MIT Study Reveals Why Africa Is Still Poor
Vložit
- čas přidán 9. 05. 2024
- Go to our sponsor betterhelp.com/ee to get 10% off your first month, and talk to a licensed therapist today.
Africa is the poorest continent in the world. There are, as always, a lot of factors to consider as to why that is the case, but recently Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson from MIT have released a study detailing the surprising bigger factors in why Africa still struggles to build wealth despite massive amounts of incoming aid and charity work trying to improve the lives of people there. So what are the reasons why much of Africa can't seem to get out of poverty?
Interview with Daron Acemoglu: open.spotify.com/episode/29ba...
Why Nations Fail by Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson : a.co/d/2gqPnyT
This video was made possible by our Patreon community! ❤️
See new videos early, participate in exclusive Q&As, and more!
➡️ / economicsexplained
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Check out our other channels ▶️
Epic Economics @EconomicsIsEpic
Context Matters @Context.Matters
And our Language Channels →
WirtschaftsWissen (GER) - / @wirtschafts-wissen
L'Économie Expliquée (FRE) - / @economie-expliquee
Economia Explicada (POR) - / @economia_explicada
Economía Explicada (SPA) - / @economia-explicada
اقتصاد العالم (AR) - / @aqtisadalealam
経済会話 (JP) - / @keizaikaiwa
✉️ Business Enquiries → hello@economicsexplained.com
🎧 Listen to EE on Spotify! 👉 open.spotify.com/show/5TFVUEJ...
Also on Apple Podcasts or anywhere else you listen!
#EconomicsExplained #betterhelp #africa
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
ECONOMICS EXPLAINED IS MADE POSSIBLE BY OUR PATREON COMMUNITY 👊🙏
Support EE by becoming a Patron today! 👉 / economicsexplained
👑 ROYALTY CLASS 👑
Juan Benet
UPPER CLASS
Valkmit, Randall, Charles Youngs, Jeromy Johnson.
UPPER MIDDLE CLASS
Ernest Hua, Michael Wakim, Pineapples&bricks, Robert Abraham, Peter Wesselius, Michael Ling, Frank Soltero, David Poliakoff, Jay Eno, Sophie G, Brett Jubinville, Anthony Roberts, jill hoffman, Nathan Ngumi, JKH, Post Apocalyptic In Missouri, Laor Glukhovsky, Forodon, Paul Ashworth, Wendover Productions, Andrew Harrison, Shane Wailes, Igor Bazarny
MIDDLE CLASS
Per von Zweigbergk, Malleus Flavus, Backartoffel, Andy Giesen, Christopher Kastensmidt, Aryan, William Sherlock, Gerhardus, Derrick Yowell, BUBBA CONWAY, Chris, Brian, Vladimir Zotov, Seth, Dragan Alexandru, Jason, Jamie Costello, Leah Klearman, Klaus Clemens, Ps0Fa, Abel, Randall Sylvia, Eric Slimko, Empyre18, Brian Jackson, Istvan P, Kieran VR, Leonid Sorokoumov, Thomas Davenport, Nicholas Luchetta, Kim Brand, Ted Marcy, John Issitt, Joe Ryan, Patrick Staight, Wees Kendall, Shane Guthrie, Karan Mehta, roGER, Randy Cleary, Arjan, Liubov Zvereva, Michael D. Hall, Long Phan, Craig Mews, Kent Klatchuk, Roman~1, Chris Hawkins, Wesley Fite, David McIlveen, Anthony, Arend Peter Castelein, Daniel Alberto Vázquez Rodríguez, Kamil Sicinski, Dodd Willingham, Leo Vassershteyn, How long can a profile name be... this long... Wow, this is longer than I would have expected. Good lord, the letters! Secunda!, Michael Kürbis, Hugh Harris, David W., Dar H, Will, Kheng Lai Tan, David Taylor, Scott Greenwood, Jane Walerud, Zachary Demko, Michael Wolff, Siegfried Eggl, PM, Jack Annear, michael, Franklin, Trevor, Marcel Roquette, Daniel Hall, Connor Costello, John D Tyler, Petronio Coelho, Kevin MacIntyre, Travis Thompson, Matthew Eggleston, Kenneth Lum, Andrew Vinnichenko, Zachary Kasow, Johannes, Reuben Field, Nigel Pauli, Jacob, AB3, Matt McKee, Victor T., John C, Rimvydas, John Downie, Donald Wedington, Demo sthenes, Ed, Hayden van Reyswoud.
The Economic Explained team uses Statista for conducting our research. Check out their CZcams channel: / @statistaofficial
Go to our sponsor betterhelp.com/ee to get 10% off your first month, and talk to a licensed therapist today.
how did you comment before the video was uploaded?
i love when my therapist sells my data to the highest bidder
you guys need to get another sponsor.....
Having such a shady sponsor is not a good look. You guys need to be more careful who you go into business with.
Still hocking this scam? That's disappointing.
Better help was exposed for being a scam a few years back
we're here for the macro, not the therapy
He's gotta pay the bills somehow
@@asdfghjkl3003 because there are no other sponsees than a company that sells peoples info they give in therapy and doesn’t even have real therapist?
How is it a scam?
Scam is a strong word. Unreliable is a better word
Why is Africa Poor?
Thumbnail: Not What You Think
Video: Exactly what you thought
LOL
MIT is advocating genocide.
@@rayguistina3314 People who annoy you.....
@@rayguistina3314
All that has a more fundamental underlying reason: Culture. The prevailing customs and way of thinking that people are brought up to and what they learn from their own society.
The amount of greed and corruption within the peoples of a nation varies enormously from nation to nation, and this is not something that's something innate. It's something that people learn, grow up into, by learning from and emulating other people in their surrounding society. In other words, the prevailing culture of the country. If everybody they grow up with is selfish, greedy and corrupt, then you instinctively learn from them, start emulating them, and become greedy and corrupt yourself. (In a twisted way, it makes a kind of sense: "Why should I be honest and fair, as this only leads to everybody taking advantage of me and screwing me over at every turn?" In a twisted way it kind of acts as a form of self-defense mechanism. You won't be taken advantage of if you, too, are as greedy and corrupt as everybody else.)
The only way to change this is to change the prevailing culture. But that's not something that can just be done overnight. You can't just go there and force people to change their upbringing at gunpoint.
@@rayguistina3314 I disagree absolutely.
"Adoption of the wheel was limited in Africa, because Africa was ruled by regional kings with unchecked authority, unlike Europe." is a hilariously out of pocket "theory."
They still carry stuff on their heads like they don't even know what a brain is for. Why wouldn't they fail?
@@happyjack8613 because wheels don't work very well in the rough, humid terrain of central Africa.
We can see from toys that Africans absolutely understood the concept of the wheel, it's just that in Africa carrying by hand, using pack animals and especially using boats was far more efficient.
The whole video just reeks of ignorance and lazy research
@@euanstokes2828 After watching documentaries from Africa, I have to agree with you.
@@happyjack8613 It's orders of magnitude easier to just carry something on your head or on your animal or on a boat than to drag a wheelbarrow through uneven heavily-forested muddy or rocky terrain. Why are you being so dense?
About 20 years ago a (white) work colleague cycled from the UK to the very south of South Africa. He wrote a book about his experiences. ''Why Africa will never win the World Cup.'' Although he met some good people on the way he encountered endless corruption. Almost every border crossing involved some form of bribe. He got arrested in Zimbabwe because he foolishly cycled past Mugabe's Palace. A kindly Police Sergeant allowed him to leave in the dead of night with the advice; ''get over the border asap.'' He set off with optimism but returned sadly chastened.
I wonder if their taxes are lower than the US, which would make bribes their taxes
The palace road was probably the best road of that town, to his credit.
Africa will however win plenty of world cups... might not be soon, yet it will happen
Nothing against cycling long distances and across borders as I've done it myself but I can't think of a better way of flaunting Western ways than going for a multi-national cycling exploit in Africa, where almost no one does that except perhaps a handful of Westerners with a definite apetite for risk and no concept of what it means to be white in Africa. Also, no concept of what it means to do highly noticeable things that locals would never do, which applies to anywhere in the world. I know of two cases of white guys cycling Africa with the obvious exact same results. It's just a stupid insensitive thing to do as a white guy.
@@TROGULAR10000
This sounds like a distraction. He describes the endless corruption they found in governments across a continent (which he could have just as observed by other modes of transportation, not just bicycling), and then you respond by calling cycling through Africa a "stupid insensitive thing to do". So the smart, sensitive thing to do would be to avoid Africa, and thereby not encounter the corruption which locals have no choice but to endure? Somehow it's the "insensitive" cyclists' fault that Africa is what it is today?
I moved to Kenya for a job, curious about living on the continent. I thought I understood corruption, but corruption in Africa is on a whole other level.
can you give some examples or something?
When Moi stole EuroBond over 3B$.
NYS Scandal Ann waiguru I mean there's a lot I can't even finish@@taivalmaa2251
2000 years of corruption?
@@taivalmaa2251just look up state capture in South Africa
I would agree but corruption can be just as bad in rich countries.
