olrotimi:

think it was the best for us, because without we would have devoured ourselves silly

Sometimes we all thought we are so barbaric that we will eat each other for dinner.

But the honest fact remains that nobody knows for sure what we may turn out to be without colonialism.

One thing I suspect is that we may either be much better or worse but definitely not the way we are.

Some indicator earlier on suggest that we may be worse off, like we never build quality infrastutures or maintain even those that are left by the colonial masters, all we wanted to do is to 'move in' to the old colonial masters house in IKOYI etc.

Examples of what we build after independence, Lagos-Ibadan Express road, oil refineries, Peugout assembly plant in Kaduna (not even trains to take them form the ports to kaduna anymore) etc  they have all gone down like rubbish.

The only conclusion one can draw from these set of eye strarring facts is that we are unable to doing things for ourselves not because we are incapable but unwilling for selfish reasons.

Maybe if the colonial masters haven't come we may have develop our own systems and ways of life and might have even copy countries like Japan (and it is a big maybe) and be a better country than we are now. Nobody knows or can tell.

Nonetheless colonialism is now irreversible fact of our country history, we have been colonised and may have still remain with some kolo mental and some very nicely fine tuned indeginous selfish and stupid mentality.  

The future from here is what we should be looking forward to, we cannot change the past in terms of history but we ca do so in terms of result and decisions.

God we touch all hearts to be our brothers keepers and care and love for each others.

Omolulu:

Colonialism had it's positive and negative sides, for one it allowed us to know how bad the system was, secondly it introduced certain concepts which we are benefitting from immensely today:education,health,infrastructure, it gave us the idea that the world was more than just a system of family relationships and clans interacting with each other.the ushering of Christianity,to Christians was also a good side of colonialism.it brought about improved governmental systems and admin practices,
On the other hand,it provided the framework for modern bureaucratic corruption,as well as the actualization of imperialistic values(exploitation notably).i think the Negative sides of colonialism,which by far outweigh it's positive sides is best captured in Walter Rodney's classic "HOW EUROPE UNDERDEVELOPED AFRICA". it is a concise work of the systematic degradation of the African continent.
Nevertheless,everything in life has it's advantages and disadvantages, Colonialism has played an important role in Africa's development,whether we like it or not,

and i agree entirely with this.

This is a rather interesting discourse. Was colonialism good for Africa? The answer is Yes and No. Arguably, the disadvantages of colonialism far outweigh the advantages. Is colonialism responsible for the plight of Africa today, I would say a resounding NO. The past is in the past.

Stay with me awhile. When a person hits you and you fall down. It is "down" to that person. But if you are still in that position (instead of getting up) bemoaning the fact that someone hit you, then it is down to you. Another analogy:when you fall down, you don't look back - you look in front of you. We need to forge ahead of time, instead of engaging in lost time that can never be recaptured.

Over 47 years is a long time since the whites left Nigeria and no one can convince me that the reason why we are progressively backward is because the whites came to colonise us. We are to blame for the innumerable plight that is besseting our social and economic polity.

Why don't we see the good in each other? Strive, envy, jealousy, coveteousness, is the bane of our existence. We pull each other down in our thoughts, passive or inert action/activity. Rather than act and progress as a cohesive entity, we seem to have immersed ourselves in this pseudo self centredness that borders on corruption, mismanagement, self aggrandisement and the adopted maxim of "every man for himself" - all of which has absolutely nothing to do with the advancement of our beleaguered polity. If anyone has raped our colony, it is our people and not the whites. What has the stashing of billions of pounds in foreign banks got to do with the whiteman? What has the non completion of contracts on important projects got to do with the whiteman? What has the mismanagement of oil got to do with colonialism? A nation that still sells crude oil for other countries to process for us only to resell to us at many times the original price is a country that still hasn't got its priorities right.

