led regimes could be counted on in maintaining colonial hold on the territories without overt colonial military presence. What colonialism did, was that it ‘proletarianised’ African masses into the modern working class within the capitalist framework. This unintended outcome of capitalist colonialism was to also become its major threat; the African working classes expanded in the aftermath of the World War, as opposed to the vice versa, and the rural areas were bridged with the urban centers even more so. The result was that, with evermore repressive exploitation by local capitalist colonial regimes, the African proletariat grew more and more radicalized, leading to growing mass anti-colonial uprisings, not unlike other mass uprisings seen across Europe and elsewhere at beginning of the 20th century, in the aftermath of the first World War.

Today, some fervent capitalist apologists claim that the problem with Africa, is that Europeans didn’t colonize it long enough, and interestingly enough, the capitalist colonial regimes actually intended to remain there much longer, if not indefinitely, but it was the tenacity of the African working class to be free that earned them “independence”, which turned out to be “token independence” thanks to the high-jacking of popular anti-colonial movements by bourgeois “Pan-Africanists”. So, the main problem with Africa, is precisely that it was colonized and raped by European capitalist colonial economies and that bourgeois “Pan-Africanists” derailed mass African movements, by high-jacking them and subordinating them to colonial socio-economic order, and in doing so, helping Europeans to continue raping and exploiting Africa; the problem is not, as colonial apologists like Lancaster say, i.e. due to “African socialism” —a capitalist jargon for bourgeois “Pan-Africanism”—or innate inability of Africans to govern by themselves. The problem was and remains that the bourgeois “Pan-Africanists” rescued European colonialism from genuine social revolution of the African proletariat. So, capitalism has definitely been a disaster for Africans. We’ve also gone through in great length, how the revolutionary social democracy plan put in place in the October Russian revolution aftermath had digressed into a counterrevolutionary form—that is, Stalin’s ‘socialism in one country’ [the anti-thesis of Marxist thought] bureaucratic apparatus, ultimately brought about by the defeat of the European working classes, who were just weakened by the Great War and deteriorating economic situation. The Stalin bureaucratic apparatus’ relative isolation compelled it to turn to more opportunistic and counterrevolutionary antics both in Russia and abroad, thereby discrediting the communist apparatus to broad masses, including those in Africa. So, obviously Stalin’s brand of socialism proved to be a disaster as well, and this brings us right back to the question posed: what about “social democracy” based on Marxist thought, which means ultimately doing away with statehood/nation-state, and political dictatorship of the working proletariat?

When asked for a viable alternative solution for the cause of the working proletariat, opponents of social democracy are hard pressed to come up with one that precludes well, either capitalism or social democracy. Human social evolution culminated into consolidation of hierarchical society under centralized ruling system, and interestingly enough, the earliest attested hierarchical-structured complex—spanning a large territory—brought under central-governing to be deemed a true nation state, took place on the northeast corner of the continent. But human social evolution is ongoing, and has not stunted or reached its final course upon attaining the modern industrial social structure, as capitalist apologists like to rationalize. The industrial revolution which was fueled by the Slave Trade and led to colonialism, created the modern industrial working class out of the working masses of both feudal or semi-feudal social structures and other pre-existing forms of socio-economic order.

With the rise of the modern working proletariat, and with the ever acute social contradictions of bourgeois socio-economic apparatus—dominated by capitalism in the global network, a new workers’ mass movement had emerged by the turn of 19th century, and especially in the aftermaths of the first and second World Wars. On and off stabilization of capitalism and Stalin's betrayal of socialism have in some ways delayed successful workers’ revolution towards a social democracy path, but as globalization progresses—which at the moment serves to do away with national political boundaries only for big business—working classes across the globe get more and more alert to their common socio-economic hardships. The communications revolution only speeds up this process. This coupled with globalization, as the system develops, will facilitate faster-paced and wider ranging spread of organization-effort campaigns for the working class, for thus far—as history has shown time and again—working class organization in a single country often leads to unionism, which doesn’t have enough clout, is susceptible to bourgeois infiltration and is quickly brought under bourgeois handle...because of both the proletariat's insufficient understanding of the precise nature of the complex socio-economic apparatus of which the waged worker is a small part, and lack of genuine workers’ political party. Be as it may, from the African working proletariat [as with any other] standpoint, the only way to find out the benefits of a social democracy governed from a purely materialistic standpoint [as opposed to idealism which breeds reaction through sectarianism; government should be separated from religion, just as science has], is to give it a shot, allow it to blossom and ultimately do away with the concept of statehood, which almost always guarantees counterrevolution!
____________________________________________________________
*References:

—Quotes, courtesy of wsws.org