So this is a question that's been rattling around in my head for a while now. What exactly caused the Congo to become even more impoverished? It is very rich in natural resources, with a large-enough population, so what was stopping a government from forming that would utilize its resources wisely and enrich the country? Personally, with my (very) limited knowledge, I'm guessing that the rushed independence of the Congo was a factor, maybe the Belgians delay independence and better prepare for independence? Again, I have little to no knowledge of this, so I'm hoping that there's a few experts here on the Congo.
AHQ: Is a prosperous Congo possible with a 20th Century POD?
- Thread starter Texas Bulldog
- Start date
Everything that happened during colonialism + rapid decolonization with the Belgians wrecking a bunch of shit on their way out + multiple coups + civil wars + brutal corrupt dictatorship that looted the country for all it was worth + yet another civil war that led to the current government securing power. The Congo wasn't dealt a very kind hand. Maybe if the chaos of the 60s is avoided they could luck out and make it into the 70s relatively stable, but the height of the cold war would likely mean the two superpowers would be trying to secure governments favorable to them (Mobutu stayed in power so long because the US backed him for being anti-communist), so they'd have to get hella lucky.
I'd its somewhat possible if Mobuto suddenly dies shortly after the Congo crisis ends. This point is critical because the Congolese state is at a high point of stability(just coming out of a war) while being before Mobuto messed it all up.
After his death, his successor would have to fill enough the power vacuum quickly to prevent any resurgent violence or a power struggle tearing the state apart. Then he can consolidate power. This successor would have be someone not even a fraction as kleptocratic or corrupt as Mobuto was.
Many parts of the Congo are hard to reach and thus are easy breeding grounds for rebels. So the government builds transport links to these far flung corners, for the military at least. This in addition to military bases secures the governments rule over these lands.
A state funded tertiary system to start educated local workers would be a priority of this new ruler as it reduces the need for expats.
When the Congolese ruler dies, his succesors begin transitioning to nonviolently democracy. So the new democratic Congo inherits a stable country, a more connected Congo, and large mineral resources that the state can readily regulate and tax. These can help the Congo prosper.
After his death, his successor would have to fill enough the power vacuum quickly to prevent any resurgent violence or a power struggle tearing the state apart. Then he can consolidate power. This successor would have be someone not even a fraction as kleptocratic or corrupt as Mobuto was.
Many parts of the Congo are hard to reach and thus are easy breeding grounds for rebels. So the government builds transport links to these far flung corners, for the military at least. This in addition to military bases secures the governments rule over these lands.
A state funded tertiary system to start educated local workers would be a priority of this new ruler as it reduces the need for expats.
When the Congolese ruler dies, his succesors begin transitioning to nonviolently democracy. So the new democratic Congo inherits a stable country, a more connected Congo, and large mineral resources that the state can readily regulate and tax. These can help the Congo prosper.
Last edited:
THE KINGFISH
Gone Fishin'
Additionally, Belgium needs to cultivate a local elite (much as the British had done to many of their colonies) as colonialism winds down that way the country doesn’t swing from one bloodthirsty, corrupt dictator to another and instead develops a stable political culture prior to independence.
So even if Congo-Kinshasa’s industrialism and infrastructure is still initially built entirely for the exploitation of its natural resources by European powers - having a political culture that isn’t “rob the country of all its wealth while you and your cronies take trips to Paris on Concorde flights” means that Congo-Kinshasa at least has an HDI score on par with India by TTL’s 2024.
Last edited:
Fun fact: apparently Dave Chappelle’s mother was involved in the Congo after Lumumba’s assassination.
threadreaderapp.com
Thread by @paulkleinfancam on Thread Reader App
@paulkleinfancam: I'm gonna do a longish thread on Chappelle's mother, Yvonne Seon (formerly Yvonne Reed/Yvonne Reed Chappelle), laying out some interesting things I found while trying to clear up my own confusion a...…
threadreaderapp.com
Where did this idea that if African states were colonized for even longer that they would be more prosperous come from?
Belgium needs to up its game. IIRC the Belgian Congo had the second lowest rate of black participation in the public service in colonial Africa, being behind only South Africa.
As a result when independence came and all the Belgian civil servants left there was not even a basis to build upon. You had an army (with very few officers) and that was about it as far as the state apparatus is concerned.
As a result when independence came and all the Belgian civil servants left there was not even a basis to build upon. You had an army (with very few officers) and that was about it as far as the state apparatus is concerned.
Not more prosperous maybe, but more stable.
Rushed decolonisation left most of Africa without fully developed social or political institutions, and the duty of governance was suddenly dumped into the hands of inexperienced bureaucrats and politicians. This fostered corruption and authoritarianism due to the lack of checks and balances and the instability, permitting people like Mobutu to take control.
If the transition to independence was slow, and the natives were given the chance to learn to run a government, most countries would be more stable, which would lead to greater prosperity.
Moboutou is not born.Lumumba isn't executed and carries out his plans with everyone's co operation
Less total length of time colonized and more abruptness of its conclusion. Congo could have been prosperous at independence in 1960, had Belgium spent the previous decade transitioning towards native rule. Instead Belgium kept using the colonial government as little more than a jobs program for its own middle class, up until the calls for immediate independence became too powerful to ignore. Only then did the Belgians propose a transition plan (a 30 year one) which the Congolese rejected because they were (rightly) beyond fed up with the Belgians by that point.
Basically have Lumumba not be assassinated and the ones doing the coup be executed, given the fact the US supported not only the coup but also alongside other western powers supported the Katanga rebels, he might as well go full communist and get direct aid of the USSR in order to modernize and strengthen the Congo, especially to use it as a springboard for anti colonial guerrillas to set up base in.
Let me play devil's advocate here. Tshombe had a lot more to offer than many think. Katagana could have avoided succession if Lumumba hadn't gone the Chinese, we must industrialize yesterday wrote. There should have been a government of national unity.
Can anyone come up with a plausible scenario in which European powers would partake in this fantasy of good-hearted fraternal colonization where they 'uplift' the population and invest a great deal of capital into the creation of independent states?
After the devastation of wwii, the Europeans required dollars to rebuild their economies. The best way they thought of getting such was through intensifying the exploitation of the natural resources of their empires. ‘State building’ and gradual handover were just delaying tactics for them to establish informal empires to maintain their control of their colonies economies. The clearest example of this is France’s informal empire that only recently has begun to finally collapse.
I used to accept the idea that colonization screwed over a lot of third world countries and zi do think there might be some validity to it, but South Korea and Taiwan were colonized. Look at them now.
Different circumstances. SK and Taiwan was forcefully decolonized and then built up to buffers to communism by the US.
Congo got screwed over by Belgium.
Doesn't need to be philanthropic in motive. Even post-colonial ponzi schemes require a functional state apparatus to maintain infrastructure and the rule of law.
There’s a difference between a state apparatus for properly governing a nation and one for a colony. The one’s inherited by the African nations were the second, without the only check on power being the threat of a dismissal from the metropole. Thus making it very easy for them to be corrupt and oppress their own minorities. The main strategy itself of the British empire was doing the bare minimum to cut administrative costs and coopting the local elite to minimize the risks of native rebellions.
Last edited: