IMPACT OF COLONIALISM IN AFRICA ECONOMY

 The major impact of colonialism in African is that it brought about the under-development of African territories in many different ways. It is usually argued in favour of colonialism that it brought western education and hence western civilization to the shores of Africa which by implication is a positive contribution towards African development. This argument will appear to be true on the surface level or superficially, but if it is subjected to critical analysis, it will reveal the hollowness or emptiness of colonial education which is partially responsible for the present African underdevelopment. The colonial education was not rooted in African culture and therefore could not foster any meaningful development within the African environment because it had no organic linkage.

Furthermore, colonial education was essentially literary; it had no technological base and therefore antithetical to real or industrial development.

The poor technological base of most of the present day African states, which has been responsible for their underdevelopment stems from their poor foundation of education laid by the colonialists. Colonial education essentially aimed at training clerks, interpreters, produce inspectors, artisans, etc., which would help them in the exploitation of the Africa’s rich resources.

Colonial education did not aim at industrialization of African territories or at stimulating technological development within the African environment. Colonial education brought about distortion and disarticulation in African indigenous pattern of education which was rooted in African technology. Before fully embracing colonial education, Africans were good technologists, advancing at their own rates with the resources within their environment. For example, Africans were good sculptors, carvers, cloth weavers, miners, blacksmiths, etc.

They were able to provide and satisfy the technological need of the various African societies. The introduction of colonial education made Africans to abandon their indigenous technological skills and education in preference to one which mainly emphasizes reading and writing. This was the prelude or foundation for the present poor technological base of African states which has perpetuated their underdevelopment. As we know, education that is not deeply rooted in a people’s culture and environment cannot bring about any meaningful technological advancement. This has aptly been shown in the unsuccessful attempt at the so-called technological transfer, which is more of a myth than reality.

Another important impact of colonialism in Africa is the disarticulation of their economy. Colonialism distorted African pattern of economic development in many different ways. There was disarticulation in production of goods, markets, traders, transport, provision of social amenities and pattern of urbanization etc. the colonialists introduced a pattern of international division of labour which was to the disadvantage of Africans.

They assigned to Africa the role of production of raw materials and primary products for use by their industries at home. Africans were not allowed nor encouraged to go into manufacturing. The only industries Africans were encouraged to build were those that would facilitate in the processing of the raw materials for export. The African raw materials were bought at a very low price while manufactured goods from abroad were sold at expensive price. This situation accounted for the impoverishment of most Africans.

There was also disarticulation in the type of goods produced by Africans. The colonialists compelled

Africans to concentrate in the production of goods meant for export. Africans were not encouraged to produce those goods required by the local population. This made many

Africans to abandon the production of food items required to feed the teeming and growing population. The effect of this was food shortage and escalation in food prices.

The present day situation where Africans now import their food is a carry-over from colonialism. The point being stressed here is that colonialism distorted the satisfaction of local needs in terms of food production and other requirements in preference to production and satisfaction of foreign needs especially the industries.

Colonialism also disarticulated African markets and trades. The traditional or original African marketing centres were distorted by colonialism. Most of the traditional African marketing centres or routes were formed based on local needs. When colonialism came and introduced a different need, this changed the original or traditional marketing centers to new marketing centres because it rendered them irrelevant. Colonialists created new marketing centres and routes where their required raw materials could be easily bought and evacuated back home. This led to the gradual decay or death of most of the original or traditional marketing centres thereby distorting African pattern of development and urbanization. As we know, most of these traditional African market centres constituted the traditional or original African centres.

Colonialism also made African trade to be mainly exportimport oriented.

It integrated African trade and economy prematurely into the world market and international trade. It is a known fact that before a local economy fully integrates itself into the world economy or trade, it must have developed adequately its internal dynamics and forces of production. The consequences of premature integration is that such economy will be hijacked by the more advanced ones; and the vagaries in international trade will make the country concerned a perpetual debtor. Furthermore, premature integration cannot absorb shock from the international market and will never enjoy trade balance or comparative advantage. The export-import orientation pattern of African economy introduced by colonialism does not allow for accelerator and multiplier effects necessary for economy advancement and development.