The irony of an Australian saying bad farmland and geographic isolation made Africa poor...
we all know the real reason. ZA seemed to do just fine in the less politically correct era.
@@earth9531 what is ZA
@@MohamedAli-nf1rpSouth Africa....but I'm not sure of how they're fine
@@earth9531South Africa has the worst gini coeff of any country in the world. Before apartheid, there was a huge wealth gap which obfuscated the overwhelming poverty that was widespread. This has not changed: it’s just slightly less determined by race.
You can't compare Africa with Australia because it's less populated and has abundant resources that share with just 25 million people.
The video drones in the background while I feast on comments 😂
nom nom nom.
Weirdos
I work in Algeria, where the amount of red tape to get the simplest of tasks completed means that the simplest of tasks usually don't get completed.
That's interesting. Too much Red Tape I find is almost always overlooked when assessing the struggles of many industries and in Algeria case as you say, the struggles of nations.
@@hrthrhs bureaucracy, which is directly linked with poor quality of normative frameworks (i.e., poor quality of legislation) is always overlooked by economists, probably because the price that we all pay for red tape is incalculable, it has to do mostly with lost opportunities, while economists want to see measurable and quantifiable losses/profits. High time, perhaps, to engage a little more in qualitative analysis.
If i had to guess, this means you're not paying the baksheesh to get things done
Where would the money to pay bureaucrats come from if it wasn't for red tape.
@@rincwind666 baksheesh isn't a thing in my industry
Residing in Zambia, Africa, for the past 30 years, I've never experienced conflict or war. It's rare to even see a police officer with a gun where I'm from. My realization is that it's corruption that continues to impede our progress and perpetuate poverty. Until our leaders prioritize the development of our nations over personal gain, obstacles to progress will persist. While external forces significantly contribute to corruption, which further reduces access to resources and capital that we need for development we must eventually take responsibility for addressing and combating these issues.
Did life for the average not improve in those 30 years?
@@1wun1 yesnt
Yep. It's always corruption at the heart of economic failure. Just ask Russia.
I wish i could offer you and your country more than good luck. I'm not sure anyone knows how to break the cycle. I mean, what are normal people supposed to do against widespread corruption?
Remove middlemen, remove corruption.
Corruption is a symptom of too many middlemen, they get tempted by the chance to take advantage of their gatekeeper position.
Barack Obama had some blunt feedback on this years ago while hosting the Young African Leaders Initiative. He pointed out that when his father was in Kenya in the 1960s, the GDPs of Kenya and South Korea were about equal. Now, as he said, "it's not even close." He then went on to say that this was because of decades of poor choices and missed opportunities by Kenya's leadership, and it's a similar story for much of Africa. He closed by expressing hope that this generation of Kenyan, and African leaders would not be looking back in 50 years on another era of missed chances.
I would bet everything I owned that they absolutely will be looking back on missed chances.
Lets oversee SK's northern neighbor. Necessisating a spirit of "live or die" too its leadership
Countries in permanent perilous position often has corruption "magically" stamped up. As national consciousness made "slacking off" frowned upon
SK too has MULTIPLE YEARS of its national budget having a large portion of it subsidized by the US, again due to NK
Does many African countries has this privilege aside from Somalia?
East Asia are full of lying nations. They acted as if their recent jump to modernity is of their own effort. Although the US always, always has a huge part on it. Mostly to blunt the expansion of USSR influence
In 1992 South Africa had the same GDP as China. Whilst having a smaller population and more available natural resources
@@WhatIsBaconwhat’s the suicide rate of young South Koreans again ?
@@Cynicruss2 whys that relevant?
The graphic at 13:43 is misleading. Only about 10% of enslaved Africans went to the "13 colonies" in North America. The vast majority went to South America and the West Indies.
...and islamic world !
Actually, the figure transported to NA was 400K for the whole duration of the trans-Atlantic transportation period, out of the total of ca 14 mln.
People forget slavery was everywhere and that the Arab world actually brought slaves from Africa for a longer period of time than the Americas did. Slave markets were there until the 1960s.
@@alexneigh7089??? That doesn’t mean it’s not 10%
Mauritania was the last nation to outlaw slavery-that was in 1983. But, the anti-slavery laws are loosely enforced, and slavery is still widespread-as it is in other similarly situated African countries.
"Not what I think, well, I would guess corruption, I wonder what it actually is...
Oh
Exactly what I thought it was."
The Bell Curve doesn't lie...
Tagline is “not what you think” - but it’s corruption and leadership - exactly what people think, no?
No. Ask "why" are corruption and leadership a problem? Is there some underlying reason for it?
@@saaah707 Don't dig any deeper. The answer is not politically correct, and must never be spoken of.
@@jeandutoit1413It's not politically correct to point out the effects of colonialism?
@@jeandutoit1413 In a nutshell. Intellectual dishonesty is the most destructive form of corruption.
@@saaah707 Tribalism is one reason. Europe had it too. Still does to a fair extent, but after slaughtering each other for a thousand years they've grudgingly decided to co-operate a bit.
I am from Botswana. It's all true. We're winning. Things really work. Not perfect, but it works. There's a very clear upwards mobility, complimented by our fairly functional education and justice system. I love my country man, and I lived in the States for most of my 20s.
A great example for the rest of the continent. Africa has so much potential 🙏
@@Craicfox161 Only a few thousand years more guys!
@@Craicfox161 One very big asterisk has to be placed next to Botswana as an example of what other African countries should strive for. Botswana is a huge outlier when it comes to demographics in Africa, more than 75% of Botswana's citizens are Batswana, it is literally the land of the Tswanas. Plus they were never really colonized in the traditional sense of the word, the British didn't conquer them and the agreement to make it a protectorate came after the rulers conflicts against the Boers encroaching on their land, and fortunately the British were also fighting the Boers at that time so the Tswanas basically became an important ally to the British in keeping order as well as the Boers under control, so not only did the core leadership structure never fall apart and lose legitimacy, one could argue it gained more legitimacy even after the British left, which made it impossible for any legitimate challengers to power. This is the same reason why the only truly stable countries in the Middle east are all Monarchies, because that's the best way to maintain stability. With that stability, even if it was poor the first few decades after independence, the country developed with the few resources it had. So, in summary, Botswana had three very important things going for it, that IMO, no other Sub-Saharan African country has - Stability, a strong and legitimate leadership structure and well-maintained, strong institutions arising therein.
Rwanda has decent stability and low crime today, and I would say has one
of the best chances in Africa@ArawnOfAnnwn
I should add that Botswana's history also lends itself towards democracy much more easily. There was never an absolute ruler, only one with the buy-in of the various tribal chiefs. In some ways it could even be compared to the Holy Roman Empire, albeit that comparison is reaching. Point being that it historically didn't lend itself to full-on tyranny.
I like how "Ill equipped to handle their problems, natural resources, etc" is just skipped over. Other people, on every other continent has overcame their issues, and this video doesn't describe why but just what happened when other cultures rocketed past them in history. I was expecting better.
It's all such a mystery. Humanity still has no clue. Not from history. Not from observation.
No matter how much the problem is studied.
We will never be able to identify the root of the problem.
My brother in Christ, disease, lack of water, bad soil, political corruption is a rough set of problems to overcome. It's like trying to form a functional country in Mad Max.
How do they have any more disease or bad soil than, say Vietnam or Uzbekistan, or Colombia? Africa has some of the best soils in the world, problem is underutilization of fertilizes. Disease is a lame cop out.@@anal3544
Actually, I was expecting the video to never even come close to mentioning the real problem, and I was right.
@@viggotannhauser7251 what is the real problem
It's a bit weird because there is another video on this channel investigating why Australia is rich when in fact it shouldn't be.
Ha... Ignoring the obvious, Australia is full of Europeans and Africa is full of Africans.
The native Australians have about as many entrepreneurial skills as the native Africans.
Does anyone have a clue as to what the reason is?
@@friendlyfire7861no one can say
@@JKnksrsly🤔
”corruption have been known to happen” was a understatement if I ever heard one 😅
Actually Colonism, have you seen what France has being doing in Africa???
@@calicoesblue4703 *MUd hUT iz fREnCh fRY prOBLEM*
@@calicoesblue4703 is it as bad as what africans have been going to france? france hasn't been influential since napoleon died.
@@jaewok5G Is it as bad as how Europeans have been doing to all of Africa???
@@calicoesblue4703 where? in a given year 10x as many people leave africa as arrive.
I live in Ghana and what I've realized was the missed opportunity when Nkrumah was overthrown. He had his way of steering through the obstacles of international affairs. He created a lot of factories that collapsed after his overthrow.
The problem now we face is the devaluing of the cedi against the dollar which makes costs go high because we mostly import with the dollar. Our exports, unfortunately, don't exceed our import demand and so the cedi continuously depreciates. Ghana needs to do more exports and it is challenging because we need to find the market for our products. Worst of all, most of our products exist in other countries and so penetration is costly as a lot of money has to go into expensive marketing.
Kwame suffered the same fate as other intellectuals turned leaders like Trotsky who was outmuscled by Stalin. I've been to Ghana about ten times but only during Jerry John who did what he could but, as technically a coup leader, international cooperation was difficult.
"Africa Must Unite!" -- KN
@@GB-ez6geTrotsky and Stalin are not the best examples as they almost completely agreed on everything except one detail.
That being whether it was time to export communism to the world or continue to solidify its growth within Russia.
Trotsky wanted to go on an offensive war and bring communism to all of Europe while Stalin did not.
That’s literally the only major difference in their ideology.
@@darth3911 Please read what I wrote before commenting. It does not state that Stalin was an example. The "example" (really, metaphor) was Trotsky, in his capacity as an intellectual. Their political views and actions are irrelevant to one being an intellectual and the other being forceful. (Whatever their disagreements, Stalin thought them severe enough to assassinate Trotsky while exiled in Mexico.)
But why it collapsed? I don't know reason but it baffled me few years ago and i don't remember country but they decided kick out white farmers but they didn't take over and work fields for whatever reason and result was famine.
I can bet you 1k dollars that the CIA had a hand in the overthrow of Nkrumah. The same Americans who destroy our best leaders gather themselves in their ivory towers (which they built with ivory they stole from us) to discuss why we are poor. Insult to injury! Why is every nation around America that is not dominated by Caucasians, war torn and poor? Why is Mexico poor? Why is Panama poor? Why is Columbia poor? Why is America so rich and everyone else so poor? Americans shouldn't be talking about other peoples poverty. Their government is the cause of a lot of it.
Different ethnic groups is just poor excuse. Reminder... Most European countries are made out of different tribes who used to fight each others in the past.
For context, there are only 87 ethnic groups in the whole of Europe. A considerable part of European history has been wars between those groups. In fact, before the start of the Russia-Ukraine war, Europe had been experiencing the longest period of peace and stability (and that's due in part to nuclear weapons). And that's because only 87 ethnic groups could not agree on a lot of things. In Nigeria, there are 371 ethnic groups. Imagine the level of disagreement all that deiversity would have on one country let alone a whole continent. You somehow have to find a way to make all those ethnic groups feel included all else there will be trouble.
@@waithakakangethe6549 More than that. They just became more united. Finland for example has loads of different tribes and they all identify as Finnish. Not just that, but before the "era of peace" for almost 100-years. Europe was still prosperous and filled with highly advanced societies. In fact it's argued that reason why we were ahead of others is precisely because we had conflicts among ourselves.
But you need to ask yourself... why are people in Below Sahara so racists that they can't tolerate each otehrs? ;)
It's poverty. Why so poor? Legacy of colonialism. Between resource extraction, continuing "soft colonialism", and lacking infrastructure, we had the rise of rampant corruption among a few and with substantially less economic upward mobility for the masses.
@@Tespri Clearly you've forgotten your history. Look at how poorly the English treated the Irish, Welsh, and Scottish. Even when they came to the US, that same tribalism persisted. "Irish/Italian Need Not Apply" signs were still in store fronts in the early 20th century. And how are you defining "racist" when you're talking about what I assume you believe to be peoples of the same "race".
@@TreyDeuce109 excuses. Loads of previous colonial countries, even recent ones that are flourishing. Best counter to your argument is... South Africa. IT was on same level as western nations until certain group got into power. Now they figured out how to time travel entire country before white men visited there ;)
I loved this video and the interview with Professor Daron Acemoglu. Would it be possible to do a video/podcast on the country of Kenya? I hear a lot of people talking about how great it is economically, however, as who lives in the US but was born in Kenya and his family there, I do still see plenty of economic woes. Also I'm hearing that recent developments are now stifling investments in the country. I would love any insights your team could shed on its current situation.
Nice vídeo but I missed the point. Is the ground breaking MIT conclusion that countries with less stable or robust institutions are harder to develop? The video is called "MIT Study reveals why Africa is still poor" and then kinda reveals what everyone already knows.
The only 'groundbreaking' thing about that study would have been that it was produced by MIT profs...
The Berlin conference and the doctrine of discovery. Still in effect!!
@@ththim7785
mUh wItE fAuLt
While having the most backward culture in the world
Howwwwwww did you arrive at the word "EVERYONE" ?? are you literally implying that "EVERRRRYONE ALREADY knows, including 13 year old kids and 17 year old kids" ??
@@TebogoMotlhaleno babies and infants didn't know. You are the smartest troon around
Tribalism is also probably one of the biggest challenges holding back Africa. Dictators on down to regional governors and lowly civil servants are more likely to help their tribe than help the overall population or national interest.
from what I heard from my friend who's from Ghana, this seems to be the problem there. the local leaders will make ridiculous laws making life difficult
That's an old post-colonial problem. It's still present but this criticism is often overused to explain away problems, even in nations which have been modernizing quite a bit - where's it is really doubtful whether these inter-ethnic biases are really still a major factor.
I would be careful not to generalize about it. Especially since this particular criticism has its origins in European colonialist excuses for "why the Africans can't govern themselves.". That's not what you seem to be saying, but I promise you others still do on occasion.
The other colonial trope that has an ounce of truth to it, but gets overused? "It's a problem with the culture.". Most people recognize what's wrong with that one. (Uhh. Which culture? Where?) 😊
Even if tribalism of "culture" is a barrier in some places, the way out of that is to build strong institutions and traditions of governance and civil society.
I think the biggest problem is the transfer of value. If the value that a country produces through unequal exchange (the main mechanism of value transfer, but by no means the only one) is constantly flowing out of their economy, they simply lack the resources necessary for economic development. What flows back in the form of foreign aid is only a fraction of what flows out. The production of many African countries is at the beginning of the value chain, the least profitable part of the chain. However, the big profits are only realised in the final processing steps and the final sale.
@@ems4884 lol always blaming colonialists won't do you good, look at Southeast Asia, they were colonized the longest by foreign powers but they're thriving economically.
Also true of the middle east. I lived in Iraq for a while and everyone said the same thing - the new democratic institutions are basically just proxies for the tribes and clans to compete with one another, while the old dictatorship allowed them to unite under common interests. Although the younger generation, and especially the Kurds and minority groups, despise Saddam, they are very nostgalic for the old autocracy.
Summation: it’s always somebody else’s fault, never the fault of the people that are actually there running it.
That’s what I got out of it.
to be more precise: it's always white people's fault.
sounds familiar
Say it louder!
If I do something heinously wrong, the long-term consequences of that thing would mainly be be my fault, not nearly as much the fault of the people who suffered the damage.
Love the 4x strategy gaming references, and the cheeky aussie mate at the end
As an agricultural engineer working at ground level since 1978 with government institutions both ministerial and research the greatest problem that many African countries suffer from is the lack of skills, engineers tend to be desk-bound with little or no practical skills, artisans acquire skills but never seem to develop them, content to keep reproducing the same item year after year. This can best be seen in the craft sector where high-quality items are the exception, not the rule, most crafts are rudimentary lacking detail or finish. Research institutions produce products that already exist in the marketplace of better quality and at a lower price but are kept alive by governments to show they do research however they are never subject to an audit so it is impossible to access their contribution to the national economy.
i couldnt agree more
Well said
So real entrepreneurship and innovation would help solve the issues?
@@arewecrazyyetYeah the government don't encourage them enough to be an entrepreneur nor prepares for capitalism
You mean lack of intelligence to practice higher skills, don't you?
“Why nations fall” is one of the most interesting book I’ve ever read. Glad you guys made a video dedicated to his paper.
Is it? Why? :)
IQ and the Wealth of Nations
So is Guns, Germs, and Steal. Both amazing reads
Me too
I read "Cows, Pigs, Wars, and Witches" a little over 20 years ago and I still remember the point the author made about cultures and why they do things.
There are no easily navigable rivers in on the continent of Africa other than the Nile River. All the developed nations and continents have major transportation of goods via rivers.
The wheel requires good roads and will easily get stuck in non-ideal conditions. The bearing and structure of the wheel are hard to make. Animals are better at traversing harsh or muddy trails.
Interesting study. Some past and ongoing external factors were left out. I'll leave it at that.
Only thing Africa lacks is good leadership! Botswana is clear example of how good leadership can change the country
As a Nigerian, I absolutely agree with you, friend. We have other issues like bad geography and climate but good leadership and political structures and institutions can negate all of the other issues.
Stop saying it’s about good leadership when Europeans and Americans have assassinated leaders, sponsored coups and terrorist organizations, and use other forms of political meddling which have made all regions of Africa struggle. Everyone wants to focus on what Africa is doing wrong. But nobody wants to talk about how France has the 4th largest gold reserve but no gold mine, and yet holds 90% of the gold from 15 African countries, some of which don’t have their own gold reserves. Let’s talk about how many of the industries extracting resources from Africa are European, American, and Chinese businesses that give little profit or benefit to the countries and local people. Good leadership gets you assassinated bc there’s too much money flowing out of Africa. Almost all of the resources needed to build electric cars are on that continent and this is the moment they should be benefiting but instead we have children in lithium mines
For those who don't know en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruth_Williams_Khama
@@katnicole7274 No, let's not talk about _how,_ let's talk about _why._ The discourse you describe is a discourse of grievance and acrimony, not a discourse about understanding and solutions. Africans will not be fooled by such talk forever.
