“Africa is important in the eyes of our Creators, for it is the future if it can escape from the old mysticisms, a handicap which led it to be subdued by the other continents.”
How many thousands of innocent Africans will die in civil wars like in Rwanda before one understands that the cause of these terrible events is the monstrous European colonization ?
When colonizers arrived on this immense continent, they deliberately created countries that previously did not exist by drawing totally arbitrary and artificial boundaries in order to share in the looting of local resources. In each African state, one can often find more than a hundred groups of people who have nothing in common with their neighbours, neither in their traditions nor in their customs — some- times even in their languages, which are often so different that the groups cannot understand one another.
Despite this, the centralist colonizers came and decreed that these groups of people, whose only fault was to have a less advanced technology which did not enable them to push the invaders back, should from now on live together within common frontiers with a capital city designed to reign over the entire artificially created nation. As long as the colonial power was there to impose its authority through force, there was no problem. All the Africans were living together under this tyranny, helping each other and even feeling closer to other ethnic groups who were sometimes hostile. The environment was filled with sentiments of injustice, which quickly led to the creation of the first revolt movements. The same way as the French and the British, who historically waged many wars against one another, suddenly felt close to one another in order to fight nazi Germany.
And the decolonization came, in a world that pretends to be based on justice and not on the brutal force of armies. The colonial powers returned home, but left in place a centralist power and administration based on the European model that does not take into account local and cultural realities. Once the “independence” was obtained, problems began… In each of these artificial states, the group of people with the largest population automatically took the power by using the rules of democracy brought by the colonizers.
If this rule were applied in Europe, the reunified Germany, which has the largest population, could impose its points of view on the rest of Europe… Would the French and others accept it? Of course not… When the decolonization took place, it would have been good to give back independence to all the groups of people who were arbitrarily gathered by the colonizing forces. A myriad of independent small countries would thus have been created. The Hutus and the Tutsis each would have had their territory to administer, and we would not have the current wars. The process would have given these small African states the possibility of creating a federation similar to that of the United States of America or the ongoing one of Europe. It is not too late to take over the problem by destroying the states and the frontiers created by colonial powers.
“A true decolonization consists, in fact, in putting Africa back to the state in which it was before it was polluted politically by colonization.“
Certainly there were some tribal conflicts, but each one had his own territory and nobody was trying to exterminate his neighbour.
Imagine that scientific progress had gone faster in Africa than in Europe and the latter had been colonized by Africans one or two centuries ago. We would have had an artificial European state created to manage the conquered territories. Then, a decolonization revolt would have sent the colonizers back home. Can one imagine that the colonized Europeans would have accepted keeping the boundaries and the system set up by the invaders? Of course not. The French or the Italians would never accept being governed by the largest ethnic group, the Germans or the Russians, if they were also part of the colonized groups. Ethnic fights would have devastated the decolonized Europe, just as they ravage Africa today. No, the only solution, if we really and sincerely want the well being of African populations, is to destroy all traces of colonialism, starting with the arbitrary borders which rely on no reality, be it cultural, ethnic, religious, or geopolitical. Lines drawn on maps by totally unconscious colonial civil servants that’s what African borders are. If Africans want to get rid of their problems, they have to carry on a real decolonization of their continent; and this real decolonization goes along with the destruction of artificial states created by the exploiting colonizers, as well as all the centralist systems put in place. The old colonial powers are doing nothing to really help Africans, for they are too content to keep on looting the natural resources of this immense continent, using local conflicts to mask their political and economic cheatings. In artificial states that live on ethnic conflicts, it is so easy to use corruption to keep on benefitting from the natural resources of officially “decolonized” countries.
If each ethnic group could truly get back the power of the natural resources of its territory, it would be much more difficult for the European looters to manipulate prices and production through powerful multinational firms. It must be taken into account that each conflict, even those officially “condemned” or “deplored,” allows the European arms builders to make juicy profits. Finally, the recent military interventions, particularly those of the French, are the proof that the independence given to the decolonized countries is totally relative. As soon as an African head of state wishes to establish a privileged relationship with Libya, China or any other state the old colonial power dislikes, the French come in and put the country “back in line.” They depose the government, democratically elected, and replace it with personalities more “sympathetic” to the old colonizing powers. The most reserved heads of state can’t stay insensitive for long to the deposits made in banks in Switzerland (it is interesting to notice that almost all African leaders have bank accounts in Switzerland despite the exchange control barrier set to impeach the outflow of the meager African capital resources. How are these accounts supplied?). The crowning of emperor Bokassa 1st, which was financed by France, is the most striking example of the decolonization mascarade. Africans must wake up and destroy the boundaries and states they have not chosen. The UN could supervise the creation of new states, the borders of which would be the natural and ancestral limits of ethnic groups or populations as they existed before colonization, and organize a federation of the different countries so created. The natural resources of Africa would therefore benefit the local populations, not the multinational firms eager to make profits. So, each ethnic group or nation could find its roots, its traditions, and its language. A second federal language could be adopted to allow all the inhabitants of the Great African Continent to communicate with one another. It would be preferable that this federal language not be the one of the old colonizing country.
