This is an industrious legal platform that offers legal literature on various fields of Kenyan, Regional,Continental and International Law. Publish or Perish is the principle
Tuesday, 29 October 2013
Ancient Kemet Civilization( Present day Egypt)
Monday, 7 October 2013
SUMMARY OF DR. WALTER RODNEY'S 'HOW EUROPE UNDERDEVELOPED AFRICA' (CHAPTERS 1-3)
Chapter
one
What is
development? A significant event, occurrence, or change.[1]Chapter one of the book states that development is a many-sided process which appears in three distinctive forms: Individual development which
is implies increased skill and capacity, greater freedom, creativity,
self-discipline, responsibility, and material well-being. The achievement of these aspects of personal development ties in with the state of the society as a
whole because man, from the earliest of times, found it convenient and necessary
hence led to a new form of development which is, Community development according
to Rodney is an increasing capacity to regulate both internal and external
relationships because much of human history has been a fight for survival
against natural hazards and against real and imagined human enemies.
Development as a community speaks to what the entire group is able to
accomplish[2] The need to make and use tools is a part of development
as it takes less man hours to do the same thing. The task of survival was made
easier and easier with new tools being developed. Man could thus gain more
control over nature. Economic Development generally refers to
the sustained, concerted actions of policymakers and communities that promote
the standard of living and economic health of a specific area[3].A society develops economically as its members increase
jointly their capacity for dealing with the environment. This capacity for
dealing with the environment is dependent on the extent to which they
understand the laws of nature (science), on the extent to which they put that
understanding into practice by devising tools (technology), and on the manner
in which work is organized. Taking a long-term view, it can be said that there
has been constant economic development within human society since the origins
of man, because man has multiplied enormously his capacity to win a living from
nature. Examples of man’s economic development are as follows; firstly, the
progress from crude stone tools to the use of metals; secondly, the changeover
from hunting and gathering wild fruit to the domestication of animals and the
growing of food crops; and thirdly, the improvement in the character of work
from being an individualistic activity towards an activity which assumes a
social character through the participation of many[4].
Rodney
uses China as an example and states that Early man in China lived at the mercy
of nature, and slowly discovered such basic things as the fact that fire can be
man-made and that seeds of some grasses could be planted in the soil to meet
food requirements, By the time of the Tang dynasty[5], China had expanded its economic capacity not only to grow
more food but also to manufacture a wide variety of items such as silks,
porcelain, ships and scientific devices. This of course represented a
quantitative increase in the goods produced, and it was inter-related with
qualitative changes in Chinese society. However, development cannot be seen
purely as an economic affair, but rather as an overall social process which is
dependent upon the outcome of man’s efforts to deal with his natural
environment. In the natural sciences, it is well known that in many instances
quantitative change becomes qualitative after a certain period. Similarly, in
human society it has always been the case that the expansion of the economy
leads eventually to a change in the form of social relations. Karl Marx[6] was the first writer to appreciate this, and he
distinguished within European history several stages of development. The first
major stage following after simple bands of hunters was Communalism where property
was collectively owned, work was done in common, and goods were shared out
equally. The second was Slavery, caused by the extension of domineering
elements within the family and by some groups being overwhelmed by others.
