Why Africa hasn't caught up with the rest of the world?

Question

I would like to expound on my theory, you can too.

I think that Africa is one of the most difficult environments to live in the world, why? Because it probably contains more apex predators than any of the other continents with which to compete with for food. In addition fresh bodies of water were quite scarce and impeded population growth. I think the stagnating of population did much to stymie any leaps in technology. Furthermore it was isolated from the rest of the world for a very long time, reason being the Sahara desert is a gigantic barrier between Africa and Eurasia.

Cultures and nations prosper when they have good trade routes and a lot of neighbours. Just think most of Europe would be far less developed had it not been for the Romans (and the Greeks to a lesser extent).

Answer 1

You should read Jared Diamond's award-winning book, "Guns, Germs and Steel". Diamond contends that nations that prosper (e.g. Western countries) do not prosper because the individuals that live there are "intelligent" or "superior" humans. He contends that the geographical landscape and axes of the continents pretty much determined who excelled and who did not. To make a long story short, Diamond asserts that human civilization began in the "Fertile Crescent" (present day southern Middle East). The Fertile Crescent had good soil, water, predictable seasons, native plants and animals.  The people of the fertile crescent were able to domesticate plants (e.g. wheat) and animals (e.g. cows), which allowed nomadic hunter-gatherers to create towns. The abundance of food meant that rather than spending time hunting & gathering, societies with specialists (eg. writers-- who created language and scripts) were able to prosper. This "technology" transferred to the rest of the world where similar geographical conditions were present. Unfortunately for Africa, its arid landscape meant there were not enough sufficient local plants and animals that could be domesticated from the beginning of civilization. Had Africa had a landscape conducive to this, Africa would probably be leading the world in terms of "advancement".

Answer 2

Firstly I didnt know Africa Asia Europe Americas were countries .

Secondly Africa is what many call poor because it holds the poorest countries many of them while there are rich ones but the governments are controlling their money in corruption like South Africa- 25th richer than Pakistan, Greece & Sweeden

Egypt- 27th

Nigeria- 38th

Algeria- 39th

richest country in the world out of 193 these are all richer than Portugal 44th , Norway Ireland 55 New Zeland 58 do your reasearch if you dont belive its that the governments dont care for the people and own about 90% of the countries wealth. While on the other hand many are the poorest in the world which out weighs the richer ones making everyone think everywhere in Africa is poor. By the way what are you talking about animals competition? The animals like lions etc live in national parks my parents were from Africa and never seen a big cat before (lion cheeta etc) not an elephant nothing if you think people are living side by side with big predetors you need to open your eyes watch a documentary on TV you dont see a community in the middle of the savana. Also Africa is a good climate not muche effected to natural disaters I dont think this would drive people to discover other places as their land was nice hot all year round fertile lands. Asia suffers the most natural disasters Europe changing seasons from warm to freezing days change from short to long the people obviously had to addapt and many chose to leave and explore better places. Also the trade between Asia & Europe allowed progression while Africa only traded minamily with Arabs as the Sahara desert was there. Also they didnt need to build ships as everything they wanted was on their doorstep. Africa is not tribe land you know that is more like how the Americas was thats why Europeans were able to almost eliminate everyone there. Africa had kingdoms armys   tribesmen hunter gatheres its very diverse. I dont think Europeans were getting slaves from tribesmen other wise they would of just entered and stole people for themselves and had wars straight away like they did in the Americas. Also Africa is the oldest human inbatiton so it created huge diversity many languages so many groups I dont think they were think of coming together and becoming industrial. Africa is a home for tradition not civilization. Remeber every civilization has an end but tradition never ends. The western world which we live in today will not always be here but in Africa tradition is gaining popularity again as it was almost wiped out by Arab & European influnce many didnt change and these traditions outdate any civilization and are still practised today. When the next civilization starts which I rekon will be some sad cyber world where robots will be doing the work while humans are just livin in this fake world we have cameras and IDs on everyone I can see suicide terrorism war murder mental illness drug abuse become soo common no one will want to leave that cyber world look at masai & bushmen they happier than any of you could ever be and they have no possesions. At this rate this civilization is almost over. USA is number 1 in the world but by reading all these questions you lot post you lot seem very ignorant think your better than everyone but without computers and nukes you would die in a second what have you done to make your country the richest in the world???? None of you alive today did your forefathers used Africans!

