Obama's double standard on Africa questioned

[Derek]

(<span style="font-style: italic">From Blakkgiant's light-skin advantage website - some interesting observations:</span>)


President Obama's speech to Africa &quot;lectured Africans on local repression, corruption, brutality, good governance and accountability&quot;. Whereas in his Arab world speech in Egypt, &quot;there was nothing 'brutal' he could conjure up, no 'corruption' and no 'repression'&quot;.

On Congo, Mr. Obama failed to mention the role of the West in eliminating popular leaders like Patrice Lumumba who worked hard for a better Congo. Instead, the West enthroned and supported Mobutu Sese Seko who plundered the country and killed all potential rivals. By the time Mr. Mobutu's rule ended, Congo was defunct of good leaders. The political vacuum has since led to insecurity in that country.

Even more surprising and troubling was Mr. Obama's decision to use a faulty comparison between Kenya and South Korea. In the speech, he wondered as to why South Korea's economy is far ahead that of Kenya even though several decades ago, Kenya was ahead. Any high school student should be able to explain the difference. South Korea, because of its proximity to North Korea, is very important to America and the West, for both security and ideological reasons. As such, rich Western countries have poured abundant resources on South Korea, while Kenya has been struggling to access Western markets for its mainly agricultural exports. Sometimes, the poor are so not because of stupidity and laziness, but rather for the rich having written the rulebook and grabbed all their resources.

It also must be pointed out that when the president wanted to talk to the Arab world he chose Egypt, a country with one of the most horrible human right records in the world - and Egypt is far from being an exception in the Arab world. Yet, there was no patronizing talk about a rewarding visit to some country from the region for its democratic record. While the Ghanaians seemed happy to turn the other cheek over and over again, Mr. Obama's speech will probably best be remembered for cementing stereotypes against Africa. Already, the European and the far-right white South African media are celebrating.

http://africauncensored.com/obama-speech-on-Africa.html

[jah_yout]

Re: Obama's double standard on Africa questioned

yea we touched this in the thread about his speech in ghana;

i considered the speech extremely lame and anti-climactic when you compare it to the other speeches he gave to 'muslims' and to 'jews';
two thumbs &amp; two big toes down i give it

[Blackstar*]

Re: Obama's double standard on Africa questioned

Without announcing a halt in arms sales to Africa and an end to diplomatic and financial support for some of the more crooked leaders (like the one from Eq. Guinea) the whole speech was a big bag of insults.

[Derek]

Re: Obama's double standard on Africa questioned

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BlackStar</div><div class="ubbcode-body">the whole speech was a big bag of insults. </div></div>



And I bet he didn't write ONE WORD of the script.

[Amberal37]

Re: Obama's double standard on Africa questioned

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Derek</div><div class="ubbcode-body">(<span style="font-style: italic">From Blakkgiant's light-skin advantage website - some interesting observations:</span>)


President Obama's speech to Africa &quot;lectured Africans on local repression, corruption, brutality, good governance and accountability&quot;. Whereas in his Arab world speech in Egypt, &quot;there was nothing 'brutal' he could conjure up, no 'corruption' and no 'repression'&quot;.

On Congo, Mr. Obama failed to mention the role of the West in eliminating popular leaders like Patrice Lumumba who worked hard for a better Congo. Instead, the West enthroned and supported Mobutu Sese Seko who plundered the country and killed all potential rivals. By the time Mr. Mobutu's rule ended, Congo was defunct of good leaders. The political vacuum has since led to insecurity in that country.

Even more surprising and troubling was Mr. Obama's decision to use a faulty comparison between Kenya and South Korea. In the speech, he wondered as to why South Korea's economy is far ahead that of Kenya even though several decades ago, Kenya was ahead. Any high school student should be able to explain the difference. South Korea, because of its proximity to North Korea, is very important to America and the West, for both security and ideological reasons. As such, rich Western countries have poured abundant resources on South Korea, while Kenya has been struggling to access Western markets for its mainly agricultural exports. Sometimes, the poor are so not because of stupidity and laziness, but rather for the rich having written the rulebook and grabbed all their resources.

It also must be pointed out that when the president wanted to talk to the Arab world he chose Egypt, a country with one of the most horrible human right records in the world - and Egypt is far from being an exception in the Arab world. Yet, there was no patronizing talk about a rewarding visit to some country from the region for its democratic record. While the Ghanaians seemed happy to turn the other cheek over and over again, Mr. Obama's speech will probably best be remembered for cementing stereotypes against Africa. Already, the European and the far-right white South African media are celebrating.

http://africauncensored.com/obama-speech-on-Africa.html </div></div>

I think the speech was what needed to be said at that point in time from Obama - to Africa.

I think that most western whites deep down know that the current conditions of Africa is a lot to do with those whites past practices in Africa. I don't know much about the condition of &quot;white man's burden&quot;, but this is also tempered by 'white man's guilt', Obama was partly about purging that guilt.