Slaves did a variety of tasks, but their main job was to produce food. The next
was Feudalism where agriculture remained the principal means of making a
livelihood, but the land which was necessary for that purpose was in the hands
of the few, and they took the lion’s share of the wealth. The workers on the
land (now called Serfs) were no longer the personal property of the masters,
but they were tied to the land of a particular manor or estate. When the manor
changed hands, the serfs had to remain there and provide goods for the landlord
– just keeping enough to feed themselves. Just as the child of a slave was a
slave, so the children of serfs were also serfs. Then came Capitalism, under
which the greatest wealth in the society was produced not in agriculture but by
machines – in factories and in mines. Like the preceding phase of feudalism,
capitalism was characterized by the concentration in a few hands of ownership
of the means of producing wealth and by unequal distribution of the products of
human labour[7]. Underdevelopment, He points out that once
development is understood one can best comprehend the concept of
underdevelopment. "Obviously, underdevelopment is not the absence of
development, because all people have developed in one way or another and to a
greater or lesser extent. Underdevelopment makes sense only as means of
comparing levels of development. It is very much tied to the fact that human
social development has been uneven and from a strictly economic view point some
human groups have advanced further by producing more and becoming wealthier.[8]He expounds on underdevelopment and maintains the necessity of
comparative analysis in making an assessment of the underdevelopment of a
country with economics as a determinist. Thus Rodney argues that if one is to
maintain the realities of underdevelopment he must move from an economic
analysis. Economic comparisons can be made by looking at statistical tables or
indices of what goods and services are produced and used in the societies under
discussion.[9] At all times, therefore, one of the ideas behind
underdevelopment is a comparative one. It is possible to compare the economic
conditions at two different periods for the same country and determine whether
or not it had developed. A second and even more indispensable component of
modern underdevelopment is that it expresses a particular relationship of
exploitation: namely, the exploitation of one country by another. All of the
countries named as ‘underdeveloped’ in the world are exploited by others; and
the underdevelopment with which the world is now pre-occupied is a product of
capitalist, imperialist and colonialist, exploitation. African and Asian
societies were developing independently until they were taken over directly or
indirectly by the capitalist powers. That is an integral part of
underdevelopment in the contemporary sense, Actually, if ‘underdevelopment’
were related to anything other than comparing economies, then the most
underdeveloped country in the world would be the U.S.A, which practices
external oppression on a massive scale, while internally there is a blend of
exploitation, brutality, and psychiatric disorder However, on the economic
level, it is best to remain with the word ‘underdeveloped’ rather than
‘developing’, because the latter creates the impression that all the countries
of Africa, Asia and Latin America are escaping from a state of economic
backwardness relative to the industrial nations of the world, and that they are
emancipating themselves from the relationship of exploitation. That is
certainly not true! If we can measure the national income and the income per
capita of the super nations and the underdeveloped nations the results are
saddening, for example As of 1968 the income per capita of U.S was 3578 whereas
the income per capita of Kenya was 107 dollars. Developed economies have
certain characteristics which contrast with underdeveloped ones. The developed
countries are all industrialized. That is to say, the greater part of their
working population is engaged in industry rather than agriculture, but it
is also striking that the developed countries have a much more advanced
agriculture than the rest of the world. Their agriculture has already become an
industry, and the agricultural part of the economy produces more although it is
small. They have a high output of labour per man in industry because of their
advanced technology and skills. In Africa, the output of food per person has
been falling in recent years. Because the developed countries have a stronger
industrial and agricultural economy than the rest of the world, they produce
far more goods than the poor nations-in the category of necessities as well as
luxuries. The social services provided by a country are of importance equal to
that of its material production in bringing about human well-being and
happiness. It is universally accepted that the state has the responsibility to
establish schools and hospitals, but whether these are provided by the
government or by private agencies, their numbers can be established in relation
to the size of the population. The extent to which basic goods and social
services are available in a country can also be measured indirectly by looking
at the life expectancy, the frequency of deaths among children, the amount of
malnutrition, the occurrence of diseases which would be prevented by
inoculation and public health services, and the proportion of illiterates. In
all these respects, the comparison between the developed and underdeveloped
countries shows huge and even frightening differences. For every 1,000 children
who are born alive in Cameroon, 100 never live to see their first birthday, and
out of every 1,000 African children born alive in rural Sierra Leone, 160 die
before reaching one year. Yet the comparable figures for the U.K. and Holland
are only 12 and 18, respectively. It takes a large number of skilled
people to make an industrial economy function; while the countries of Africa
have a woefully insufficient number of highly qualified personnel. Persons in
developed capitalist and Socialist, countries consume twice as much protein
food as those in underdeveloped countries. Such differences help to make it
clear which countries are ‘developed’ and which are ‘underdeveloped’.
