In his latest op-ed, F2FA South African Contributor Daniel Sincuba wonders why -- with the current state of Africa and its respective nations -- Pan-Africanism is still not on the table as a means to centralizing our power and resources. He writes, among many other points: Arguments for Pan-Africanism seem to have decreased in volume, strength, and number as time has worn on, with the opposite being true for imperialism and post-colonialism that demolishes African (and Third World in general) economies, politics, society, pride, and more. And with these circumstances, it seems like a good time for us to ask ourselves why Pan-Africanism isnt boldy on the table. ... With imperialism and post-colonialism, countries still act as bottomless slices of the African cake for the first world to indulge in. It surely baffles the mind how anyone can think that the First World’s design is here to assist the Third World. And while we know that no idea is without flaws, and obviously, a political and economic union of more than 50 states would have its share of problems, the purpose should be to multiply the strength of all regions in a whole is equal to more than it’s parts kind of way through shared political, intellectual, and physical resources. This is why uni-state revolution is doomed to fail. There is simply not enough power in any one African state to affect lasting, meaningful change. What do you think? Do we need to have a modern and serious look at Pan-Africanism? Furthermore, is the fact that our nations arent unified the reason why we must rely on others -- the very same people who have plundered and victimized the continent -- for help?
Posted on: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 01:00:01 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015