[M_Bakhtiari]

When will Africa realise that they have to learn to look out for themselves because no-one else will?

They declined Europe's "offer" (though realistically Europe really didn't have anything to offer its colonies after being devastated by WWII), but where they that much better off under Soviet influence and are they that much better off under China? It's time they started working towards real independence instead of always trying to chase the next free lunch.

[badminton1]

Well that's exactly what the African Union is for.

The poverty trap right now is:

1) Loan from the IMF

2) Restructure your debt = privatization = loss of sovereignty and control

3) Repeat

The hope is that through a regional central bank, regional investment bank and a regional monetary fund they can break away from the shackles of predatory psycopaths like the IMF and the World Bank.

I personally think this will not actually succeed and neocolonial powers will do everything in their power so the union does not succeed.

For example, UNASUR, the Latin American equivalent of African Union, is dead on arrival because of corruption. The president pro-tempore, Macri, doesn't seem to be representing regional interests at all.

[vidarh]

The AU seems likely to be a in better spot, in part because it is built on regional "pillars" and a lot of separate organizations, so even if the AU itself for some reason were to fail, it is already having massive impact. E.g. ECOWAS covers 15 countries and ~350 million in West Africa. SADC covers 16 states in Southern Africa etc. COMESA acts as a superset of SADC and EAC, providing a free trade area covering 400m+ people in Southern and Eastern Africa, and so on.

A number of monetary unions have started coalescing the currencies of he continent, as well, so even if the progress towards a single African currency were to fail, that too is still having an impact.

[AnAfrican]

the AU is also much older than UNASUR. The OAU was established in 1963 with a very clear mandate towards unification and decolonization.

However, the good intentions towards unity had to quickly face the reality of each despot desire to stay in power.

[vidarh]

That's true, but also changing, with the AU getting increasingly willing to send in joint AU forces to stabilize countries, or pressuring various governments to hold elections. That the AU is taking a more active role in curtailing dictators is quite ironic given that one of the drivers in getting to the Sirte declaration that laid a lot of the groundwork for reviving the work on the AU was Gadaffi...

[coldtea]

>They declined Europe's "offer" (though realistically Europe really didn't have anything to offer its colonies after being devastated by WWII), but where they that much better off under Soviet influence

Well, at least they got their freedom from European colonialism.

Although they never really got that 100%.

[marci]

What do you mean by declined?

Most of the french speaking african countries (and some others) don't even own their own currency[1]. The way they can spend "their" money is dicated by guidelines set by the french Department of the Treasury.

You see them chasing the next free lunch, I see lobbyng. And compared to the billions spend in lobbying in the Americas or Europe, building the AU headquarters must have been pocket change. More so with backdoors.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFA_franc#History

[M_Bakhtiari]

>What do you mean by declined?

I mean they made a big spectacle of "overthrowing" colonial rule, but with the effect that they still have effective colonial rule (as you point out), but kicking out the actual Frenchmen living there they removed any incentive of the colonial powers to actually contribute any services back and build a functioning society.

It's the supposed freedom fighters who are just chasing free lunches and not actual freedom. Though I suppose they may never have had a chance. Look how the colonial powers have reacted to pan-Arabism or the Rhodesian UDI.