It has
been noted with irony that the principal ‘industry’ of many underdeveloped
countries is administration. Not long ago, 60%, of the internal revenue of
Dahomey went into paying salaries of civil servants and government leaders. The
salary given to the elected politicians is higher than that given to a British
Member of Parliament and the number of parliamentarians in the underdeveloped
African countries is also relatively high. The situation is that Africa has not
yet come anywhere close to making the most of its natural wealth, and most of
the wealth now being produced is not being retained within Africa for the
benefit of Africans, Even the goods and services which are produced inside of
Africa and which remain in Africa nevertheless fall into the hands of
non-Africans. Thus, South Africa boasts of having the highest per capita income
in Africa; but as an indication of how this is shared out, one should note that
while the Apartheid regime assures that only 24 white babies die out of every
1,000 live births, they are quite happy to allow 128 African babies to die out
of every 1,000 live births. Mistaken interpretations of the causes of
underdevelopment usually stem either from prejudiced thinking or from the error
of believing that one can learn the answers by looking inside the
underdeveloped economy. The true explanation lies in seeking out the
relationship between Africa and certain developed countries and in recognizing
that it is a relationship of exploitation .The exploitation of nation by
nation. One of the common means by which one nation exploits another and one
that is relevant to Africa’s external relations is exploitation through trade.
When the terms of trade are set by one country in a manner entirely
advantageous to itself, then the trade is usually detrimental to the trading
partner. To be specific, one can take the export of agricultural produce from
Africa and the import of manufactured goods into Africa from Europe, North
America and Japan. The big nations establish the price of the agricultural
products and subject these prices to frequent reductions. At the same time the
price of manufactured goods is also set by them, along with the freight rates
necessary for trade in the ships of those nations. The minerals of Africa also
fall into the same category as agricultural produce as far as pricing is
concerned. The whole import/export relationship between Africa and its trading
partners is one of unequal exchange and of exploitation. More far-reaching than
just trade is the actual ownership of the means of production in one country by
the citizens of another. When citizens of Europe own the land and the mines of Africa,
this is the most direct way of sucking the African continent. . In other words,
in the absence of direct political control; foreign investment ensures that the
natural resources and the labour of Africa produce economic value which is lost
to the continent. At the social and cultural level, there are many
features which aid in keeping underdeveloped countries integrated into the
capitalist system and at the same time hanging on to the apron strings of the
metropolis. The Christian Church has always been a major instrument for
cultural penetration and cultural dominance, in spite of the fact. That in many
instances Africans sought to set up independent churches. Equally important has
been the role of education in producing Africans to service the capitalist
system and to subscribe to its values. Recently, the imperialists have been
using new universities in Africa to keep themselves entrenched at the highest
academic level. Something as basic as language has come to serve as one of the
mechanisms of integration and dependence. The French and English that is so
widely used in Africa is more for the purpose of African communicating with the
exploiters rather than African with African.
Chapter
2
In
Africa, before the 15th century, the predominant principle of social relations
was that of family and kinship associated with communalism. Numerous examples
could be brought forward to show the dominance of the family principle in the
communal phase of African development. It affected the two principal factors of
production, land and labour as well as the system of distributing goods. Thus
under communalism there were no classes and there was equal access to land, and
equality in distribution — at a low level¡ of technology and production.
Feudalism involved great inequality in distribution of land and social
products. The landlord class and its bureaucracy controlled the state and used
it as an instrument for oppressing peasants, serfs, slaves and even craftsmen
and merchants. The movement from communalism to feudalism in every continent
took several centuries, and in some instances the interruption of internal
evolution never allowed the process to mature. In Africa, there is no doubt
that the societies which eventually reached feudalism were extremely few. By
the 15th century, Africans everywhere had arrived at a considerable
understanding of the total ecology — of the soils, climate, animals, plants and
their multiple interrelationships. The practical application of this lay in the
need to trap animals, to build houses, to make utensils, to find medicines, and
above all to devise systems of agriculture, in the centuries before the
contact with Europeans, the overwhelmingly dominant activity in Africa was
agriculture. Development is very much determined by the social relations
of production: i.e., those which have to do with people’s functions in
producing wealth. Where a few people owned the land and the majority were
tenants, this injustice at a particular stage of history allowed the few to
concentrate on improving their land. In contrast, under communalism every
African was assured of sufficient land to meet his own needs by virtue of being
a member of a family or community. For that reason and because land was
relatively abundant, there were few social pressures or incentives for
technical changes to increase productivity. One way of judging the level of
economic development in Africa five centuries ago is through the quality of the
products, for example Through North Africa, Europeans became familiar with a superior
brand of red leather from Africa which was termed ‘Moroccan leather’. In fact,
it was tanned and dyed by Hausa and Mandinga specialists in northern Nigeria
and Mali. When direct contact was established between Europeans and Africans on
the East and West Coasts, many more impressive items were displayed. As soon as
the Portuguese reached the old kingdom of Kongo, they sent back word on the
superb local cloths made from bark and palm fibre and having a finish
comparable to velvet. The Baganda were also expert bark-cloth makers. Yet,
Africa had even better to offer in the form of cotton cloth, which was widely
manufactured before the coming of the Europeans. Well into the present century,
local cottons from the Guinea coast were stronger than Manchester cottons. Once
European products reached Africa, Africans too were in a position to make
comparisons between their commodities and those from outside. In Katanga and
Zambia, the local copper continued to be preferred to the imported item, while
the same held true for iron ‘in a place like Sierra Leone. It is obvious that
some of the world’s development and civilization of today which Europe claim to
be her handiwork actually started in Africa but was later improved upon my
Europe after Africa had suffered greatly from the periods of slave trade and
colonialism, which drew the continent backward. Various countries were
considered so as to put emphasis to Africa’s position before Europeans came in
and robbed it.