@@katnicole7274 I know the West has assassinated some leaders, but as far as I know they have all been corrupt or communists. So there has been no loss to the country.
I don't know the French neo-colonial empire too well, so no comments there.
Better help has been a known scam for a while, they keep getting in trouble but fines are cheap to pay off rather than raise their business practices.
Yep very shady. I'm glad i have sponsorblock
EE also promoted Masterworks which is another known scam. They don't care about their audience.
And there is zero chance he actually uses it. Just a lie like the rest of this video.
Seems like they expanded their advertisement massively. I hear about this scam everywhere now.
it's not really a scam, they did have shady practices but it's not like they didn't offer people therapy and it's still cheaper than therapy generally is out of pocket.
Read Origin of Species, specifically on population dynamics due to geography.
I think back often to the massive and wealthy African megacities in the halo games, and think about what it would take to get them there. The main problem is that they must do it themselves. I hope for the best future possible for all.
I'm a simple man, I see Betterhelp, I click dislike.
Good that not everyone has forgotten this
Based
Glad to see someone with a functioning brain
And he still gets his resources from MIT lol
I recommend using sponsorblock then
I have a hard time with the argument that a main reason for lack of technology adoption was erratic tyrants. Europe and Asia were both absolutely filled with despots, tyrants of all kinds, hordes of barbarians like the Huns and Danes who pillages and burned down places, yet people still developed commerce and metallurgy.
Agreed. Widespread corruption may be a better argument. Nothing can get done if there’s absolutely no trust 🤷♂️
That not only what he said was the cause . He said the fact that the land in a Africa was big, people could easy leave their communities and settle somewhere else with out the oppressive leader thus they did not developed a sense of nationalisation to come together and fight back.
Its in the jeans
As a South African, I always got the idea that Africa's greatest problem (at least where I am from) seems to be that the chiefs and king is too often still seen as infallible, or unchallengeable... there have never been a revolution against their hierarchy structures as there was in Europe... it was more of a softening, but never a complete rejection. The lack of adoption of tech for the greater good is also mindboggeling... there appear to be traces of this tech-rejection that precedes European influence on the Southern part of the continent.
You missed what he said, couple the tyrany with the land and the environment allowed groups to escape and set up their own communities and be virtually isolated from the rest preventing ideas they learnt from being spread. Europe never really had that problem, all the natives of the european countries today mainly derive from 1-4 ethnicities. And about metallurgy you should look into how slaves from the carribean helped in the industrial revolution theres a guardian article about it.
19:40 "Economic success leads to economic success" due to Girardian Imitation. It's actually an effective strategy before it gets saturated and conflict emerges. In this case, everyone is copying a small set of the same thing, which leads to petite competition to the bottom.
There is also a lack of animal species that can be domesticated, and agricultural technology cannot be easily applied from north to south and west to east, as there is not only the Sahara but also massive jungles and rivers broad enough to allow two different species of bonobos to develop on each side.
Long ago the Economist published a piece called The Chief Problem with Africa - in a nutshell, Africans see their leaders as divine and beyond reproach. As a South African, I can say this problem is still alive and well. It is rooted in mentality and other factors are simply ancillary.
It's a reflection of the circumstances when people are so preoccupied with their own challenges that keeping up with politics takes a backseat.
I'm Namibian, and I agree.
I think when I ponder the state of political participation our society I often neglect the fact that Apartheid was a very recently lived experience for the majority of our people. When the only thing that matters to you is escape from a system like that, I suppose it's easy to gather religiously around the leaders of the struggle against it, and it thus makes sense emotionally that this reverence lingers in the public consciousness. Nevertheless, it's immensely disheartening to talk to the people who remain proud supporters of leadership just to find out that they are all largely unhappy with the performance of leadership. For them, voting is not an expression of political interest, but rather a ritual they have to celebrate freedom. To them, the democratic process is not one where people participate in decision making. It's just a celebration of the end of Apartheid.
In a sense, it's just the legacy of the style of participation of non whites (especially blacks) are used to. It's inertia
south africa is a fantastic example of degradation - in the 90s, it was still classified as a developed economy in financial markets; it had one of the top #10 rail networks; world's best energy supplier; world's best tax collector.
all the democratic gov needed to do was build & expand on this incredible infrastructure.
.....it didn't.
That's the first time I hear this. Let alone about South Africa.
you guys need to get rid of the ANC ASAP!
"Africa has less productive land" then the main colonial settlers economic activities were agriculture and mining the had huge plantations of sisal,cocoa,coffee,and cotton in Tanzania for example the Germans built railroad the agricultural reasons. Most CZcamsrs who talks about Africa poverty have never been into Africa 😅
The wheel thing is shocking
But did that form of agriculture destroy the soil? And do Africans own the land or do Western (or East Asian now) corporations own it?
you need to see Europe and the American plains to understand what real agriculture is. I'm Kenyan and geography is a much bigger problem than you think it is. in comparison to Europe and USA, we don't have any arable land in our country.
Those aren't grains. You can't feed yourself with those.
I think he explains what he means really well. Have you stopped the video the moment he said that?
I didn't hear "foreign aid" mentioned. When people are supported by outside money, they do not develop the means to make do for themselves. Dependency.
The Bell Curve doesn't lie...
@@The_Reality_Filterunderdeveloped prefrontal cortexes is the correct answer that is glossed over by the entire world
@@Doitallgp well they are intrinsically linked...
Did you guys even read the study your quoting?
Thank you so much for making this video. As an African myself (Nigerian, specifically) it always annoys me when most people only attribute Africa's current problems to "colonialism or racism", effectively removing personal responsibility of us Africans, and ignore more important factors like geography, climate, socioeconomic systems, political unity, culture, and leadership. Thanks for focusing on those areas.
Biafra woupd come
@@kennyking9667 friend, I don't care. We have so many wannabe secessionists in Nigeria, it's not funny anymore. Oduduwa nation, Arewa separatists, Biafra separatists, Sokoto caliphate fanatics, Fulani insurgents etc. The simple reality is that these groups have very little support or clout, even among their own tribes. They can't sustain themselves without the nation and they know it but choose to remain delusional.
Both can be right at the same time.
Ignoring foreign interferance whilst only highlighting corrupt African leadership is no better than Ignoring corrupt African leaders whilst only blaming foreign interference.
Your all the same just shilling for different sides.
@@anthonyyawtwumasimensah197 both can be right at the same and one can be more responsible for the problem than the other, also.
@@kennyking9667not funny at all.
There's a reason why most of my African friends have no plans of living in Africa. I'm paraphrasing, but one guy told me "imagine me going back and telling people 'hey we should follow traffic rules and make stop lights.' Everyone would look at me like I was crazy." And that's a small example of how culture and nurture means much more than geography. You have pockets of places with awesome cohesion, property rights and education, but it has to reach a critical mass to be safe from total annihilation.
This kind of culture is a result of corruption, If only half the people have to follow the rules and the other half has a connection in the government or can bribe and get away with a lot of things, people will start to hate the rules and they will lose all respect to them, and with enough time people will start to see it as the norm since that all they know their whole life, specially when the rules are not even enforced properly or fairly
Yea u made this whole things up, and Africa is a huge diverse continent
@@Bell_plejdo568p my buddy from Nigeria, neighbors from DRC, met someone whose family is threatened if they go back to Sudan, talked to an ambassador from Ghana and I think Uganda was the other guy. Like this isn't hidden information. Granted all of these people were no longer living in Africa, so maybe their bias is skewed, but that's the point. People that want a certain way of life (property rights, self determination, education) are going overseas, so everyone left are more intrenched in their ways.
"how culture and nurture means much more than geography"
EXCEPT the Africans IN the western world -- who are benefitting (and taking advantage of) what the WESTERNERS have built -- did not and DO NOT believe "hey we should follow the rules" unless they are continuously and continually "forced" to do so! They have come to a different "geography" and changed hardly at all! ALLLLL the years of living in a different "culture and nurture" has NOT changed Africans into people who desire to -- and CAN -- live in a different culture and nurture!
EVERY "African group" living in EVERY other 'culture and nurture' has an exceedingly HIGH of out-of-wedlock, no-fathers-present, birth rate. EVERY single one. It's PART of their culture and nurture. It exists in Africa, it exists and every African group across the planet. The exceptions do NOT prove the rule! (I'd point out: in the 1920s and 30s in the U.S -- when the African family structure was FORCED to live within the (then-extant) "rules of (White/western) society" -- they had actually a LOWER divorce rate than White/Westerners. Once that force was let up -- they mostly returned to the 'African culture and nurture' of reproduction without marriage, which has only increased since then.
@@Avalanche-Ice1950 OUTRAGIOUS. I'm shocked...