Answer 3

I think you have answered your own question quite effectively! I can only add that climate pays a large part on a continental scale. The search for food and warm clothing is not  so intense in a warmer continent like Africa, so mans quest for skills to beat the environment is quelled to a certain extent by lethargy, and an unwillingness to learn new skills. Have a great day.

Answer 4

That's one theory, another theory is that they were oppressed by colonialism, never allowing them to catch up.  Personally I think their social structure discouraged technology. The kinship groups and clinging to the 'old ways' all discouraged technological advancement. Plus, it didn't help having white people controlling their countries until well into the 19th century.

Answer 5

I think it is because a lot of Africans belong to a tribe, and being tribal, it means that a large amount of their resources of time, energy and effort are spent in war with others.

Answer 6

Africa varies in terms of hostile environments, Europe and Asia are a lot worse, as they require protective clothing and shelter for most of the year. You can get away with butt naked and sleeping in the open in Africa (assuming you're black, I'd burn). Also, Africa is extremely rich in natural resources.

There have been humans in Africa for for about 200,000 years, in Northern Europe about 30,000 years, and  probably 20,000 in America. All these other continents had major civilizations popping up all over the place in a pretty short space of time, but still most of Africa didn't develop farming and metal work until until the BC's.

There's a big barrier to genes getting into Africa , you are right, the Sahara does really cut them off.  Any new improvents to brain function have to go through the little gaps at the Nile and via the Yemen coast. Also, the virulence of malaria and other tropical dieases causes a lot of child deaths, they've had to adapt to reproduce for that factor, everything else is secondary.

Misamoto, Europeans only moved into Africa about 200 years ago, how can you blame Europeans for things that happened before  their arrival? There have been people in Africa since the dawn of time, and right up until the point Europeans stuck their noses in, half of them were still in the stone age. The more Southern parts didn't even have agriculture or metalwork. Why you think the whole continent would suddenly have accelerated into modern technology if whitey had kept out? They were only going at a snails pace for millenia.

You're also assuming this is some sort of white supremacy/eurocentrist thing on my part. Duh, East Asians routinely do better at every IQ test known to mankind, they score about 5 points higher than Europeans, and their cultures got going a d**n sight sooner than everyone elses. You should look up the Jomon culture, and the stone age temples under the sea off the coast of Okinawa. I'm just saying that we ain't a homogenous species, and that genes take time to make it from A to B, and that new 'smart' mutation seems to have it's origins in the far East. Evolution/natural selection is an ongoing process.

http://www.cix.co.uk/~archaeology/world/...

http://www.morien-institute.org/imk5.htm...

http://members.toast.net/rjspina/Japan's...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice#Global...

Answer 7

To the above poster:

Africa's lack of development was certainly not the result of a lack of "new brain development".  They certainly have had adaptations to malaria, such as sickle cell, but it's quite a leap anyway to assume that genetics are sole cause of "civilization."  They are at very best primers.  Jared Diamond's geological luck is a far more plausible idea, unless of course you're a time traveler who comes from Victorian England, with armchair anthropologists and the idea of sub-human savages.  Indeed, Africa (and anywhere else that humans have been around) have had unique, powerful cultures with intricate histories.  It's a rather large assumption to say that the Greco-Roman archetype is the pinnacle (which I suppose was not explicitly said by you, but certainly implied throughout this question and responses, ie "caught up").

And blaming lethargy?!  Really, now?