I think that Obama has the right termperament that both BLACK and WHITE people need in a head of state for the US.

He is not scarred by the <span style="font-weight: bold">inherited </span>legacy of the civil-rights movement (which rightly evokes a lote of pain and emotion).
But perhaps too much pain and emotion in a person to lead a country where the majority previous oppressors class while deep down want to move on, are also afraid that putting in charge someone inflicted by those previous acts might lead that new power to turn around and commit the same that was dealt to them.
Obama's mother (and main teacher) is white - half of his inheritance, half of him, and the other half black, immediate African descendent, he has learnt much from BOTH aspects, can empathise with BOTH, and has as much stake in BOTH legacies.

He is currently performing a balancing act in trying to bring BOTH to a resolute position. It won't happen, but he should be judged at the end of this, by how much further he brings us along that road.

Black leaders know too well what is quoted above in terms of colonialism, they themselves use it ALL the time - colonialism, etc. While it important to acknowledge how these attrocities have played their role, there are things that say ON PAPER that Africa should be able to direct their own destiny without corruption. It has been said before - mainly by non-blacks, but people do not heed them - partly because of said source, and partly that we rely on the victim factor to keep outselves from wanting better for ourselves (many African states rely more on AID agencies to provide jobs than they do the government).

I think that what HE is saying is that they can have REAL faith and NOW trust what is written ON PAPER. That if they want to run decent democratic systems, then the support will come in better means (not raw aid), but they have to realise that it is THEIR job to start this seriously.

[Emperah]

Re: Obama's double standard on Africa questioned

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BlackStar</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Without announcing a halt in arms sales to Africa and an end to diplomatic and financial support for some of the more crooked leaders (like the one from Eq. Guinea) the whole speech was a big bag of insults. </div></div>

dat nah guh hapm when America has implemented AFRICOM which is the United states of Africa Command, meaning the militarization of every nation in Africa except Egypt (cah dem already control dat)

Nuff tings a gwaan bout Africom and de media naah seh a word. De idea is to have an american miltary presence deh suh suh dem cyan have easy access to all the raw material. Under the guise and disguise of helping out the ppl. If any leader decides to get outtahda a force is already in place to trod dem down.

<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/sDGOMY4gNVQ"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/sDGOMY4gNVQ" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>

<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/M_CDUZWDRDk&amp;feature=related"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/M_CDUZWDRDk&amp;feature=related" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>

[jah_yout]

Re: Obama's double standard on Africa questioned

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: amberal37</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Derek</div><div class="ubbcode-body">(<span style="font-style: italic">From Blakkgiant's light-skin advantage website - some interesting observations:</span>)


President Obama's speech to Africa &quot;lectured Africans on local repression, corruption, brutality, good governance and accountability&quot;. Whereas in his Arab world speech in Egypt, &quot;there was nothing 'brutal' he could conjure up, no 'corruption' and no 'repression'&quot;.

On Congo, Mr. Obama failed to mention the role of the West in eliminating popular leaders like Patrice Lumumba who worked hard for a better Congo. Instead, the West enthroned and supported Mobutu Sese Seko who plundered the country and killed all potential rivals. By the time Mr. Mobutu's rule ended, Congo was defunct of good leaders. The political vacuum has since led to insecurity in that country.

Even more surprising and troubling was Mr. Obama's decision to use a faulty comparison between Kenya and South Korea. In the speech, he wondered as to why South Korea's economy is far ahead that of Kenya even though several decades ago, Kenya was ahead. Any high school student should be able to explain the difference. South Korea, because of its proximity to North Korea, is very important to America and the West, for both security and ideological reasons. As such, rich Western countries have poured abundant resources on South Korea, while Kenya has been struggling to access Western markets for its mainly agricultural exports. Sometimes, the poor are so not because of stupidity and laziness, but rather for the rich having written the rulebook and grabbed all their resources.

It also must be pointed out that when the president wanted to talk to the Arab world he chose Egypt, a country with one of the most horrible human right records in the world - and Egypt is far from being an exception in the Arab world. Yet, there was no patronizing talk about a rewarding visit to some country from the region for its democratic record. While the Ghanaians seemed happy to turn the other cheek over and over again, Mr. Obama's speech will probably best be remembered for cementing stereotypes against Africa. Already, the European and the far-right white South African media are celebrating.

http://africauncensored.com/obama-speech-on-Africa.html </div></div>

I think the speech was what needed to be said at that point in time from Obama - to Africa.

I think that most western whites deep down know that the current conditions of Africa is a lot to do with those whites past practices in Africa. I don't know much about the condition of &quot;white man's burden&quot;, but this is also tempered by 'white man's guilt', Obama was partly about purging that guilt.

I think that Obama has the right termperament that both BLACK and WHITE people need in a head of state for the US.

