Chinese corporations are all over Africa. In June 2017 a McKinsey & Company report estimated that there are more than 10,000 Chinese-owned firms operating in Africa.
What are Chinese corporations doing in Africa? That’s a highly controversial issue.
The reason Chinese corporations are in Africa is simple; to exploit the people and take their resources. It’s the same thing European colonists did during mercantile times, except worse. The Chinese corporations are trying to turn Africa into another Chinese continent. They are squeezing Africa for everything it is worth.
This is the view several African politicians have. The Zambian politician Michael Sata was one of them. At least he was before being elected President of Zambia in 2011. He wrote a paper presented to Harvard University in 2007 that said “European colonial exploitation in comparison to Chinese exploitation appears benign, because even though the commercial exploitation was just as bad, the colonial agents also invested in social and economic infrastructure services Chinese investment, on the other hand, is focused on taking out of Africa as much as can be taken out, without any regard to the welfare of the local people.” (quoted in Scott D. Taylor’s “The Nature of Chinese Capital in Africa, Current History, May 2018, p. 197)
This is something on which I need to do a great deal more research.
I plan on asking my bio father — Philip Ochieng — about this. He edited the rather well-known book How Europe Underdeveloped Africa by Walter Rodney. He and I think differently about a great many things, so that should be an interesting conversation or three.
Consider this post a place-holder and, possibly, a Part One.
Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here. She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.
Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar for his new not-GoDaddy host!
The New York Times
620 Eighth Avenue
New York, New York 10018
Dear Mr. Sulzberger:
I have been a subscriber to your newspaper for much of the past 30 years.
During that time, I have stood by you when Jason Blair made stuff up.
I stood by you when Judith Miller made stuff up.
I must stand by you when Sarah Jeong made stuff up.
As an old, white guy, I understand that I deserve to be treated with cruelty.
For years I have been a groveling goblin and been miserable to others.
I have marked up the internet like a dog pissing on a fire hydrant.
I didn’t realize that I burn more easily in the sun than people of color.
I thought living underground was what everyone did.
I find comfort that my fellow academics and my former colleagues in the mainstream media stand by Jeong’s side.
As Nolan L. Cabrera, an associate professor at the University of Arizona, put it so clearly:
“The term ‘racism’ is not the equivalence of prejudice or bigotry. It’s an analysis of social inequality along the color lines and an analysis of power dynamics and social oppression. None of which has ever been in the hands of people of color or communities of color: There’s never been the social structure to be able to oppress white people.”
I do realize the error of my ways, failing to see that I have subjugated all races to second-class citizenship and understanding that a social structure must be put in place to oppress white people.
As a Trump supporter, I understand why Jeong feels that “nothing but an unending cascade of vomit” comes out of her mouth when she tries to “politely greet a Republican.”
I do realize that I am a “garbage” person with bad teeth as your and Jeong’s colleague at POLITICO so rightly put it.
I also endorse the harassment of many administration officials for their looks and the ban on some of them eating in restaurants because of their beliefs.
My re-education is almost complete. I will continue to read your excellent columnists like Charles Blow and Jeong to make certain that my wayward ways are corrected.
I praise you and your media colleagues for raising the bar so high on journalistic standards.
Oh, I am sorry for being, as Joeng puts it, “satirical.”
Officer Malone: [stopping at a post office] Well, here we are. Elliot Ness:What are we doing here? Officer Malone:Liquor raid. Elliot Ness: [looking at the police station across the street] Here? Officer Malone:Mr. Ness, everybody knows where the booze is. The problem isn’t finding it, the problem is who wants to cross Capone.
We hear “White privilege” bandied about by the Democrat left as the source of all kinds of evil in the black community and we’ve equally heard the words “Black Lives Matter” used as a club against police, republicans, conservatives and any enemy of the left (and adopted as a name by anti-police radicals) as they argue that these “privileged” groups don’t care about the lives of black Americans and target them for violence.
Now if you want to make a case that Black Americans are targeted for violence, there is no better example than the reaction to what happened in Chicago last weekend.
A violent weekend in Chicago left 10 people dead and dozens more wounded, police said.
Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson plans to hold a news conference at 11 a.m. Monday.
However, CPD says it has seen a citywide reduction in shootings by 30 percent this year.
What’s really interesting in this story is the use of language in the embedded video, it’s “gun” violence not “gang” violence even though the driver of this violence are the gangs of Chicago.
The largest shooting, which injured eight people, happened in the South Side’s Gresham neighborhood as a group, including a 14-year-old girl, was standing in a courtyard just before 12:40 a.m.
The crowd had gathered after attending a funeral repass, said Fred Waller, Chicago police chief of patrol.
During a Sunday news conference, Waller voiced frustration at gang members whom he blamed for taking advantage of large summer crowds to use as cover to take revenge.
The gang members do not fear repercussions from the law, Waller said.
“They take advantage of that opportunity and they shoot into a crowd, no matter who they hit,” Waller said.
“It’s absolutely outrageous. It’s a state of emergency in our city,” Pfleger said Sunday in response to the series of mass shootings earlier in the day. “Someplace else in the country, the whole country would be talking about that this morning. All world news and national news would be talking about that. Four types of mass shootings going on in Chicago with those numbers, and it’s a weekend in Chicago, a rough weekend. No it’s not a rough weekend! It’s absolutely ridiculous. It’s unacceptable.”
He is correct that the whole country should be talking about this, that the world news and the national news should be all over this and that the howls out outrage should not stop until this violence which is directed against Black Lives is stopped, but in once sense Fr. Pfleger is being disingenuous when he decries this earlier in the piece as”gun violence” because both he and I know the issue here isn’t guns, it’s gangs.
I also strongly suspect that Fr. Pfleger knows his cry for national media attention to the issue will go unanswered because these gang members and the Democrat pols who rule Chicago (the last GOP mayor left office in 1931) are the best of buddies:
Most alarming, both law enforcement and gang sources say, is that some politicians ignore the gangs’ criminal activities. Some go so far as to protect gangs from the police, tipping them off to impending raids or to surveillance activities—in effect, creating safe havens in their political districts. And often they chafe at backing tough measures to stem gang activities, advocating instead for superficial solutions that may garner good press but have little impact.
The paradox is that Chicago’s struggle to combat street gangs is being undermined by its own elected officials. And the alliances between lawmakers and lawbreakers raise a troubling question: Who actually rules the neighborhoods—our public servants or the gangs?
The irony of course is the families of the slain know the gangs are the driving force behind the killings of their children, the problem is with the gangs the source of political power on both the local & state level (how many gang generated votes have helped keep Illinois blue?) there is no incentive for those enjoying the financial or political rewards to do a thing about it and as the gangs are largely of color, there is no reward for the professional demagogues nationally to do so either.
The media know what the source of the violence is but to report on it means acknowledging two things harmful to the Democrat party
That it’s black on black gang violence, not rogue cops or white radicals that has been preying on the black citizens of Chicago for decades
That Democrats have for decades protected these killers for the sake of keeping power not only on the city level but to provide votes on the state and federal level
If the gangs had been white or the pols in bed with these gangs had beenrepublicans, the media’s hue and cry would be never ending and the good folks of CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS, NYT and Washington Post would not rest until national action was taken and a parade of pundits and activists from Black Lives Matter and other racial groups would be demanding action for the victims of this senseless slaughter and those who perpetuate it both behind the trigger by their actions and those in office protecting them to be brought to justice.
Alas for the black citizens of Chicago living in fear or dying in agony as it’s not 1931 and their plight can’t be blamed on rogue cops, or white man named Capone, or Trump supporters in MAGA hats or a corrupt GOP Mayor or pol, in fact their deaths don’t fit any of the media’s preferred narratives so said media and the liberal/radical activists like Black Lives Matter who they promote have decreed the dead of Chicago shall remain a local story to be briefly noted, regretted, and then ignored.
After all one can’t risk highlighting gang violence or corrupt Chicago pols when a story like that could strengthen President Trump’s hand nationally in an election year.
Call it “Democrat privilege”.
My pay for this comes from the voluntary contributions of readers. If you think this work is worth your while and wish to support it and my writers please subscribe to the site below.