You must never speak of these things again
Africa is a continent. Many different peoples and countries. To lump all its diversity together is strange to me. Africa will never live up to the standards of what everyone expects. Just like North America does not live up to everyone expectations. Africa is not completely poor. In my humble perspective, being poor means you do not have what you need to live. If you have everything you need without money are you really poor? If you have more than what you need and nature can continue to replenish naturally what does a economic monetary measurement really mean? If people want to walk a km to get to a well -- does not make them poor? If people drive that km, via truck, lease a car, pay for insurance, maintenance, pay tolls, fuel, damage the environment, gain weight because of all the related issues due to lack of exercise? who is poor and whom is just extravagant masquerading as prosperous.
The Bell Curve doesn't lie...
Looking at the comments, I'm surprised that 'IQ' is not a banned phrase yet 😂
It is impossible to measure a persons IQ without using an appropriate IQ test. One way to get a rough idea. If a person mentions another persons IQ then they are probably at the lower end of normal IQ. If they mention a whole continents IQ? Maybe below normal.
@@fuzzy9294Lynn et al 2012
@@nickkorkodylas5005 I have not studied Lynn et al's paper on National IQ's. For anyone who has not studied national IQ's at his level AND does not have academic knowledge of what an IQ actually is to comment on a national IQ or to guess an individual's IQ based on observed or reported behavior is ignorant and/or malicious. What I said about being at the lower end of IQ is a contradiction of what I just said an was said tongue in cheek.
@@fuzzy9294 Please stop talking nonsense. And do you also need a peer reviewed paper to realize that the sky is blue?
@@fuzzy9294ooohhhh. thank you for that. I'll be sure to let my right-wing friends know. you must be an administrator or someone important
This video shows how difficult it is to speak openly and honestly about Africa’s reality without putting your shoe in your mouth.
Is that shoe a Nike?
You don't have to "put your foot in your mouth", read my comment up top. That is Africa's reality...@pukavoket.
Africa's poverty is due to lack of white colonizers.
The Bell Curve doesn't lie...
@@The_Reality_Filter I am definitely in agreement with you. And I understand the importance of manipulating the circumstances of populations in order to maintain the beliefs preferred by certain members of society.
As an ex South African, and who studied that part of Africa from the inside, can I suggest having a very close look at Botswana. There are a number of very important differences to other African countries, first being mainly a single tribal group. A lot depended on one man, Seretsi Khama, but his policies remind me of Norway.
I am a Motswana. Are you smoking crack? Mainly one ethnic group? You are actually mad, we have over 20. We just don't go to war with one another and only have dialectic differences in our language.
I envy you because you can say "as an ex South African".
I lived as a white SAfrican, pulling my weight, but privileged. It was not a hard life unlike most Black SAfricans. I did consider that I had paid my way, but it was time to leave and let the country be run by indigenous people. All power to them, I long for them to take their rightful place in the World.
@ebaab9913 my parents migrated to SA from Mozambique. I was born in SA but I've never felt like this is home, I never felt welcomed. I'm not impressed with the leadership or how things are done. I look forward to the day I leave. Whatever opportunity I can find, I'm taking it. I'm so fed up with the way things are done on this continent.
Nation states do not equal prosperity.
You're map graphics guy needs a raise
This is really well addressed by a Thomas Sowell analysis. It is available here on You Tube
This is the biggest intellectual gymnastics stretch I've seen ever! Both Africa and Latin America could have some of the wealthiest countries on earth, but have been continuously mismanaged and riled with corruption.
they think short term not the long game
Not being left with strong institutions was crippling.
Before European colonialism they used to have strong institutions if you actually read to the history of those kingdoms
@@penderyn8794 😂
Evolutionary protocol.
Did we watch the same video? His whole point was that strong and inclusive institutions are conducive to prosperity while corrupt and extractive ones lead to the situations we see in SA and Africa.
Same thesis by Acemoglu and Robinson in their book.
So where's the link to the MIT study?
Too busy shilling his product to provide source.
I mean he gave you the title and the authors, use google
Daron Acemoglu & James A. Robinson - Why is Africa Poor?. Google it 😮💨
You have google you know.
@@knusperkeks2748 Google it.
It sounds like it's ultimately an issue of leadership, something that still persists today with some exception. Question for you though: Europe also had a long history of feudalism. So what was the trigger that changed all that? Also, we've seen what unfettered "development" can do to the environment, so it might be time to move away from measuring development in economic output alone. If it's not sustainable, then it will eventually come crashing down as we've started to see in the West.
Had Africa only been discovered this morning, where would they be in their industrial revolution?
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
In the mud hut stage.
less pumas and nikes
There's no reason to beleive they would have ever developed an industrial revolution. Even now they need assistnace from China to develop one.
Good question😊.
I think the obvious (politically incorrect) answer to especially Sub Saharan Africa's underdevelopment & backwardness is; below average intelligence and the lack of intellectual prowess on the part of the critical mass of the population.
I can think of another explanation
?
The real reasons are not discussed...
Yeah the party of science sure does love to ignore uncomfortable truths.
@@reignman30so I’ve seen this hinted at a few times in the comment section, and I’m genuinely curious what you mean by this? What is this other explanation? What is this video dancing around? Would you mind explaining this to me?
@@fadbtx colonization
I wish countries like senegal were discussed in this video only because it has always been politically stable and peaceful but it's still very poor. All the foreign investment benefit those already in power and many say the west African currency is one of the biggest reasons it's remained poor.
the west keeps the african continent poor. look there are inherent problems but the strategy is there
The currency is not the main reason Senegal is not thriving at all. Ivory Coast and Benin have the same currency but they have better economic growth annually than many country in the world. Senegal has strong institutions, but it is less economically attrative to investors than Ivory Coast for exemple. Mainly because it lacks natural ressources (cocoa, gold etc.) and its agriculture is very unproductive. That's why when they have the choice, private investors go to countries like Ivory Coast instead of Senegal.
Prosperous, industrialized economies are highly complex systems that require a certain level of intelligence in order to build and maintain.
There.
That's your reason why Africa is poor.
The main reason I cannot take economists seriously is because nearly all economic theory is based on the assumption that all people are equally interchangeable units with identical abilities and behaviours, as this makes the mathematics easier on a macroeconomic scale. Any engineer (such as myself) will tell you that any calculations you perform are only as valid as the underlying assumptions you base them on, which makes the macro calculations economists perform utterly useless, bordering on pseudoscientific.
This is why economic theory is sometimes so ludicrously detached from reality, and why economists can spectacularly fail to reach the correct answer on some questions, such as the one presented in this video's title.
Cogent take! Makes sense
Half right. You are writing about education and not intelligence and for this, you need a lot of resources and infrastructure, something african countries don't have. Not that long ago, kids in europe couldn't visit a school because they had to work in the fields.
Feels like people writing "It's exactly what you think" didn't pay attention to the whole video.
Also I think more should be looked into the causes of such endemic corruption.
Your comment deserves more likes.
Videos like this have become harder to watch since I began noticing the rampant use of vague stock footage on CZcams. It makes me appreciate shows like Forensic Files or Air Disasters that produce their own reenactments based on specifics of the story.
Not everyone has the budget or time for that, as long as it gets the message across I am more concerned with what he is saying.
Yea it’s filled with misinformation and nosense
@@bojangles2492 Yeah, but sad part of this story is, the channel covered this topic like one or two years ago and is more basic this time around. It's like if he can't find any better topics or other countries are just not clickbait enough.
I agree on this topic. In many cases I would prefer just a static screen with information than random clips that may be close to the subject, but still obviously stock photo. I just feels a little off and takes my focus away. This video I was manly listening to, instead of viewing though.
@bojangles2492 and not everyone should make videos.. its just laziness really. Especially the ones who strictly use AI.. I can't stand then, and block every page I come across, especially if you use clickbait titles.
I love hearing about how diversity in African countries is the reason why they remain poor and underdeveloped; however, the same people are quick to point out that diversity is a strength anywhere else... just not in Africa. There is so much dissonance, and I bet these people don't even realise it.
Africa is super developed
I'm probably one of the people you're referring to, at least tangentially. However, I don't claim that diversity is the problem in Africa, but statements of mine (and perhaps others arguing in a similar way as I do) might be mistaken that way. What I'm saying is this: Countries in Western and Central Europe had favourable conditions for development, such as being able to develop and industrialize on their own terms and not being subject to any form of colonialism or forced liberal market reform. Most of them chose the way of the language or ethnicity based nation state, but there's also Switzerland, for example, which chose a different route, which, for the time, was quite diversity embracing.
The problem with colonies is that the way they're organized, the economic structure and power structures, is for extraction by colonizers. They're (very likely) not what the people in the region would build if they could structure their societies on their own terms, if they could go through their own process, their own societal negotiations and conflicts, like Europe once did. That, however, is almost impossible in the current environment, with multi-national corporations teaming up with western governments and their international organizations (e.g. the IMF and the World Bank) to stabilize an environment that is conducive to extraction, and international law and diplomacy set up in a way that make it very hard for countries to reform themselves, or even develop away from the European nation state model.