The truth is bitter but it is not unhealthy when swallowed. We can be our worst enemies if only we care to admit it. Do you want a stereotypical case study synonymous to the black race? Why do you think a basket full of black crabs are not covered? It's because none will escape. If one tries to, the others pull it back into the basket. Now, place a white crab inside the basket and see what happens.

Posted by: seabiotics 
Insert Quote
This is a rather interesting discourse. Was colonialism good for Africa? The answer is Yes and No. Arguably, the disadvantages of colonialism far outweigh the advantages. Is colonialism responsible for the plight of Africa today, I would say a resounding NO. The past is in the past.

Stay with me awhile. When a person hits you and you fall down. It is "down" to that person. But if you are still in that position (instead of getting up) bemoaning the fact that someone hit you, then it is down to you. Another analogy:when you fall down, you don't look back - you look in front of you. We need to forge ahead of time, instead of engaging in lost time that can never be recaptured.

Over 47 years is a long time since the whites left Nigeria and no one can convince me that the reason why we are progressively backward is because the whites came to colonise us. We are to blame for the innumerable plight that is besseting our social and economic polity.

Why don't we see the good in each other? Strive, envy, jealousy, coveteousness, is the bane of our existence. We pull each other down in our thoughts, passive or inert action/activity. Rather than act and progress as a cohesive entity, we seem to have immersed ourselves in this pseudo self centredness that borders on corruption, mismanagement, self aggrandisement and the adopted maxim of "every man for himself" - all of which has absolutely nothing to do with the advancement of our beleaguered polity. If anyone has raped our colony, it is our people and not the whites. What has the stashing of billions of pounds in foreign banks got to do with the whiteman? What has the non completion of contracts on important projects got to do with the whiteman? What has the mismanagement of oil got to do with colonialism? A nation that still sells crude oil for other countries to process for us only to resell to us at many times the original price is a country that still hasn't got its priorities right.

The truth is bitter but it is not unhealthy when swallowed. We can be our worst enemies if only we care to admit it. Do you want a stereotypical case study synonymous to the black race? Why do you think a basket full of black crabs are not covered? It's because none will escape. If one tries to, the others pull it back into the basket. Now, place a white crab inside the basket and see what happens.

Now this view I can say I agree with.

What we fail to understand is that even those who colonized us where at some point colonized and so where we are today and for the past 47 years has been of our own doing and not the doing of those who colonized us. We do not know all of our history but I am going to bet that at some point, our people may have also colonized some other people. This has been the way of the world for thousands of years.

It was good for the few that became aristocrats, bad for the majority that became slaves

China, Japan were not colonized however they still have health, education and what not.

Posted on: Today at 09:27:59 PMPosted by: wendymanda
Insert Quote
China, Japan were not colonized however they still have health, education and what not.

Move out to china and I bet you will run back before the end of 2008 thanking your God for Nigeria and even Colonialism , LMAO!!!!!

Move out to china and I bet you will run back before the end of 2008 thanking your God for Nigeria and even Colonialism , LMAO!!!!!

You easily forgot that I mentioned Japan which is a first world country that was not colonized. If I moved to Japan I feel I will be content, all the Nigerians in China are not complaining. Nigeria is one of the countries on America's no go zone but Chinese is study at my school and there is problem with going abroad to study in China. So I think China and their uncolonized self is alot better to America than Nigeria and their colonized self.

As long as we have to operate under the current Western system, I think that colonization did not last long enough to prepare us(Africans) to the big task of competing with them(Westerners) on the international scene.

Not surprising that countries subjected to longer colonial domination seem to be doing better than those countries that had immediate success 'chasing out' the white man.

wendymanda:

China, Japan were not colonized however they still have health, education and what not.

China was partially colonized by the West; from the days of Marco Polo to the Independence of Hong Kong in 1997.

they indeed did their thing but blame no colonial masters, we screwed it all all up!

I don't see anyone blaming the colonial masters here; my point: colonization was probably too short.