Former French colonies should adopt English as their second language, for it is more and more becoming the dominant world language.
After linguistic decolonisation, it would be desirable to undertake religious decolonization. Traditional African religions should be taught again to the populations and in schools as part of the cultural inheritance of Africans. This way, a “de-Christianization” would take place progressively. One should not forget that Christianity has been used as an instrument to better subdue the conquered people, attempting to get them lose their identity. Finally, it is time for Africans to be aware of the fact that under the cover of “cooperation,” the “cooperants” and other “advisors” (the former colonizing countries put “gently” at the service of African countries) are, in fact, agents in charge of maintaining control, so that independence remains simply a word, and does not come to be a fact. Why do Africans accept French troops to be positioned in almost all African countries? They are there to so-called “protect the Africans,” but in fact they quickly intervene as soon as the powers in place have a sentiment of real independence, deposing them and replacing them with more “subdued” leaders. What a scandal!
Yes it is truly time that Africans finally get true independence, and put an end to the shame.
“Africans, take your destiny in your hands by rejecting altogether the structures that have been imposed onto you by force, be they political, religious or cultural.“
Your immense continent is rich, and the new technologies, like computer science and the internet, set you free from the need of colonizers in order to learn. Millions of young Ivorians, Congolese, or others can receive knowledge directly from the greatest universities of the world. This is why getting away from France and getting closer to the USA would be beneficial to the development of Africa.
What can non-African Raelians do to help Africa? Above all, do not help the begging which has been organized and raised into institutions by governments who want to maintain, through this process, the power they have over Africa. “The more I help you the more you depend on me” — this is their motto.
What happens in rich countries? Millions are spent to organize campaigns to help the “third world,” and more millions are spent to ask the French to buy French, or the Canadians to by Canadian… What hypocrisy. “Let’s keep the third world in dependency and begging, and let us enrich ourselves by buying national…” As to the enterprises that invest by building factories in “third world” countries, they are pointed out as exploiters of a low-paid workforce. Yet these enterprises are “doing the right thing,” even though they do it more for profit than for humanitarian altruism. They unconsciously contribute to a reequilibrium movement of wealth.
“The third world needs not begging, but development.“
The best way to help the poor man is not to give him a fish, but rather to teach him how to fish… and give him a fishing pole. Enterprises should be encouraged to move their production factories to “third world” countries. European consumers would be better off because the products brought to their markets would be cheaper, and the “third world” would develop as one can see happening in the Philippines or in Thailand. We Raelians can contribute to this great movement of wealth reequilibrium.
“I wish that all the Raelians of rich countries undertake campaigns with T-shirts, stickers, conferences, etc., around the theme: “Buy Third World.”“
Instead of contributing to fund raising to help the “third world,” we will help it more by motivating our contemporary fellows to buy what is produced in the “third world,” rather than buying our national products. Will this create a bit more unemployment in our countries? Yes, and so what…? This is what true charity and true solidarity are all about: to accept that a few more people live less wealthy so that others in less favored countries can escape death from hunger. What is the suffering of an unemployed person, forced to reduce his expenses so he can survive from his unemployment allowance, when compared to the suffering of an African family that wakes up not knowing what it will eat today and tomorrow… and the following days…? To buy French or Canadian is to save jobs, to buy “third world” is to save lives…
The choice is quickly made when one is aware of the problem.
The year 2000 of the Christian era is here, in less than three years. Let us make it together, so that Africa and the “third world” of the third millennium will be different from those of this end of the 20th century, and so that when the Elohim come, they feel proud of their children of all races and of all continents.
From the speech of His Holiness Raël, in Valcourt, (Quebec) Canada, August 24th, 53 a.H (1998).