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 which did not exist by drawing totally arbitrary and artificial boundaries in order to share the looting of local resources. In each African state, one can find up to more than a hundred groups of people who have nothing in common with their neighbors, neither in their traditions nor in their customs, even sometimes in their languages which are 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 not enabling them to push the invaders back, should from now on live together within common frontiers with a capital city designed to reign on the whole nation so artificially created.
As long as the colonial power was there to impose its authority throughout the ace of force, there was no problem. All the Africans were living together to this tyranny, helping each other and even feeling closer to the ethnic groups which were sometimes hostile, in the environment of sentiment of injustice which quickly created the first revolt movements in force of —. 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 the Nazi Germany.
And the decolonization came on, in a world which pretends to be based on the right 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 using the democracy rules 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 to 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 arbitrary 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 the one 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 everyone 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 to keep the boundaries and the system set by the invaders? Of course not.
The French or the Italian would never accept to be 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 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 frontiers which rely on no reality, be in cultural ethnic religious or geopolitical. Lines drawn on maps by totally unconscious colonial civil servants, and that’s what African frontiers 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 a destruction of artificial states created by 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 which live on ethnic conflicts, it is so easy to use corruption to keep on benefiting from the natural resources of officially “decolonized” countries.
If each ethnic group could truly get back the power on 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. Not taking into account that each conflict, even those officially “condemned” or “deplored” allows the European arm builders to make juicy profits. Finally, the recent military interventions, in particular the French ones, 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, French — come and put the country back into 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 a long time to the deposits made in banks in Switzerland (it is interesting to notice that almost all African leaders have banking account in Switzerland despite the exchange control barrier set to impeach the flow out of the meagre African capital resources. How are these accounts supplied?) The crowning of emperor Bokassa 1er, who was financed by France, is the most striking example of the decolonization masquerade. Africans must wake up and destroy boundaries and states they have not chosen.
The UN could supervise the creation of new states, the frontiers 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 be not 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 world language.
After linguistic decolonization it would be desirable to undertake religious decolonization. Traditional African religious should be taught again to populations and in schools as part of the cultural inheritance of Africans. This way, a dechristianization would take place progressively one should not forget that Christianity has been used as an instrument to subdue the conquered people better, attempting to get them loose 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 a 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 so called there to “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 in your hands your destiny by rejecting all together the structures which 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 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 on 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 re equilibrium movement of wealth.
The third world needs not begging, but development.
The best way to help the poor 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 it happening in the Philippines or in Thailand. We Raelians can contribute to this great movement of wealth re-equilibrium.
I wish that all the Raelians of rich countries undertake campaign 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 productions. This will 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 line less wealthy so that others in less favoured countries can escape death from hunger. What is suffering for an unemployed led to reduce his expenses so he can survive from his unemployment allowance, compared to the suffering of an African family which 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.
RAEL