I don't think colonization was necessary or good for Africa. I think people should stay in their country and not try to enslave others under the falsehood of; christianizing pagans, bringing justice and equality and what not other nonsense.

In an ideal situation, a post industrialization society would 'honestily and sincerely' trade with non-industrialized societies, but we know there is no ideal situation.

Despite the atrocities that come with colonization, I think it was a neccessary route for us to go from hunting and gathering to becoming lawyers/doctors/engineers.

Unlike Japan that was already industrialized, we also needed to industrialize to compete like the Europeans.

Ethopia was not colonized, we know that right. It is sad that people actually believe that if not for colonization we might not have doctors, lawyers. Impossible, it is incredibly difficult for me to beleive that Africa would be stuck in the hunting and gathering mode if not for colonization. Also we had judicial system precolonization and medical system herbalists before colonizaton. Herbalism which is considered by some as barbaric is now being considered as a better from of medicine that the stupid chemicals we suffocate ourselves with. Homeopathy was practiced pre colonization and is now gaining attention. So I don't think we are as backwards as we have been effectively been inoculated to believe.

Colonialism has its good and bad part, but for the poster who believes that without colonialism, Africans wont have doctors, what makes you think so? they were doctors, trained in the native way, prior to colonialism. I dont have a problem with herbal medicines, as long as it is strictly used for medicinal purposes and not spiritualism.

Ethiopia was not totally free of European colonization of Africa, remember their suffering under Italy? Infact, the sacred Ethiopian oblisk was forcefully removed and currently on display in Italy against the wishes of the owners.

There is no question that Africa had science and technology before the arrival of the West, but the question is, If our indiginous technology was up to par, why did we fall to the European technology? I know we had doctors, etc before the European arrival, but have you ever wondered why it could not compete?

Obviously our local science, technology, and medicine could not compare with the Western equivalent.

wendymanda:

You easily forgot that I mentioned Japan which is a first world country that was not colonized. If I moved to Japan I feel I will be content, all the Nigerians in China are not complaining. Nigeria is one of the countries on America's no go zone but Chinese is study at my school and there is problem with going abroad to study in China. So I think China and their uncolonized self is alot better to America than Nigeria and their colonized self.

The very fact that you make that all about colonization just blows whatever you have to the NO MAKE SENSE zone. Are you seriously telling me that China and where it is at today is because it was not colonized according to you?? No comment from me on that one cause you just hanged your point there!!

Ethiopia is not doing better than Nigeria,  you do know that right?? Countries that were never colonized all had there down time. Even China is still to be classified as an under developed country. Do not be fooled by the side you see. If you had been in china about 47 years ago, you would understand why I say we have been the reason why we are were we are to were today.

I don't see people saying that if not for colonialism, we would not have doctors and the likes. The point I am actually trying to make is it has been almost 50 years since the end of colonial rule in that nation and we are doing worse than we were back then as a nation and worst is that most of the harm has been caused by factors within and not by the colonials. Hence the reason why I completely agree with the poster that urged that we move forward and stop with the NIGERIA IS WHERE IT IS TODAY CAUSE OF COLONIALISM.

Ethiopia was not totally free European colonization of Africa, remember their suffering under Italy?

There is no question that Africa had science and technology before the arrival of the West, but the question is, If our indiginous technology was up to par, why did we fall to the European technology?

Obviously our local science, technology, and medicine could not compare with the Western equivalent.

Yes they revolted against the Italians and at some point defeated and because the Italians couldn't take it, so they came back with Mustard gas as their last resort. Like you said the Ethopians suffered, they did not fall for the European Technology they might have been crushed by it in the end but they did not fall for it.

The very fact that you make that all about colonization just blows whatever you have to the NO MAKE SENSE zone. Are you seriously telling me that China and where it is at today is because it was not colonized according to you?? No comment from me!!

