Classifying countries as Developing and Developed is clearly disingenuous because it implies that a country cannot regress so I prefer the term industrialised and unindustrialised.

White South Africa became a largely industrialised country with best-in-class infrastructure mainly after many large infrastructure projects in the 1940s - 1980s with best-of-era sea and air ports, a national rail and highway system, nuclear electricity generation, an advanced telephone network and even nuclear weapons and a space program.
The infrastructure South Africa has might be stunning and on the level of many so-called “First World” nations but that is not the only or main criteria of determining what a developed country is. Even the fact that it is a newly industrialized country will not get it an easy pass.

A very large proportion of South Africans (almost all black and Colored) is very poor - “poor” like the way you would think of a so-called typical “Third World” nations. These people live in slums and shanty towns, many are unemployment and the few that are lucky enough to find employment are often exploited by unscrupulous capitalists (almost exclusively white) on the farms and in the factories. These people can hardly (literally) afford basic things like food, and many of their informal settlements do not have basic infrastructure such as clean running water, electricity, sanitation and institutions of basic education.

The important part for me here is proportions; a much larger portion of South Africa's population is very poor and struggles a lot. The poverty-stricken part of South Africa is incredibly larger than the wealthy, bling bling life part of South Africa that you see on television. The poor part is largely hidden from general media attention, which is not really surprising because the media are owned by the very same exploitative capitalists.

The nicer, wealthy “developed” part of South Africa is enjoyed by a very tiny minority largely made up of whites, government officials and a few blacks that have risen to the top through many ways (ethical or unethical; it does not really matter to them).

But yet again, half of the population lacks electricity, their public school education, like most African countries, is slammed, got a high criminal rate (I mean that country is scary as hell).

So I would say South Africa is neither well nor Developing. They are in between.

Lol I wonder what concerns us with South Africa, don't you have a state of origin which you can write an article about?

Ivimilly:
Lol I wonder what concerns us with South Africa, don't you have a state of origin which you can write an article about?

just wanna shear my experience.

Ivimilly:
Lol I wonder what concerns us with South Africa, don't you have a state of origin which you can write an article about?

There's actually a whole field of academic study called International Relations. Your universities in Nigeria have such departments flooded with thousands of students annually who end up filling posts at the UN, AU, World Bank and foreign embassies.

What do u think is the purpose of your Foreign Affairs minister?

Why do you think Nairaland has a section dedicated to foreign news?

Please try thinking about these questions, although I believe it will be very difficult for you judging by the sheer oblivious ignorance u have displayed in your post.

You are sadly a parochial individual. Next time just skip topics you don't like or understand without farting all over them. Nairaland has millions of topics you can engage in instead.

TMKsouth:


There's actually a whole field of academic study called International Relations. Your universities in Nigeria have such departments flooded with thousands of students annually who end up filling posts at the UN, AU, World Bank and foreign embassies.

What do u think is the purpose of your Foreign Affairs minister?

Why do you think Nairaland has a section dedicated to foreign news?

Please try thinking about these questions, although I believe it will be very difficult for you judging by the sheer oblivious ignorance u have displayed in your post.

You are sadly a parochial individual. Next time just skip topics you don't like or understand without farting all over them. Nairaland has millions of topics you can engage in instead.

You said it all.

golddust6000:
You said it all.

People like that really irritate me.

Anyway, there's some truth to your post although I found it highly biased towards apartheid and white people, while throwing shade at black people and governance.

The system of apartheid (separate and unjust development) itself results in huge economic inequality, the legacy of which we are living with today. So if the majority black were poor back then just as they are today, how come u classify apartheid SA as industrialised but Democratic SA as the opposite of that? This despite the economy having been quadrupled by the black government.

Also you cast doubt on the legitimacy of the wealthy and middle-class black sector of Democratic SA, forgetting the fact that apartheid itself operated on a grand corruption scale. The system was nepotistic and ensured that only whites got the best jobs and lived the fanciest lives - especially Afrikaners. This was even legislated.