Lifted from a different forum: Ndichu Kuria: The major difference between the real colonists from the west and the imagined colonists from the east i simple: The colonists from the east understand that the only way their economies can grow is if they access new markets. Simply because they are manufacturing economies. They understand that they can only access those new markets if two things are present: (1) infrastructure and; (2) disposable incomes in those markets increase. As a result, it is in their interests for Africa to develop. They therefore sponsor infrastructure development as well as other intiatives designed to stimulate economic growth. The traditional colonists on the other hand have a different model. They are declining powers due to various economic problems. As a result, they are only interested in access to cheap or free resources to stimulate their economies. To do this, naturally, they require the countries in which those resources are found to be weak, dependent, corrupt and manipulable. As a result, it is in their interest to destabilize countries (Libya, Mali, Niger, Egypt, Syria), install puppets (Ivory Coast, Tunisia, Yemen) and where they fail haul the obstacles before such contrived Kangaroo courts as the ICC (Kenya, Ivory Coast, Central African Repulic) The point is that if we muct choose a colonist, I prefer the easterner.
Posted on: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 14:08:15 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015