He is not scarred by the <span style="font-weight: bold">inherited </span>legacy of the civil-rights movement (which rightly evokes a lote of pain and emotion).
But perhaps too much pain and emotion in a person to lead a country where the majority previous oppressors class while deep down want to move on, are also afraid that putting in charge someone inflicted by those previous acts might lead that new power to turn around and commit the same that was dealt to them.
Obama's mother (and main teacher) is white - half of his inheritance, half of him, and the other half black, immediate African descendent, he has learnt much from BOTH aspects, can empathise with BOTH, and has as much stake in BOTH legacies.

He is currently performing a balancing act in trying to bring BOTH to a resolute position. It won't happen, but he should be judged at the end of this, by how much further he brings us along that road.

Black leaders know too well what is quoted above in terms of colonialism, they themselves use it ALL the time - colonialism, etc. While it important to acknowledge how these attrocities have played their role, there are things that say ON PAPER that Africa should be able to direct their own destiny without corruption. It has been said before - mainly by non-blacks, but people do not heed them - partly because of said source, and partly that we rely on the victim factor to keep outselves from wanting better for ourselves (many African states rely more on AID agencies to provide jobs than they do the government).

I think that what HE is saying is that they can have REAL faith and NOW trust what is written ON PAPER. That if they want to run decent democratic systems, then the support will come in better means (not raw aid), but they have to realise that it is THEIR job to start this seriously.
</div></div>

jokes;

it's an insult to his black AND white ancestors that he put so much more nuance &amp; passion in his speech to 'the muslim world' than he did to africa;

it seems africa/ns don't garner the respect of the muslim or jewish world...even when dude himself is of african descent &amp; wife &amp; children also...

how r u gonna talk one side but not talk the next??

a very cowardly speech

[queenb]

Re: Obama's double standard on Africa questioned

I would say that Africa should take the idea and run with it. What is wrong with having Africom being the African equivilent of the European Union? It makes a stronger monetary base, deletes the regional/tribal competition, and makes individual countries stronger. Many of the countries of Europe had traditional animosities similar to those in Africa, but currently are working together peacefully.

[Emperah]

Re: Obama's double standard on Africa questioned

<span style="font-style: italic">shi neh really sayt</span>

[britisha]

Re: Obama's double standard on Africa questioned

Pan-Africanism died with the great thinkers and would-be martyrs of yesteryear. Leaders like those are not born anymore.

It's like pre-slavery Africa as compared to post-slavery Africa. A lot has been lost in between and it will take a lot to regain it.

[Emperah]

Re: Obama's double standard on Africa questioned

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: queenb</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I would say that Africa should take the idea and run with it. What is wrong with having Africom being the African equivilent of the European Union? It makes a stronger monetary base, deletes the regional/tribal competition, and makes individual countries stronger. Many of the countries of Europe had traditional animosities similar to those in Africa, but currently are working together peacefully. </div></div>
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/loH3CTTv82k&amp;feature=related"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/loH3CTTv82k&amp;feature=related" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>
This why AFRICOM should not be supported

[Derek]

Re: Obama's double standard on Africa questioned

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: amberal37</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think that most western whites deep down know that the current conditions of Africa is a lot to do with those whites <span style="font-weight: bold">past practices</span> in Africa. </div></div>

And present!

Africans, forced to grow cash crops to repay never-ending interest on debt, for example.

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: Obama's double standard on Africa questioned

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Derek</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: amberal37</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think that most western whites deep down know that the current conditions of Africa is a lot to do with those whites <span style="font-weight: bold">past practices</span> in Africa. </div></div>

And present!

Africans, forced to grow cash crops to repay never-ending interest on debt, for example. </div></div> That is not the problem. The problem is that <span style="font-size: 14pt">All the arable lands and other productive resources are owned by the same Europeans that owned them during colonialism and used for the same purposes that they served the colonial masters.
It is so because the black middle class support this atrocity,and even support the deposing on leaders that try to undo this wrong against the people of Africa. </span>

[Derek]

Re: Obama's double standard on Africa questioned

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dr.Dudd</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Derek</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=amberal37]I think that most western whites deep down know that the current conditions of Africa is a lot to do with those whites <span style="font-weight: bold">past practices</span> in Africa. </div></div>

And present!

Africans, forced to grow cash crops to repay never-ending interest on debt, for example. [/quote That is not the problem. The problem is that <span style="font-size: 14pt">All the arable lands and other productive resources are owned by the same Europeans that owned them during colonialism and used for the same purposes that they served the colonial masters.
It is so because the black middle class support this atrocity,and even support the deposing on leaders that try to undo this wrong against the people of Africa. </span> </div></div>



It has been estimated that for every dollar sent to Africa as 'aid' three dollars are extracted my multi-national corporations such as Unilever and Proctor &amp; Gamble.