The raw materials produced by Africans were not used by industries located in Africa but abroad. Therefore, there was no organic linkage between the agricultural sector and the industrial sector in Africa. Consequently, the African economy could not move forward because the surplus profit appropriated from the economy by the colonialists are not ploughed back or spent within the economy.

This is where the accelerator and multiplier effects necessary for economy advancement and development come in. As we know, goods and services are sold for profit and income generation. If for example, Japan, an industrialized nation sells Sanyo television to an African state which could be Nigeria, the money paid for the product serves as profit and income for the television company located in Japan. If the company uses the money paid to it to buy something in Japan, it helps to accelerate the economy of Japan. This accelerator effect was totally absent in African territories during the period of colonialism. The absence of the accelerator factor/effect, created the propensity for Africans to keep importing continuously from outside without depending on their own goods.

Furthermore, the multiplier effect concerns the reinvestment of profit appropriate from an economy. For example, under a normal economy and circumstance, when a profi t is made from an economy, it is re-invested to stimulate and generate new profit. The profit can be reinvested into new enterprises within the economy. The re-investment of accumulated profit into an economy helps the economy to move very fast and to generate new profits. The ability of re-invested profit to bring out new profit is referred to as multiplier effect. This was absent in the African economy during colonialism. This is because the colonialists did not re-invest profits appropriated from the African economy; rather they transferred the profits abroad for the development of their home economy. This greatly accounted for the present underdevelopment of most African economies.

The colonialists distorted and disarticulated the development of a comprehensive transport system in

Africa. The transport network developed was not to link different towns and rural areas for purpose of effective communication and development. Transport routes were built by the colonialists to enable them to evacuate easily the raw materials from their sources or base to the destination point where they could be effectively exported abroad. The transport network developed was essentially rails and seaports. There was no good effort to develop an organised road network which would help to improve the lives of the African people and their interaction with their relations in the different parts of the territories. The distorted, disjointed, and disarticulated transport system developed by the colonialists did not allow for effective agricultural and economic integration within the different parts of the African enclaves and territories. There was therefore absence of economic integration and cooperation among the African territories during the period of colonialism

Colonialism also brought about disarticulation in the provision of social amenities and the urbanization pattern in Africa. Most of the little social amenities provided during the colonial period were concentrated at a place.

This made most people to migrate from the rural areas where these amenities were virtually non-extent to colonial urban centres where they could be found. The consequence of this was the struggle and over-use of these amenities and the attendant overcrowding of the areas (cities) and the problems of urbanization. The consequent problems of disarticulation of provision of amenities and urbanization include rural urban migration, overcrowding, filthy and slump environment, poor hygienic condition, spread of epidemic disease, social vices, tribal and ethnic problems etc. The management of the above problems created by colonial distortion and disarticulation of amenities and urbanization on Africa has remained a single most important problem confronting African states today.

Another important impact of colonialism in Africa was the emergence and institutionalization of classes and class struggle in the socio-economic and political life of the people. Colonialism aided a clear emergence and development of classes in Africa. These classes include comprador bourgeoisie, petty bourgeoisie, proletariat and the peasant. The African petty bourgeoisie serve as the conveyor belt through which the colonialists exploited and siphoned the economy of African countries. There is a great harmony of interest between the African petty bourgeoisie and the European comprador bourgeois. This was why during the period of political independence; it was the African petty bourgeois that got the mantle of leadership. The African petty bourgeois maintained the same relationship with the erstwhile colonial masters and this is why they run the economy and political administration of their states in the same manner as the colonialists did.

Most of the African leaders or petty bourgeois maintain strong link with their erstwhile colonial masters.

The African petty bourgeoisie maintained the long exploitation of the proletariat and the peasant classes.

The rampant and complex nature of political instability and socio-economic malaise being experienced in most African states today has recourse to the nature and character of classes introduced in Africa by colonialism.

The economic and other resources of Africa are shared between the petty bourgeoisie and their European/colonial counterparts, even in this contemporary time. The nature of political power struggle and distribution of wealth as well as economic resources in the contemporary African state are a reflection of the understanding and harmony of interest between the African petty bourgeoisie and their colonial partners/friends. The severe impoverishment of most Africans by their petty bourgeois leaders and marginalisation as well as oppression of the masses by those who have access to state power are offshoot of colonialism or colonial hang-over among African states.

