(04-07-2015 10:16 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 10:04 PM)I45owl Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 07:17 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 07:06 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 02:33 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  It's more a statement on the mindset of Africa. Nothing is going to be done quickly or decisively and you can't speed things up.

OK. I think people are under the impression that if India and China can turn it around within 40 years that there should be a handful of African nations that are on a similar trajectory. Instead there are only a few.

Yea, and in reality there isn't a single sub-Saharan nation on anything like that track.

The problem in Africa is you can bring in foreigners and build new buildings and such but the majority of the population retain their preindustrial mindset. They aren't ready to compete.

African development will be far slower than many think. Well, that is to say anything other than superficial development.

Arguments of people like Jared Diamond regarding population density and economic development (though I'm familiar with them only superficially) suggest that development will always be a challenge for African nations.

Have you never read Guns Germs and Steel? Definitely worth the read.

I've read the book and while I think it makes some great points, there are many nations that have overcome the limitations Diamond describes for development to be solely predicated on tenets he describes.

(04-07-2015 11:26 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  I've read the book and while I think it makes some great points, there are many nations that have overcome the limitations Diamond describes for development to be solely predicated on tenets he describes.

I'm curious as to which countries and which time periods. I think his argument applies at its best to the pre-industrial time periods (even though I've brought it up in the context of modern Africa). Telegraph, telephone, and internet communication greatly lessen the impact of population density.