Egypt
One
of the first features of feudalism to arrive in Egypt was the military aspect.
The Arabs, Turks and Circassia invaders were all militarily inclined. This was
particularly true of the Mamluks who held power from the 13th century onwards.
Political power in Egypt from the 7th century lay in the hands of a military
oligarchy which delegated the actual government to bureaucrats, thereby
creating a situation similar to that in places like China and Indo-China. Even
more fundamental was the fact that land tenure relations were undergoing change
in such a way that a true feudal class came on the scene. All the conquerors
made land-grants to their followers and military captains. the ruling military
elements also became a new class of landowners. By the 15th century, most of
the land in Egypt was the property of the Sultan and his military lords.
If there
was a small class which monopolized most of the land, it followed that there
was a large class of landless. Peasant cultivators were soon converted into
mere agricultural laborers, tied to the soil as tenants or vassals of the
feudal landlords. These peasants with little or no land were known as the
fellahin. Under the patronage of the Fatimid dynasty (969 A.D. to 1170 n.n.),
science flourished and industry reached a new level in Egypt. Windmills and waterwheels
were introduced from Persia in the 10th century. New industries were
introduced-paper-making and sugar manufacturing.
Ethiopia
Ethiopia
too, at the start of its history was a great power. It was ruled over by
foreigners. The kingdom of Axum was one of the most important nuclei around
which feudal Ethiopia eventually emerged, and Axum was founded near the Red Sea
coast by a dynasty of Sabean origin from the other side of the Red Sea .It was
Christianized within a few centuries. After that they moved inland and
participated in the development of the Christian feudal Ethiopian state. The
Ethiopian, Tigrean and Amharic ruling class was a proud one, tracing its
descent to Solomon. In practice, however, the ‘Solomonic’ line was not
unbroken. Most of the consolidation of the inland Ethiopian plateau was carried
out in the 12th century by an intruding dynasty, the Zagwe, who made claims to descent
from Moses. The Zagwe kings distinguished themselves by building several
churches cut out of solid rock. The architectural achievements attest to the
level of skill reached by Ethiopians as well as the capacity of the state to
mobilize labour on a huge scale. Such tasks could not have been achieved by
voluntary family labour but only through the labour of an exploited class
Nubia
Nubia
was another Christian region in Africa, but one which is not as famous as
Ethiopia. In the 6th century A.D., Christianity was introduced onto the middle
Nile in the districts once ruled by the famous state of Kush or Meroe. The
three small Nubian states which arose some time afterwards were to some extent
the heirs of Kush, although after their conversion to Christianity it was this
religion which dominated Nubian culture. Scholarly interest in Nubia has
focused on the ruins of large red-brick churches and monasteries which had
murals and frescoes of fine quality. Several conclusions can be drawn from that
material evidence. In the first place, a great deal of labour was required to
build those churches along with the stone fortifications which often surrounded
them. As with the pyramids of Egypt or the feudal castles of Europe, the common
builders were intensely exploited and probably coerced. Secondly, skilled
labour was involved in the making of the bricks and m the architecture. The
paintings indicate that the skills surpassed mere manual dexterity, and the
same artistic merit is noticeable in fragments of painted pottery recovered
from Nubia. Other countries that had grown industrially were the Maghreb,
Western Sudan, The Inter Lacustrine zone and Zimbabwe. At this juncture one may
ask, why did this not lead to a massive growth in the African industry? The
answer to this question is not far fetch. At the period under study, Africa’s
manufacturing industry was still on a subsistent-like or domestic level. It
must be noted that a decisive factor in the growth of the European industry is
the available new machinery and change-over from domestic production to the
factory system and all these advances in Europe came after the period under
review when Africa was already suffering from the slave trade and thereafter