No am not saying that China is where it is now becuase it was not colonized what I am saying is that colonization was not necessary for success e.g China and Japan and Ethopia. For all those that say that colonization was good or neccessary for Africa these aforementioned countries show that the minority can survive without being rules at some point by the white man. I don't get what is in the

NO MAKE SENSE zone

so please clarify.

Any history buff in the house should tell us why and how the Chinese frustrated colonization by the West- I'm still intrigued by the little I know about the subject.

My main point about colonization is similar to apprenticiship---- may not be a good example, but the Europeans had a technology we badly needed to compete not just with them, but with others and ourselves. Colonization gave us the needed exposure.

There was something we have that the West needed and still needs so trading would have still been possible without colonization. Also it is engineered into the humans to explore and I feel that through exploration Africa would have been able to learn certain European things without us being trarted like brutes.

There was something we have that the West needed and still needs so trading would have still been possible without colonization. Also it is engineered into the humans to explore and I feel that through exploration Africa would have been able to learn certain European things without us being trarted like brutes.

wendymanda:

There was something we have that the West needed and still needs so trading would have still been possible without colonization. Also it is engineered into the humans to explore and I feel that through exploration Africa would have been able to learn certain European things without us being trarted like brutes.

Trading is the 'root of all evils'- slavery, cheating, economic deprivation, WWI & II, etc. By nature humans want to have all the trading advantages, call it cheating, but you cannot trade without adequate educational background.

Otherwise you may end up trading slaves/gold for whiskey/rum/mirrors and den guns like some of our ancestors did.

They traded with China and Japan. The West Indies was "discovered" as Comebucus was looking for another trading route to India that would be faster.

wendymanda:

They traded with China and Japan. The West Indies was "discovered" as Comebucus was looking for another trading route to India that would be faster.

But we were busy trading our own brothers and sisters into slavery before colonization?? I mean can you beat that one?? LOL,

wendymanda:

There was something we have that the West needed and still needs so trading would have still been possible without colonization. Also it is engineered into the humans to explore and I feel that through exploration Africa would have been able to learn certain European things without us being trarted like brutes.

The Option to trade has remained available to us since 1960 and what have we done so far??

China and Japan: that was why I called for a history buff.

They traded with China for silk way before swooping on us for slaves, somehow China managed to frustrated total domination.

Japan had an equivalent civilization/industralization, so the Europeans could not make as much profit over there as they did 'trading' with us.

Why buy 1 pound of gold for 1 $ when the same 1 $ could buy you 10 pounds of gold+20slaves+100 tons of cocoa and palm kernel.

Before we repeat the embedded lines that we sold our brothers and sister, first of all the Arabs started the slave trade by trading black Africans. Also no one was trading their own brothers but people they captured in wars, just like the Romans did not think the Brits were their bothers when pillaging. No one sold their brothers, kinsmen but they sold people they considered enemies. I think when we recognize that just like we have recognized that black is different from white is when we will move forward. Even though we want to maintain we are brothers and sisters and sing cumbaia we are not, Nigeria was not one country but people of different tribes who had nothing in common but skin color.
Slavery of the many stories for why it started another one was that the Americans tried to enslave American Indians but they told them there were black people that could go a whole day without eating and bam they enslaved us. Also they did not only trade humans with Africans, the attraction to South Africa was not merely for slave trade, not even it was for diamonds. The white man will for anything the shines and sparkles and will find arguments to conceal. Wasn't another argument that blacks were lazy. How can we be lazy when we are the one doing their work and not eating for a whole day. Beat that!!

@wendymanda
I agree that there is no psychological, social or accurate historical facts to show that black people sold their brothers, sister, children, and relatives into slavery to the massive extent shown in black American folk tales.

Instead, people sold their enemies, war victims, or the like into slavery; just like the ancient Greek and Romans did.

The word slavik denotes a whole race of white people purportedly involved in slavery at some point in history, not blacks.

