9 Comments

Nicely written. I really like how you break up all the reasons for the crisis with clear headers. This enables the reader to skim or read each section as they so choose.

I wish more writers did the same.

Expand full comment

Thank you

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Dec 24
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

A low trust society's impact is subtle but once you notice you can't unsee it.

Expand full comment

Unfortunately I can’t see any other solución as well. Great write up Ian.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Dec 24
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Emphatically agreed. I've been thinking about this a lot. Given the tribal and deeply fractured nature of a lot of these "countries" they have not had the time to build up the communal goodwill that is the backbone for an effective state. Apathetic MNCs and supranational organisations aren't helping either. I think this issue of institutional trust is a top top problem for Africa in the 21st century.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Dec 24
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

I recommend reading by article on Sierra Leone (part 1 and 2) if you'd like to see more on how Sierra Leone continues to keep some colonial institutions.

Completely by choice too - the marketing boards and chieftaincy land rule (its a perfect example of a custom Africans think is traditional, but was modified by the british).

https://open.substack.com/pub/yawboadu/p/economic-and-geopolitical-history-bdd?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Dec 24
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

I suspect the slave trades in Africa (both the European-run Atlantic slave trade, and the Arab slave trades across the Sahara and in East Africa) probably did far more to destroy trust in African societies than the much later New Imperialism did.

Expand full comment

It's hard to tell which one is "worse" or even how much it affected things to be honest.

I see many perspectives.

The slave trade basically militarized many African Kingdoms mainly in West & Central Africa to fight other African Kingdoms to sell slaves. The Kingdoms competed with each other to sell slaves to get guns to sell more slaves.

Then during European imperialism they forced many of these warring people's to share a border with each other. The Sokoto Calphiate, the Oyo Empire, the Edo Empire, and Igboland all became Nigeria, when before they all fought wars to kill and enslave each other for profit.

That being said, the fact that many African countries are richer than Ethiopia, a country that wasn't affected by the slave trade nor 1880s European imperialism, makes me think that the effects wouldn't have been different anyway. Ethiopia's feudalistic economy where most of the people were serfs to the Nobles and Monarchy shows that they held themselves back with a system that doesn't have the incentive structures that let people have their own industrial revolution.

I always use Ethiopia as a counterfactual or even Liberia, a country that has been independent since 1867 to make the point that independence still doesn't mean you would be industrialized.

As for the Arab slave trade, it was bad too, much longer and not as discussed. The Omani Arabs had their own empire and costal port network across East Africa. But they also racially mixed with the East Africans which created Swahili culture. Tibbu Tip, an Afro-Arab, enslaved Eastern Congo, and ironically Eastern Congo was "liberated" from King Leopold who proceeded to do something war worse.

It's hard to say which things had the most impact. But at the end of the day countries have to move forward. I am very happy with the recent growth of Ivory Coast, Rwanda, and Ethiopia (despite it's internal issues).

Expand full comment