Yes, in numerous cases, the lack of such an independent process surfaces as strife between ethnic groups. However, that is, at least in part, a symptom of a region greatly disrupted by colonial extraction, both in times of traditional colonialism, and (neo)colonialism. Even conflicts that are rooted in pre-colonial structures are exacerbated in a situation where people now have to make do in the results of colonial oppression - and, on top of that, they are conflicts that never had a chance of being resolved on the people's own terms, using the vessels of their own, organically developed civilizations.
The root of the problem aren't these surface level symptoms, however, but the lack of an organic process for a region to "find itself", so to say. Looked at from the surface, it may seem like a diversity issue, but it really isn't.
Also, in cases where a country is ruled by a government that discriminates against some ethnic groups, and doesn't take into account that some groups might have been dealt a particularly bad hand by past oppression, or worse, engages in direct oppression, violence or even genocide, that's neither a colonial (albeit, of course, being a (neo)colony doesn't help having sound political structures) issue nor an issue of diversity, but moral bankruptcy of those responsible. Blaming diversity in those kinds of situations isn't even a surface-level mistake like in the case of symmetric tribal conflicts, but simply a cheap excuse for a bigoted political agenda (or the very concept of having such an agenda when using Africa as a proxy token in Western political discourse).
@@christianknuchel We all know you took the time to provide this answer; however, I will not similarly return the favour. I appreciate the effort, which is only designed for the viewers and not as an answer directly to me. On the other hand, your reply, in my opinion, is just a more sophisticated way of throwing an insult, which is also okay, as I would not have expected otherwise.
I'm afraid I have to disagree with many levels that Africa or most African countries do not have the power to change their course. Unlike other countries throughout history, they didn't have to "invent the wheel" (like the Spanish had to for the Incas - to talk in your "colonialist" language; obviously, there is a lot more than the mere wheel here as it goes profoundly into what a civilisation can achieve). Africa is entirely responsible for their well-being, and they have the power in their hand; they choose to deal with Russia and China these days and appear perfectly happy with it.
You must have some form of selective memory when referring to European countries having time to develop, or you must not know history. I must remind you of the recent two world wars that have led to unimaginable destruction and loss of both human and material capital. Even before that, Europe was not peaceful or united, as can be noticed in a brief history review. No, my friend, no one had time to do anything; it was a simple game of survival of the fittest, which is perfectly fine at a cosmic level as we are not yet playing outside this game. We either move forward, or we will be forgotten.
As a background, I was born in a diverse communist country (remember, USSR was very diverse), and I lived more time in extreme poverty than in decency. I did not blame anyone for my misfortune. At no time in our previous history did one have more power to change his own fortune than today (with some minor exceptions - not Africa).
but countries in europe have figured out a way to actually work together to be great. ex. europe warred against one another. however, when it came time to slice up africa, they worked together to make that happen so that they could all prosper. africa does not work together to be great and prosper. if they did, they have good roads that linked east to west africa, north to south, etc. to facilitate commerce throughout the continent.
@@dumarudolf3976 I didn't mean to imply that Europe didn't have strife, but that it had the opportunity to develop on its own terms, as it was the first region to emerge global empires. There's a huge difference between symmetric conflict in the way that Europe had internally, and being subject to perpetual oppression.
To make a long story short: Europe (and I'm counting the US and Australia as European countries here) won the game for the current political era, it's just that its power projection's gotten a bit more subtle over the past 70 years, which is why some people believe that colonialism is over, even though it's not.
As a bit of background for me: As you might have guessed from my earlier example, I'm Swiss. Your rhetoric reminded me very much of discourse I've heard before, including in my own country, where people find excuses to argue against people from other places joining our society. However, Switzerland was founded on people speaking different languages and from different denominations of Christianity, which, as you know, had been at war with one another at various points in History, joining together and making a country. If there's hypocrisy there, it's people who claim themselves to be patriots, but who oppose immigration of people from different places.
That issue is even more pronounced in US discourse, a country that was founded on global immigration outright, and US discourse has a lot of influence on the political discourse on the internet, and even local politics - at least over here.
Personally, I don't care much about whether diversity is a strength or not. What I care about is the *fulfillment* of the individual, and if people come closer to that fulfillment by means of immigration, so be it. However, it doesn't stop there: Anti-immigration arguments are also used to target refugees, their rights and their chances of being granted asylum. This even leads to things like teenagers who are in the middle of an apprenticeship (!) getting deported back to their country of origin. People who have started to integrate, to build a life! Children with hopes and dreams. Just people, like you, me, everyone else. But because of a mix of nationalist bureaucracy and xenophobic bigotry, they get theirs destroyed - people who've already gone through so much, who were just starting to rebuild. And then there's the inhumane treatment, and sometimes even murder, of refugees before they even get here.
Besides the Humanist aspect, I also believe that it's important for the world to interweave and not separate, to facilitate a better understanding of one another, and make it less likely for monstrous views of people from other parts of the world to become widespread. It also begets cultural exchange and expands a society's social horizon and flexibility. Also, I've always loved the cultural bounty of the world, and have had a cosmopolitan mindset pretty much my entire life. I like living in an international place.
A good indication of the progress a country is to a very simple question who owns the land, the resources and the wealth. You don't need to be a genius to guess the answer.
Africa's persistent poverty stems from a systemic failure by individual political leaders and governments to establish and maintain a stable infrastructure conducive to private business operations and employment opportunities for its populace. Rather than prioritizing the welfare of their citizens, many leaders prioritize self-enrichment, exacerbating the continent's economic woes.
Essential infrastructural elements such as reliable electricity, clean water, and access to nutritious food are fundamental for economic development. However, inadequate provision of these basic necessities hampers the growth of businesses and perpetuates widespread poverty. Consequently, only a small fraction of the population contributes to the tax base, while the majority rely on welfare assistance, creating an unsustainable economic dynamic.
This stark imbalance between tax-paying citizens and those dependent on grants undermines economic stability and perpetuates poverty cycles. Without meaningful reforms and effective governance, Africa will continue to struggle under the weight of widespread corruption and fraud, impeding its progress and perpetuating its status as the world's poorest continent.
I am South African, and South Africa stands out amongst most of the African Nations as the most "developed", or used to be. Here - and to some extent I would say in most european settled regions (colonialism implies that the wealth was being shipped away, not utilised in country, which is what happened here) - the european conquest broke the inhibiting authority of local rulers that you assert prevented widespread development. In South Africa, it was replaced by a National Authority that, while still authoritarian and oppressive, DID develop enormous amounts of capital - railways, harbours, airports, mining, schools, hospitals, roads, dams, which benefitted everyone, even if the ruling whites under apartheid benefitted more. It doesn't make it right, but an oppressed South African had much better access to healthcare, education, transport, employment, clean water and food than an oppressed NON-South African. The tragedy is that when democracy was introduced - which should have been a wonderful thing - , the new leaders didn't maintain any of the practices or principles that had made the region prosperous. They didn't continue with improving or developing the infrastructure, education, etc. Instead, all they did was exhaust the capital that was previously developed and re-distribute wealth into non-sustainable social aid programmes, which kept their voter base loyal. The result is that any good that came from the suffering under the decades of oppression has been lost. It was all for nothing. They took the silver lining from that dark cloud, cut it into pieces so small that it blew away into the wind as dust. Now we have failing infrastructure, no electricity, no water, no functioning local authorities, 40% unemployment, a collapsing tax base, a prohibitively expensive international credit rating, and no light at the end of the tunnel. Africa is poor, because it insists on doing things its own way. And that way doesn't work, if your goal is to develop along the lines of other non-african industrial and post industrial nations. Other regions of the world - notably South East Asia, embraced industialisation, academicism, national planning etc. etc. and still retained their regional/ cultural identity. But in Africa rejection of "The West" is part of the mindset, and is a rallying cry for the leadership, who drive around in Mercedes Benz's wearing Armani suits. Africa will remain poor, until Africans decide that that rejecting the practices of the wealthy isn't what makes you a real African.
This is what happens when you don't have to fight to develop yourself. European nations that have been built up by centuries of hardship now find themselves with leadership that don't have any clue of how the nations wealth was achieved and are set on squandering it to purchase a voting base using taxation of those who actually work to keep building that wealth.
Explain estonia then. Most of it's wealth was taken away by Russians same with development. After getting out of soviet union they growth was growing with insane numbers. Same with Poland. The "muh colonialism" is just excuse.
@@Tespri That some countries could rise above the hurdles erected by colonialism does not imply that colonialism is not an overwhelming impediment. Estonia and Poland are where they are despite their colonial/oppressive past, not because of or uncoupled from it.
@@debarshidas8072 Finland as well.. Hong Kong after British rule... Singapore after british rule. In fact it seems that the general trend is that only colonies in Africa are incapable to "overcome this hurdle".
It's just overwhelming excuse and cope mechanism.
@@debarshidas8072 Finland as well.. Hong Kong after British rule... Singapore after british rule. In fact it seems that the general trend is that only colonies in Africa are incapable to "overcome this hurdle".
It's just overwhelming excuse and cope mechanism.
