A Historical Analysis of Imperialism & Neo-Colonialism (Africa)
By Tristan Graham
“Africa’s possession of industrial raw materials could, if used for her own development, place her among the most modernized continents of the world without recourse to outside resources” — Kwame Nkrumah
Africa’s economic and social position in the world is one of confusion, exacerbated by the lack of sufficient education of African history. As the richest continent in the world with large deposits of gold, diamonds, uranium, and other edible products like cocoa, coffee, and rice (Rodney, How Europe Undeveloped Africa), Africa nevertheless remains the hub of “developing” nations: The epitome of poverty. Africa, has 50% of the world’s gold, most of the world’s diamonds and chromium, 90% of the cobalt, 65% of the manganese, millions of acres of untilled farmland, etc… But looking at Africa from the mainstream commercials, you would think they have no natural resource. In short, the explanation for this imbalance is colonialism, neo-colonialism, and imperialism.
With colonialism, European empires established economic, political, and cultural control over various African nations. This was done economically by forcefully removing the most prevalent asset Africa provided: People. The metropoles (European “mother-countries”) also profited beautifully from raw materials such as gold, rice, indigo, cotton, etc. These raw materials were extracted from Africa and taken to Europe for the creation of final goods. This system was entirely favorable to Europe since Africa’s reimbursement for its plethora of raw materials were finished products that were unsellable and of poor condition (Rodney 115). It is also often overlooked that African leaders actually “sought European technology for internal development, which was meant to replace the trade in slaves” (Rodney 122). Rather, we are saturated with stories of African leaders gladly participating in the denigration of their own nations through the slave trade. Unsurprisingly, Europeans ignored all these requests for they knew once Africans were self-sufficient and economically independent, their capitalist efforts would be in vain. This imbalance that existed between these continents sealed the economic and political fate of Africa for the next 400 years.
It is important to study capitalism on its own because it explains the methods Europe used to subjugate a culturally rich and socially robust continent like Africa. In its basic analysis capitalism is a lesser version of capitalism which is an economic ideology that upholds and propagates colonialism and imperialism. The “mother-countries” import raw materials from the colonies for low prices, and sell the finished goods back to the colonies at much higher prices. For example, iron ore from one of the large deposits is taken from Africa and melted and molded to be made into firearms. Cotton was also extracted for the mass production of high-end clothing in Europe. This system stunted development in not only African countries, but Asian and Latin American countries as well; These “developing” countries were not able to use the raw materials within their own borders for their own benefit and development.
Within Africa especially, this system prevented the interconnection of neighboring African nations,which subsequently barred any semblance of future African economic unity. This was best manifested in the trade routes and roads Europeans built and used to transport human cargo. All the roads that were built were designed to extract humans — slaves — out of Africa. There lacked a system of roads in place in which Africans of the East could reach Africans of the West and vice-versa. It was easier for Africans to reach European towns than it was to reach towns with whom they shared the same land. This system was to the benefit of the metropoles, and to the detriment of Africa (Rodney 280).
With absolute control of the economy, political control seamlessly fell into the hands of Europe. This was officially enshrined with the “Scramble for Africa” policy solidified in the Berlin Conference of 1884 in which African nations were literally divided among European countries. This move prolonged the economic and political subservience of Africa and propagated the idea of white superiority and justified it by championing the idea of the “white man’s burden.” With absolute disregard to the already-established borders of African nations, this move wreaked havoc on the future intra-continental relationship of Africans.
To further illustrate the drastic economic effects it had on the world, from 1619–1865 the US benefited from 222,505,049 hours of forced labor through slavery. Economists estimate this amounts to $97 trillion today. Keep in mind the US became self autonomous long after Britain, Spain, France and other foundational imperialists.
At the end of the Second World War (September 2, 1945) marked the beginning of the “decolonization” process. This was when the wind of independence swept across Africa with Ghana as the pioneer in 1957. In the year 1960 (optimistically called the Year of Africa) 17 sub-Saharan nations became “independent” (“1960”). The discourse around decolonization is regretfully one tinged with romanticism; It is told as a story of the perpetually oppressed African nations finally breaking away from the yoke that was Western colonialism and imperialism. What is so often missed is the performative and superficial nature of it all. Yes, Africans were independent once more but only in name. Rather than it being the year of Africa, 1960 marked the transition to neo-colonialism. The age in history where the colonial statuses of African nations were no longer ideal for the continuation of exploitation; The rebranding of traditional colonialism was needed. This is where capitalism shifted to imperialism (“the highest order of capitalism”- Lenin) and where colonialism shifted to neo-colonialism.
Osagyefo Kwame Nkrumah defines neo-colonialism (“the last stage of imperialism”) as a state that has all the trappings of political independence but is still economically dependent. In essence, the countries that are now independent still heavily relied on the “mother-country” for the production of goods the country and its citizens need to survive. These “independent” countries were still beholden to the monetary and financial systems of the metropoles. The concept underscores how African state sovereignties can be reduced to mere “flag independence” by external policy interference and economic control. It does not deny that African elites may engage in wrongdoing — whether corruption, nepotism or human rights abuses. On the contrary, it asks us to acknowledge — and contextualise — instances of mal-governance in terms of how external donors and companies often enable (and encourage) such actions to preserve lucrative economic arrangements. Notably here, Nkrumah’s key text — Neo-colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism — was published in 1965. It provoked immediate political reaction from the USA at the height of the Cold War. Less than a year after it was released, President Nkrumah was overthrown in a military coup aided by the US Govt.
The harsh economic policies established at the onset of neo-colonialism still reign supreme over the Third World under new guises like “aid” and “philanthropy” and “charity.” The less developed world will not become developed through the goodwill or generosity of the developed powers. It can only become developed through a struggle against the external forces which have a vested interest in keeping it undeveloped. If these measures truly did anything philanthropic, African countries would not be in the state they are in today. As argued by Anand Giridharadas, billionaires shouldn’t exist and philanthropic ventures of which they are major proponents is just bread crumbs in relation to the mass that they take from the working and peasant class of the world vis a vis Capitalism. Eg: The Democratic Republic of Congo is the most mineral rich land on earth. Its soil is worth approximately 24 trillion USD. They export approximately 300 billion USD worth of goods annually, yet they only retain 3 billion.
“The colonialists care nothing for Africa for her own sake. They are attracted by African riches and their actions are guided by the desire to preserve their interests in Africa against the wishes of the African people. For the colonialists all means are good if they help them to possess these riches”. — Patrice Lumumba — Speech at the All-African Conference in Leopoldville August, 1960.
As Afrikan people, in or outside the continent, we must be wary of and remain vigilant against these measures.The solutions to our oppression cannot and will not come from the external. We must look inward. We must look inward and solve our problems our way — the Afrikan way.
Sources
Nkrumah, Kwame. Neo-Colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism. PANAF Books, 1965.
Rodney, Walter. How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. Verso, 1972.
“1960: The year of independence.” France 24. 14 Feb. 2010.