Tribal warfare is certailny a possible hindrance, but Africa is a very big place, and there are examples of uniting forces as well.  The Zulu, for instance.  And such tribal warfare can be seen all throughout history.  Much of the strife in such things we see today is more a result of imperialism arbitrarily dividing tribes up.

Answer 8

I think Jared Diamond may have beat you to some of your "theory."

Answer 9

Not that they didn't catch up, they were fine, but something stunted their growth and they have not recovered.

When parts of Africa became colonized, and the colonizers pulled out, they handed the nations over to Arabs and not Africans, who then arabized the nations, and this has been causing political disputes ever since. So, in short too much fighting for political power, this is what happens when people come in and try to group people by race, or nation without understanding how things work in that country, in this case, they did not see power in a race, they saw power in tribes, and certain tribes clash when put together or forced to be ruled by another tribe.

When Europeans settled across certain parts of Africa they overfished the rivers, and they had to find different things to eat, for instance, monkey, this caused them to get diseases, they were also moved into towns where it was close knit and things like yellow fever could easily spread, these diseases effect the most productive age groups, and so with most of the productive age group being sick, there is as a result less productivity and the nation cannot rise.

Presently, the European Union has overfished the seas again, and poor Africans cannot sell or eat fish, fish is also brainfood, consumption of sea food strengthens and grows the brain, the less you get the slower your brain growth is unless supplemented with something else with similar properties. Many poor Africans do not have access to supplements.

Another reason, is the fact that economically, people stopped trading with them, instead the continent and people were exploited, and their means of trade were taken without payment, this set them back economically, and they are still trying to recover.

Lastly, there is no unity of the continent, there is no functioning African Union, the nations are seperate entities, as a result, one nation finds it difficult to get away from the stigma of the poorer parts of Africa, nations can only be as good as their leaders, and many of the leaders are corrupt. What Africa needs to do is unite, hopefully with China's alliance, they can get the push they need, it is nice to finally see people not trying to exploit Africa's resources, (or at least I hope so)

I know people don't want to play the ""blame game" but the honest truth is, all of Africa's current problem was due to outside influence, and the lack of understanding or consideration for how things on that continent worked. It was a land that already had systems and politics, and coming in and changing that around assuming they did not exist has caused strife that could of been avoided.

Answer 10

I think you bring up some good points, mainly the Sahara desert being a barrier.  But africa has great trade routes, the nile river, the straight of gibralta, cape town,  actually probably some of the busiest trade routes in the world.  One of the main reasons africa is less developed is the presence of game, and natural food, this promoted a hunter and gatherer populations and did not promote people to domesticate animals, thus not enhancing certain technologies.  Also the climate is very warm, the did not need to find ways to heat homes, and build shelter.

In Europe the climater was cold, food was more scarce.  This made people domesticate animals, and a build shelters.  sophisticated heating systems were developed.  All of these things forced the creation of tools, and other practices which then created more high tech societies

Answer 11

A couple of things:

You do not have a ..."theory"...look up the word.

Horses, as we know them are not 2 million years old.

The first modern human ancestor probably walked on all fours about 6 million years ago when we split from our closest relative primate, the Chimpanzee. Eventual humans went one way the chimp went the other; their parents must have been surprised.

We came out of Africa, not once, but several times, the last time probably less than 200,000 years ago.

The Mitochondrial Eve was dated at about 140,000 years ago in Eastern Africa. The Y chromosome Adam, less than that.

Thangs change!

Finally, the Saraha was probably a jungle 2,000,000years ago.

Answer 12

Certain parts of Africa may have been just as advanced or ahead of the rest of the world during the Neolithic but  climate and environment changes destroyed various urban or proto urban cultures.

Dont forget there are many areas of Africa relatively unexplored by archaeologists?

Africa's time will come again!

I expect many surprises to come out of the Chad area if the political situation improves enuff to support large scale digs.

Even the Congo basin may have had proto urban cultures during dry spells when the forests retreated and the grasslands replaced them!