colonialism which cause massive brain drain. When Cecil Rhodes sent in his
agents to rob and steal in Zimbabwe, they and other Europeans marveled at the
surviving ruins of the Zimbabwe culture, and automatically assumed that it had
been built by white people. Even today there is still a tendency to consider
the achievements with a sense of wonder rather than with the calm acceptance
that it was a perfectly logical outgrowth of human social development within
Africa, as part of the universal process by which man’s labour opened up new
horizons. Several historians of Africa have pointed out that after
surveying the developed areas of the continent in the 15th century and those
within Europe at the same date, the difference between the two was in no way to
Africa’s discredit. Indeed, the first Europeans to reach West and East Africa
by sea were the ones who indicated that in most respects African development
was comparable to that which they knew. To take but one example, when the Dutch
visited the city of Benin they described it thus: The town seems to be very
great. When you enter into it, you go into a great broad street, not paved,
which seems to be seven or eight times broader than the Warmoes street in
Amsterdam. The king’s palace is a collection of buildings which occupy as much
space as the town of Harlem, and which is enclosed with walls. There are
numerous apartments for the Prince’s ministers and fine galleries, most of
which are as big as those on the Exchange at Amsterdam. They are supported by
wooden pillars encased with copper, where their victories are depicted, and
which are carefully kept very clean. The town is composed of thirty main
streets, very straight and 120 feet wide, apart from an infinity of small
intersecting streets. The houses are close to one another, arranged in good
order. These people are in no way inferior to the Dutch as regards cleanliness;
they wash and scrub their houses so well that they are polished and shining
like a looking-glass”. Yet, it would be self-delusion to imagine that all
things are exactly equal in Benin and in Holland. European society was already
more aggressive, more expansionist and more dynamic in producing new forms. so
as at that time Europe and Africa were more or less at the same level of
development this was of course before their sinister plan of under developing
Africa had commenced,
Chapter
3.
Due to
the many misconceptions that have come about in relation to the terms
development and under development , it was emphasized that not only are they
comparative terms but are also interrelated, in that they support each other,
for there to be development one has to be under developed so that the developed
one feeds of the underdeveloped one, it is an equilibrium in life that has to
be satisfied that gives the world balance for example for there to be Good
there has to be evil. Western Europe and Africa had a relationship which
ensured the transfer of wealth from Africa to Europe. The transfer was possible
only after trade became truly international[10] .International trade was nothing but an extension of the
European interests overseas as it was the Europeans that had vessels that
reached Africa and not vice versa, everything was fully in the Europeans hands.
Europeans used the superiority of their ships and cannon to gain control of al]
the world’s waterways, starting with the western Mediterranean and the Atlantic
coast of North Africa.[11]For example the Portuguese infiltrated and eventually
controlled the trade and became a forceful middle man, they captured Arab ports
and fortified them .As a result of commerce Africa became a market for goods
which were un- saleable in Europe, sub-standard goods because to them Africans
deserved the sub-standard goods like old sheets, cast-off uniforms,
technologically outdated firearms, and lots of odds and ends found guaranteed
markets in Africa. Europe assumed the power to make decisions within the
international trading system. An excellent illustration of that is the fact
that the so-called international law which governed the conduct of nations on
the high seas was nothing else but European law, Africans did not
participate in its making, and in many instances African people were simply the
victims, for the law recognized them only as transportable merchandise. If the
African slave was thrown overboard at sea, the only legal problem that arose
was whether or not the slave-ship could claim compensation from the insurers!