I believe the primary issue is the myopic perspective and extreme levels of corruption throughout the continent. Africans are their own worst enemies. We see the same issue in the nations born of its diaspora, such as Jamaica and Haiti, where my immediate ancestors come from. Corruption exists in all countries, but in other places, the elites at least recognize that the peasantry needs SOMETHING. In Africa and throughout the Caribbean, they horde everything.
No, it isn't that elites recognize that peasants need something--it's that they can't stop the "peasants." A wannabe tyrant won't be a tyrant if he fears the people will kill him at the very moment he oppresses them. If the people are sufficiently able to succeed without the govt, then the govt lacks certain power to keep them from succeeding.
Rights, success, are things that people secure for themselves--they are never given by those in power. Waiting on a dictator to give them is futile and foolish.
African governments 👎👎
African people ❤️🎉🎊 consistently some of the nicest, hardworking folks I’ve ever met.
@@dsparr1010 isnt the african government or any government created by its own people? are we adults or children and always everybody else is at fault except us lol
But we can't talk about why that is the case
People who annoy you.....
Everywhere in the world where people live is the same: It's the kind of people we are. That cultures aren't better or worse, just different, is an enormous lie.
I wonder if there is another factor that could be plotted on a Bell Curve....
Poor Switzerland: Cut off from the sea, lots of mountains, ...
High IQ people will succeed in any environment. Low IQ people will fail in any modern environment.
well its dependent on economically stable neighbours though, hence wealth creates wealth
@@1terminatorr
Must be why South Africa and Rhodesia were so successful with whites in charge and then collapsed once blacks took over.
I saw what you did there!
🤦♂️🙄
You flat out state that European colonists weren't going to have Europeans doing the labor in the Americas but in fact, European indentured servitude was extremely common in this period.
Not as common as using Africans
Muslins used to use africans as slaves way before europeans@@VMohdude-
Relatively speaking, they weren't doing much or as much horrible labof
@@VMohdude- depends on the place and time. In Canada and USA there were relatively few slaves (even in the south, there were far more white laborers than slaves). This is flipped in the Caribbean with the vast majority of the populace being enslaved.
@@VMohdude-and your supporting data is?
Whether you want to judge it as good or bad time marches on - the biggest advantage is adaptability -
That elaboration of Botswana's relative success would be worth a video.
The diversity in their countries should help since its obviously our biggest strength
Lol
haha! That's funny.
LoL!
Diversity of robbers a pillagers and scammers.
African countries have no more diversity than other countries
Well, I was going to say tribalism is a big factor, but so many beat me to it. So, I will simply say selfishness is a grand factor, fueled by tribalism. Instead of "all for one and one for all", there is "all for me, and none for you". Such division of thought makes for a weak nation in a continent of nations. It would make me happy to see all rise up and reach their potential. So much senseless suffering. Botswana looks to be leading the charge on development, so I wish them success.
Seems to me that I heard today that Botswana has a bunch of elephants for sale.
African nations have been described as "kleptocracies" where different tribes and groups have taken it i turn to thieve and asset-strip and purge opposition, until another group takes its tuen in chare, ribnse and repeat!
"Band aiding over the syptoms" - I see what you did there!
Probably worth reading Dark Emu by Bruce Pascoe to more carefully interrogate that assumption about indigenous australians as "just hunters and gatherers"
Corrupt politicians can totally destroy any hope of progress.
corrupt politicians are backed by people who tolerate/advocate for corruption. they do not germ from ex-nihilo.
Specially when they are put in place by western powers
100% incorrect. Every country has corrupt politicians. The difference in developed countries is they have strong institutions and culture that limit the damage that corrupt politicians can do.
@@stochastic42 Also incorrect, developed countries continually plunder underdeveloped countries, they just paint this as willing capitalist exchange.
@@spawel1 Although correct, that point doesn't refute mine.
Tyranny, greed and corruption of a nation's leadership has always been a barrier to lasting success for any country without a doubt. This was true in Africa as well even before the colonials arrived. But that isn't really the root of the problem. Authoritarian regimes can, for a time, create a reasonably prosperous and orderly society (e.g. China). When Western colonial powers left or were overthrown, one set of shackles was often simply replaced with another (e.g. South Africa). In addition to the corrupt governments many African nations have the additional hurdle of widespread and systemic religious and ethnic discrimination especially in regards to education (e.g. Nigeria). Most African nations will never realize their full potential so long as they (the people and their leaders) continue to choose to segregate themselves along religious and tribal lines.
A lesson for us?
I have one big problem with your summation. There was no choice for multi-ethnicism. If we compare ourselves to europe. You see that they only became multi ethnic in the last hundred years while have having mostly the same religon (eg. Belguim was a catholic and language split from the protestant the Nederlands). African countries can have not only religious, language and Lifestyle barriers, but also resource and power imbalances that were enforced during colonialism (eg. Hausa in nigeria are 60-90 of the african giants military. Thus military coups tended to have an hausian islamic undertone.). The country also interact with a world that doesnt want development but extraction of the continent.
@@AaronOmole They started out with kings and rulers. Colonialism neither caused it nor exacerbated it.
Culture and tradition adaptations over time are influences on outcomes on regional groups of people.
Remember when South Africa was a power house economy in Africa, I wonder what happened to change that ? .
Yes i do. Corruption, incompetent and poor leadership changed the course.
The end of apartheid is what changed.
Zuma and The Guptas happened. Common cheap corruption.
See also Rhodesia
Powerhouse? So the large BLACK mayority that was pratically enslaved living in abject poverity didn't count?
Please change the thumbnail to: "Exactly what you think", it saves lots of everyone's time.
You must be disappointed 🙂
😂😂You're not lying. I actually watched it to the end when I saw two names associated with the study - Daren Acemoglu and James A. Robinson. They know their stuff in this area, so I hoped to hear something new. But only confirmed to me what I already know - Botswana is doing well.
Born in Africa and living in Africa, I can tell you, but in my country, I can not say anything because I will be called a racist and coloniser if I do.
Not owning their own short falls and looking to place the blame on past generations is the name of the game for our leaders.
You should be the leader, bro. You're a real one.
True. It’s all about leadership
Mismanagement, corruption, greed is destroying Africa
I mean if you're going to blame black people for being black as a white person yeah people will call you out for being racist
Odd, I thought racism is about power structure and minority components!
Whites shouldnt be racist to blacks in Africa with this, was US left word police wrong? What a shock
MIT did a good job with this investigation into common knowledge
If colonialism made Africa poor, Ethiopia and Liberia (never really colonies) would be among the most wealthy countries in Africa, while (heavily colonized) countries like Algeria and South Africa should be among the poorest. Let's take a look at GDP per capita:
Team non-colony:
Ethiopia is 26th in Africa
Liberia is 44th in Africa
Team former colony:
Algeria is 9th in Africa
South Africa is 7th in Africa
As we can see, two of the most colonized countries are much wealthier than the two countries that never was a colony. Therefore, the idea that colonization created poverty is not supported by plain facts.
You only look at two countries that were colonised: One was colonised so much, that europeans started living there, taking over and creating apartheid which still has left many traces up to this day. The other country is in Northern Africa and has a stronger tie to Europe, even though I am not too sure of its history. Instead of looking at the two cases Liberia and Ethiopia, how about we look at the other 52 other countries that were colonised and their GDP per capita.
Africa is a continent and each individual country may have its own reasons for underdevelopment of course. However drawing such general and dangerous conclusions like colonisation was good for African countries is twisting the facts, spreading misinformation and is giving white saviour and victim blaming. Of course it wasn't only colonisation but saying it didn't play a big role would be very wrong.
@@cameronashford5744Liberia was colony of USA ngl. USA purposefully suppressed them
People don't want to discuss the fact that Africa simply has a human capital issue.
@@punishedksen9135Let's discuss neocolonialism first
Colonialism comprises neocolonialism too, but ok I guess. Yall feel so attacked personally that aren't even capable of accepting that, yes, maybe these phenomena left a huge trace that partly explains Africa's situation still to these days
Investing in Africa is just not worth the risk for most. The governments are too unstable and corrupt to trust to do as they say they would get done. The leaders just figure it’s easier to just take the money, shut down or take over the business and run it to the ground. The place has great potential the people just need to see the larger picture.
Sitting on a box full of gold and saying that it is "not worth it"...
@@fadbtx yeah its usually just racial bias...The continent is ready for the investment I can a bunch of nations where its good but people in the west still hold on to these barbaric ignorant beliefs about the African continent.
Investors don't care about corruption. In fact they're more than happy to take part in that corruption if it will bring them profits. Which it generally does.
the big three are very stable but highly corrupt, corruption and conflict are the number one things too affect the all the countries on the continent by quite some margin certainly not colonialism.
@@loganmedia1142 until the government nationalizes your business and takes it for themselves. You do the work and put up the money and they just take it away leaving you with nothing. Some will take that risk but many won’t.