CONCLUSION

Colonization of Africa was not a very easy one. The colonialists fought with the chiefs and the African middlemen at the coast before they could penetrate into the hinterland or interior.

The reasons for acquisition of colonies by the colonialists as we have earlier mentioned include: the need for raw materials; the search for new market for the metropolitan industries where their surplus manufactured products as a result of the industrial revolution could be sold; the need to provide more food for the growing urban industrial population; and the need to find a place where the surplus accumulated profit from the industrial revolution could be invested to make more profit.

The African colonies or territories were grouped into different categories. There were colonies that were sources of minerals; colonies for plantation crops; colonies for European settlement and colonies for peasant production.

The colonies under the first three categories include Congo, South Africa, Zimbabwe, etc. The colonies under the last category which is peasant production include Nigeria, Ghana, etc., also some of the colonies were selected as labour reserved while some others were simply trading areas. The colonialists had different policies for their colonies. For example, Britain used the system of indirect rule. Indirect rule policy concerns with the ruling of the people through their own people or traditional institutions with a close supervision from the British government. Also the French, another major colonizing European power in Africa, used the policy of assimilation and associations. Assimilation concerns with the total integration of the French colonial colonies into the main French government in Paris. Association policy came at a later stage as a result of the problems the French government encountered from their initial application of the policy of assimilation. The

French assimilated the “assimilatables” and associated with the “unassimilatables”. In the Belgium-Congo, the policy was different from that of the British and French, and this was also applicable to other European colonizing powers in Africa.

Colonialism had a devastating effect or impacts on the African colonies. It is responsible for the present situation explained by Walter Rodney in his book, How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. Also, this fact was vividly articulated in Chinweizu, The West and the Rest of Us.

Colonialism introduced a dichotomy between the centre and the periphery nations. The periphery nations are exploited by the centre nations. The periphery nations produce raw materials which are expropriated by the centre nations. Africa is periphery nation as a result of her colonization. African colonies produced raw materials which were expropriated by the colonialists (centre nations).

Furthermore, colonialism introduced a dual economic structure within the African economy. It also brought about disarticulation of African economy, education, trade, market, transport and currency institution. Colonialism made African colonies dependent by introducing a mono-cultural economy for the territories. It also dehumanized African labour force and traders. It forced Africans to work in colonial plantations at very low wages and displaced them from their lands. Similarly, the business of

African traders or middlemen were taken over from them and controlled by the colonialists.

Colonialism did not allow for industrialization of Africa. It assigned Africa the role of production of primary goods or raw materials in the international division of labour. Colonialism encouraged and intensified class struggle, tribalism and ethnicity within the African colonies. These were strategies introduced by the colonialists in order to perpetuate or prolong their rule and domination of African territories. An example is the British colonial policy of “Divide and Rule” in Nigeria. Finally, colonialism shaped both the economic and political structure of African colonies to be in line with the need of the metropolis. It ensured that African economic and political structures both in form and content serve the interest of their home government (European powers).

Colonialism therefore, in all intents and purposes was a disservice to Africa.

REFERENCES

Ake, C. (1980). Revolutionary Pressures in Africa. London: Zed.

Ake, C. (1981). A Political Economy of Africa. Longman, Geria.

Chinweizu, C. A. (1978). The Eest and the Rest of US. Lagos: Nok Publishers (Nigeria) Ltd..

Cohen, D. I., & Dnil, J. (Eds.) (1981). Political Economy of Africa. London: Longman.

Ejimofor, C. O. (1987). British Colonial Objectives and Policies in Nigeria, The Roots of Conflict. Onitsha, Nigeria: African

FEP Publisher Ltd.

Heyer, J., et al. (1981). Rural Development in Tropical Africa. London: Macmillan.

Kalu, O. U. (Ed.) (1978). Readings in African Humanities: African Cultural Development. Enugu, Nigeria: FourthDimension Publishers.

Nnoli, O. (1980). Ethnic Politics in Nigeria. Enugu, Nigeria: Fourth Dimension Publishers.

Nnoli, O. (Ed.) (1981). Pain to Nigerian Development. Senegal: CODERRIA Book State.

Nwankwo, B. C. (1990). Authority in Government. Makurdi, Nigeria: Almond Publishers Makurdi.

Rodney, W. (1982). How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. Enugu, Nigeria: Ikenga Publishers.