Europe discovered the gold potential in Africa and the Americas but as at this
time they were very few and this could not produce the labour required to tap
this wealth so they turned to Africa where they could get human captives who
would work for them for free. The fact that Europe was the first part of the
world to move from feudalism towards capitalism gave Europeans a head start
over humanity[12] It has been emphasized that the fragmentation and
disunity amongst the African community is white the white man used to gain
control over Africans for example, in the small territory that the Portuguese
later claimed as Guinea-Bissau, there were more than a dozen ethnic groups. It
was so easy to set one off against another that Europeans called it a ‘slave
trader’s paradise[13] Let it be known that the only time the Europeans used
armed force to conquer an African land this was as a last resort because the
economic weapons were sufficient enough. European scholars often treat or refer
to the European trade as entirely independent whereas it was not because
without the African labour the west Indies trade (refers to the trade between
England, Africa and the West Indies) would not be accomplished. J.S. Mill, as
spokesman for British capitalism, said that as .far as England was concerned,
‘the trade of the West Indies is hardly to be considered as external trade, but
more resembles the traffic between town and country.’ By the phrase ‘trade of
the West Indies’ Mill meant the commerce between Africa, England and the West
Indies, because without African labour the West Indies were valueless[14] Karl Marx also commented on the way that European
capitalists tied Africa, the West Indies and Latin America into the capitalist
system; and (being the most bitter critic of capitalism) Marx went on to point
out that what was good for Europeans was obtained at the expense of untold
suffering by Africans and American Indians[15] A few capitalist scholars have tried lying to us that
the slave trade was not that profitable whereas data suggests otherwise, A
trader named Hawkins made trips to Africa to capture slave during the 14th century
after his first voyage he came back with so many slaves that the Queen wanted
to do business with him, she made him a knight and Hawkins chose as his coat of
arms the representation of an African in chains. They would have us
believe that the same entrepreneurs whom they praise in other contexts as the
heroes of capitalist development were so dumb with regard to slavery and slave
trade, that for centuries they absorbed themselves in a non-profit venture.
Europe’s trade with Africa gave numerous stimuli to Europe’s growth. Central
and South American gold and silver — mined by Africans — played a crucial role
in meeting the need for coin in the expanding capitalist money economy of
Western Europe, Throughout the 17th and 18th centuries, and for most o the
19th century, the exploitation of Africa and African labour continued to be a
source for the accumulation o capital to be re-invested in Western Europe. The
African contribution to European capitalist growth extended over such vital
sectors as shipping, insurance, the formation companies, capitalist
agriculture, technology and the manufacture of machinery. The profits that
England gained from the slave trade are indisputable for instance in the book
Capitalism and Slavery. The author Williams gives a clear picture of the
numerous benefits which England derived from trading and exploiting slaves, and
he identified by name several of the personalities and capitalist firms who
were the beneficiaries. Outstanding examples are provided in the persons of
David and Alexander Barclay, who were engaging in slave trade in 1756 and who
later used the loot to set up Barclays’ Bank.
We can
clearly conclude that African trade speeded up several aspects, including the
integration of Western Europe, as noted above. That is why the African
connection contributed not merely to economic growth (which relates to
quantitative dimensions) but also to real development in the sense of increased
capacity for further growth and independence. The profits from the slave trade
were so much that an 1862 reported that the profits exceeded their powers of
calculation. What was born out of this pregnant woman called slavery was not a
bouncing baby but a dead foetus in the name of racism. It should be noted that
the Europeans did not enslave us for racist reasons but for economic reasons.
What’s to note is the hypocritical nature that the Europeans had for instance
it was enshrined in the U.S.A constitution more than 200 years that all men are
equal however they continued the enslavement of Africans this goes to show that
even the mighty State can play a hand in crimes against humanity.
[1] http://www.thefreedictionary.com/development,
accessed on 10/5/2013
[2] http://groundingsmagazine.com/wordpress/development/book-review-how-europe-underdeveloped-africa-pt-1/,
accessed on 10/5/2013
[3] http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/economic+development
[4] Pg 8, How Europe Underdeveloped Africa , Walter Rodney
[5] 7th century A.D
[6] Writing in the 19th century
[7] Pg 12 ,How Europe underdeveloped Africa.
[8] Pg 13
[9] http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/open-forum/22775-critical-analysis-walter-rodney-how-europe-underdeveloped-africa.html
[10] Pg 116,How Europe Underdeveloped Africa
[11] Pg 117 ibid
[12] Pg 121 ibid
[13] Pg 123 ibid
[14] Pg 128 ibid
[15] ibid