Even as we speak, I know of many cultures (black/white/red/yellow) that would easily sell their opponents into slavery if the trade was still legal.

I mean the Arabs vs Israelis, India vs Pakistanis, Hutus vs Tutsis? could have easily sold each other into slavery today

Also slavery was not the only trading even though it's the only one that is pronounced the most, thwere was the trade of ivory and many other minerals so we should not be blinded by what we were fed, Ngugi Wa Thiongo summerized it in an amaizing way in his introduction to the essay "Decolonizing the Mind: The Politics of Language in African Literature."

If in today's age, some parents are 'selling' their daughters to the highest bidder, and giving out their pre-teen kids to strangers as househelps, how can one convince me that this practise of selling one's kinsman was not practised in the previous era? Then again, I may be wrong, because some of the text books, written with a eurocentric view might present our forefathers as a group of savages, justifying slavery, and pinpointing the blame to our ancestors

O.k we have to remember that Africans regard men more than they do women and slavery took men in the begining.

Ndipe:

If in today's age, some parents are 'selling' their daughters to the highest bidder, and giving out their pre-teen kids to strangers as househelps, how can one convince me that this practise of selling one's kinsman was not practised in the previous era? Then again, I may be wrong, because some of the text books, written with a eurocentric view might present our forefathers as a group of savages, justifying slavery, and pinpointing the blame to our ancestors

You think that amounts to slavery?

wendymanda:

Before we repeat the embedded lines that we sold our brothers and sister, first of all the Arabs started the slave trade by trading black Africans. Also no one was trading their own brothers but people they captured in wars, just like the Romans did not think the Brits were their bothers when pillaging. No one sold their brothers, kinsmen but they sold people they considered enemies. I think when we recognize that just like we have recognized that black is different from white is when we will move forward. Even though we want to maintain we are brothers and sisters and sing cumbaia we are not, Nigeria was not one country but people of different tribes who had nothing in common but skin color.
Slavery of the many stories for why it started another one was that the Americans tried to enslave American Indians but they told them there were black people that could go a whole day without eating and bam they enslaved us. Also they did not only trade humans with Africans, the attraction to South Africa was not merely for slave trade, not even it was for diamonds. The white man will for anything the shines and sparkles and will find arguments to conceal. Wasn't another argument that blacks were lazy. How can we be lazy when we are the one doing their work and not eating for a whole day. Beat that!!

uuuummm,  there were folks who sold from their own family actually.  By the way, I thought the very fact that blacks sold blacks means blacks sold their own brothers/sisters/uncles and whatever,  Come on. Whatever way you want to slice and dice it, blacks sold their own kind. No were in my post did I say Africa was only for slave trade. We had lots to sell including our own people. There is no need to want to explain things away. You mentioned trade and I mentioned one of the things we traded back then and even to this day. Africans have been trading humans among other things, long before the "white man" came in to the picture. Back over 2000 years ago, there are records of black slaves in rome and in greece. No where is it written that there were no Nigerian slaves back then and to this day we see the same trade going on. It does not necessarily have much to do with colonialism if you really want to be honest.

wendymanda:

O.k we have to remember that Africans regard men more than they do women and slavery took men in the begining.

Are you afraid of accepting facts as just that facts? Why do you need to make the excuses and labels?? For whom do you do that self??

Slavery and other forms inhumane servitude has existed among people from time in-memorial.

Whites had sold whites, Jews have sold Jews, Arabs have also sold other Arabs, and I agree that blacks have also sold other blacks.

That said, one needs to appreciate the enabling environment that made it look as if all the black people sold into slavery in the Americas were sold by their fathers, brothers, etc.

Most of the people sold were victims of war, debt, or long term conflicts.

Once again, if there is an enabling environment today, the Egbas would sell the Owus, the Hutus the Tutsis, the Palestinians the Israelis, etc.

Colonization of Africa before the industrial revolution was a major enabling environment for slavery.