|
|
|
|
|
|
by DanielBMarkham
5412 days ago
|
|
|
Sometimes an essay, like a good movie, requires a suspension of disbelief. The writer paints a picture of a future world and the reader is expected to "play along" with him in order for him to complete and state his vision. I found I could not suspend disbelief enough to follow along with this writer. While he means well, using examples like the Sudan or the Kurds is cherry-picking at the extreme. After all, his thesis is "maps without borders" It's one thing to look at a government that's been around for 20 years (or, in the Kurd example, not really existing yet) and make some generalization. It's another thing entirely to apply such generalizations to the rest of the world. He failed with this. He also meandered quite a bit around resources: pipelines, roads, and such. I'm sure there was a point there, but heck if I could grasp it. This is just not such a good article. I'd like to see these ideas explored in a more cogent fashion though. I think there's an interesting concept in there. |
|
|
Sudan is too large, and should be split up. But also: "Africa can become economically viable only if its plethora of puny economies merge from more than 50 into just a few."
So what needs to happen? Merging Africa into a few gigantic balkanized states with no shared interests (like Sudan), or splitting it up into many small city states, a few of which will be well run?