On the population thing. The trajectory of Africa's population is nuts:
1700: 61 million Africans (10% of the global population)
2024: 1464 million Africans (18.5%)
2100: 3900 million Africans (38%)
Exactly. Africa is nowhere near as poor as it was 200 years ago. The videos' title is misleading.
😂😂😂 I guess African women have a special taste to their men
Keep in mind they'll start making less kids as they industrialise and less hands on a farm. Other developed nations followed the same trend
@@loneIyboy15this is the dumbest thing I have ever read on the internet, like seriously 😁 . Most african countries were vast rural before independence . For instance more than ninety percent of the tarred roads in nigeria was constructed after our independence . What of access to electricity , clean water and medicine . Mehn you are either filled with hate or ridiculously ignorant
@@loneIyboy15 This is just not true save for a few warzones.
"This time period on the continent was truly horrific, to the point where we can't go into too much detail or this video will just be taken off CZcams"
If that is true, then something is very wrong with youtube
It’s crazy to me that they think we should take European political, social values and force non-Europeans to abide by them
Africa will never be like Europe or Asia and sooner people realize this the better off Africans can be in developing their own continent
Is it to do with their labour and resources being taken by companies from the global North for cheap?
A lot of the reasons spelt out in this video for why Africa is so poor often sound more like excuses. Many European countries for example are also land locked but have access to international markets. A book called Dead Aid by Dambisa Moyo is a great read that addresses many of the questions.
Many "landlocked" European countries are not in practice landlocked, because it is easy to transport goods on the large rivers like the Rhine and Donau. For example, even Switzerland and Austria has some large ports. There is not actually a single European country that does not have ports with ocean access because of all the deep rivers across the continent.
This is not the case for the vast majority of landlocked African countries
Things sound like excuses when you aren't willing to listen
They are advanced NOW, for most of history those landlocked European countries have been sh*tholes. The only exception is Switzerland 🇨🇭 who is a very special case.
@@NullSeriesnope. He's right
@@Spacemongerr interesting. and what is the excuse for the ones that border the oceans?
You state that when the European powers left, they took with them their tools, ruling structures and industrial relations - but that is a bit one sided, in most cases they were chased out and the locals immediately rejected those very tools, ruling structures and industrial relations that had been brought by the Europeans, and in many cases also chased out the European ex-patriots who were running them, so they lost not only the advances that had been brought to the continent but in many cases regressed terribly afterward. Simply look to South Africa and Zimbabwe to see - they were initially very successful after independence when a significant portion of those expats were still there, or to other cases like Botswana which did not reject the benefits they had gained by embracing those institutions left by the colonists-- further, many of those countries in rejecting their former colonist's institutions, embraced marxist ones- and that has never ended well
many of the nations in africa which have shown great promise just devolve into race politics once given the chance.
They were not chased out, that is a lie. Go and look at the congo the belgiums literally took the entire administration with them when they left and killed the leader which actually seemed to want progress in the country, same with Ghana, same with burkina faso. But I do agree with your point and that is often overlooked they all decided to follow marxism.
They all followed african socialism which failed when ussr died
Africa: "You colonists raped our country and people. Our poverty is all your fault."
India: "Thanks for all the physical and institutional infrastructure, Britain! "
Most successful countries are offshoots of previously successful countries. Australia, US, Canada, all well supported offshoots of the brittish empire and benefited heavily from inheriting an already functioning system of government, trained officials and strong financial backing during it's formative years. African nations didn't have the same luxury, and when faced with a choice between stable, violent subjugation and unstable freedom they chose, what they chose.
You judge them for being of two minds about whether or not to embrace the system that oppressed them for centuries but i think thats beyond understandable.
Many years ago I read Guns, Germs, and Steel, and the author had a couple interesting takes on the African situation. For one, it is geography; the places that have done well have had a long East-West axis so you can have a large area of similar climate, providing stability for the spread of crops. Africa, and South America, with their long North-South axis doesn't provide large areas of similar climate for widespread farming success.
The other main point was a lack of species for domestication; Africa didn't have the same plants as like the Fertile Crescent and so the opportunity to domesticate plants into a crop as wildly useful as wheat (or rice in China) just didn't happen. Also, those areas had horses, while Africa had Zebras...and as similar as they are in shape, you can't domesticate Zebras, so there went their war-fighting/"tractor" options.
Aren't we here for economics and not an early-on long ad by your sponsor? It may be hard to recommend this video to others.
Nigeria's oil money is distributed into the many accounts of Nigerian politicians in London banks. Citibank was the deposit center for Abacha, about $3 billion.
Thank you, I’m so tired of hearing Africa is the poorest country. If the money made from oil was circulating within the economy we wouldn’t be poor. There is one problem and one problem only corruption. We have the resources, we have the labor and we have the entrepreneurship, we just have politicians that have chosen to partner with the west to keep us poor and keep the money.
Yeah, it's largely the US/Europe bleeding wealth.
I got feeling that tropical diseases were limited to Africa and that they didn't exist in tropical part of present day Latin America and in tropical South Asia and Oceania. Didn't malaria, for example, exist outside of Africa too? And were dangerous animals also living only in Africa? As i read, lions lived in Asia and Europe too before they were wiped out of there. Elephants live in India too and there is subspecies of tiger - bengali tiger and many poisonous snakes (cobra...) in India. South America had their own dangerous animals too (dangerous fish (piranha), poisonous snakes, large cats,...
It's the soft bigotry of low expectations, which always comes up in face of factual evidence.
Malaria existed in the US. That is why we needed African labor for plantation work. Native Americans and Irish workers kept dying since they don’t have sickle cell. Africans have sickle cell and are more immune to malaria due to that genetic adaptation. The Europeans didn’t pick African slaves for convenience. They would’ve used Irish or Slavic people as they usually did in their human rights abuses. They used Africans due to their immunity from malaria
I don't see the point in making arguments like these.
EE's argument is like a pizza and your argument is like taking a topping off and calling that topping a pizza.
Bringing up cases of Malaria in other parts of the world just ignores other aspects EE argued.
@@thinkbetter5286oh, i am sorry. i already found that but forgot to publish a correction here.
I know for a fact that malaria was a thing in medieval England. It was also present in Germany, close to the rivers.
Can you do another video on just the successful African countries (Seychelles, Mauritius, Botswana, Rwanda, Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda) or some subset of them and discuss why they are economically successful?
Competent leadership, urbanization. Thats the reason.
Great work.
Clearly delivered.
Solid context.
Interesting.
TC subscribed
Sahara is a problem as a barrier? Why is not Australia and New Zeeland poor? Why would fertile lands not lead to development/civilization in Africa but it did in China, Egypt, India, Eufrat/Tigris? I didn't get the reason, Malaria? There used to be malaria also in Europe. Bad infrastructure is not a "reason", the question is why don't they build infrastructure.
_"Bad infrastructure is not a "reason", the question is why don't they build infrastructure."_
That is a question. It's not like any nation had their infrastructure ready. Every nation had to build their basic stuff and foundations first, so they could then develop further. The basic steps of development.
@@tubetorpedo They're not capable.
@@marcv2648 They're capable. Corruption and greed is the problem
It's called 70 IQ.
@@xpusostomos That means American politicians have 70 iq too
Ladies and gentlemen. There is no elephant in this room! I repeat, there is no elephant! We just need to study the issue a bit closer. And we will do it around the perimeter of the room, because the middle section of the room is currently unavailable to us.
Hahahaaha idk mate, I think there's a pretty fn huge elephant in this room
LOL
Its cause they are more pigmented?
I couldnt finish the video
The elephant is capitalism.
As a south african i say less tribalism...more education.
Thoma Sowell explains this so well as well. Amazing job
"Not what you think" It's exactly what you thiNk
$900 billion+ worth of aid since the 60's and counting and I find it endlessly amusing how absurd the lengths are that academia will go to in order to avoid accepting what is so painfully, exhaustingly and obscenely obvious about the problems in Africa.
well said
@@bb.buchanan
the glaringly obvious reason is unutterable esp in these comments. SA pre mandela and rhodesia put the lie to any geographical argument
a better question - why is SA so poor NOW when it was incredibly prosperous within living memory
definitely climate change dude and oh, let's say... America? Can't think of any other reason@@ijustwannaleaveacommentony6511
@@ijustwannaleaveacommentony6511 Rhodesia was never a Bread Basket...Africa is a continent the Geography is obviously not going to be the same everywhere. South Africa is Poorer but you seem to omit that Nigeria is the wealthiest country on the continent. This video is definitely leaving a lot out. Also aid doesn't go to the common folk...much of that money cant even be accessed by these governments. Africans outside of Africa send in more money to Africa than aid from foreign governments (nearly 50 billion in Remittances)
As an African ( from Kivu DR Congo) this was extremely informative but extremely depressing. Our generation and the next will have to be extremely creative to find solutions to our issues
If congo stopped being corrupt it will be fine
Before even clicking on this video I knew they would provide the safe, politically correct, progressive worldview answer on this subject. This is essentially Guns, Germs, and Steel condensed into a 20 minute video. They would never touch the real answer to the postulated question; Which is namely I.Q. differences and high time preference behavior within poorer cultures.