A very charming and earnest white chap has been worrying over that old bone of contention, namely, how to fix Africa’s incessant problems, and comes up with a novel solution – add MORE white people:

Possibly the biggest misconception about Africans, also very effectively peddled by the mendacious BBC and some of the print media, is that Africans remain angry and anti-British because they were once colonized. This is rubbish; most love the British, adore the Queen, and respect the flag. And this sentiment has only grown recently, fueled by the Chinese, who have arrived in force and number. Unlike the British, past and present, the new colonialists are not squeamish about such trivia as human rights, and they are contemptuous of the locals they exploit. This attitude has angered and alienated millions; but it works well for a tiny political elite that prospers mightily at the expense of the majority. This grossly unfair dispensation suits the new Oriental overlords in their bid to reign supreme in the countries they target for plunder, but which they do not consider to be home.

The stark fact is that hundreds of millions of Africans living in wretched poverty desperately want to see more of the British and a more robust British presence, but, unsurprisingly, their leaders are less enthusiastic. The politicos should not be blamed; they have become very used to generous dollops of mostly unconditional Western “aid,” which is then siphoned off to enrich themselves and their cronies, and to pay the bloated bureaucracies and security services that buttress their positions of power.

NGOs and the mandarins of the “aid business” certainly won’t like any messing with the status quo because they too have created big, sinecure-ridden bureaucracies that provide opulent lifestyles for a legion of “do-gooders” who are generally unaccountable to anyone of any consequence.

African leaders have made a monumental mess of governing the place, despite being given huge opportunities and vast cash donations to succeed, and the only way to recovery is to acknowledge this and position competent people in both the public and private sector. The short answer to the next despot who arrives in London looking for some financial assistance is to tell him the gravy train has hit a wall and from now on help will arrive on two legs and may have a white skin.

The world needs reminding that it was the British people and their excellent systems of governance that laid the platforms for some of the most successful polities in history, which include: the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Hong Kong, and (up to a point) South Africa. It was the colonial experience that set these countries on the road to a richness that somehow missed Africa when the colonials departed.

Indeed, current events unfolding in Hong Kong provide stark proof of this premise. If colonization was so bad, why are the people of the former territory out in the streets risking their lives to retain and protect the systems bequeathed them by Britain and so abhorred by African leaders? I suggest the answer lies in the fact that most citizens, and especially the industrious working class, have experienced a sense of fair governance and know that that fairness is enshrined in the systems the colonials left behind.

What Africa desperately needs is not money but good governance and a radical reduction in the size of bureaucracies that consume most of the national wealth while providing little in return. To achieve this, they must acknowledge and accept that they need skilled British people in important positions in the public and private sector. Instead of donating huge sums of money, policy should be aimed at funding carefully selected civil servants and businesspeople to go abroad and help reestablish good governance and a more conducive business environment.

This Mr. Wessels has his heart in the right place. He really does. But, like so many white folks who look at Africa and propose well-meaning but frankly dunderheaded solutions, he is, very sadly, WRONG.

There are a number of “old Africa hands” who read this blog. One of them, the Gentleman Adventurer himself, spent a few seasons over in Uganda taking people on rafting trips and returning them more or less in one piece. He wrote a book about his adventures, which as I recall was really rather good.

His opinion on Africa, and the saving thereof, is even more trenchant and pitiless than mine.

Before I present a brief analysis of everything that is wrong with Mr. Wessels’s answer, let me first applaud him for finally presenting white Brits with something other than a bunch of tired old anti-imperialist tropes and guilt trips.

There is much to like and appreciate about what the British did. I am a child of one of the former colonies of the British Empire – the biggest and richest, by far.

Now, my parents hold a deep antipathy toward the British for stealing and taking from their people. I, however, am cut from rather different cloth, at least as far as British adventurism and intervention in their colonies is concerned. (Interestingly, my grandfather, who grew up under colonial rule, did not share his son’s far more negative view of the British and considered them to be harsh but benevolent overall.)

Unlike previous generations from the former colonies, I do not regard the British presence in these lands as evil or exploitative – no more than most colonial powers are evil and exploitative, anyway. I am more than capable of recognising that the British actually gave an enormous amount to their former colonies, and in so doing, dragged many of those same benighted nations, usually kicking and screaming, into something resembling civilisation where previously pagan superstition and endless “savage wars of peace” had ruled supreme.

As Mr. Wessels points out in his article, the true legacy of the British Empire is that of roads, railways, steam engines, electricity, modern medicine, literacy, education, jurisprudence, and – most importantly – efficient and enlightened governance.

Even Indians will, at some level, begrudgingly admit – under extreme duress – that the Pommie Bastards did in fact leave behind all of the very same systems and processes that their own country relies upon so heavily to this very day. The fact that their government is a plague upon its people, regardless of which political party happens to be in power at that time, is categorically NOT a result of British meddling and interference; it is entirely because Indians themselves elect these idiots and charlatans and thieves and crooks.

Indeed, as historian Niall Ferguson pointed out in a rather controversial article nearly 20 years ago, the British brought all of the good things of their way of life to their colonies at immense cost to themselves.

Even the most ardent anti-British statesmen of their time in India, such as Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, admitted both privately and publicly that they considered British rule to be far more enlightened and benevolent than anything that they could have expected from any other colonial power. Furthermore, they recognised that while the British were cruel and racist oppressors of the subcontinent’s people, they also did their level best to bring a relatively impartial system of justice and common canonical law to a land where superstition and village council laws held sway far too often for comfort.

So the legacy of the British Empire is not, in fact, one of pure oppression and misery. Indeed, if one actually looks at the former British colonies, one is left to remark in wonder at just how much many of them have flourished since achieving some form of independence.

As Mr. Wessels also points out, the progeny of the British Empire have become the most successful and advanced nations in the world.

Canada, Australia, and New Zealand all sent men to fight with pride, honour, and distinction beside the troops of British Kings in WWI and WWII. They are totally independent nations today with their own self-elected governments and pay only the most cursory homage to Her Majesty the Queen, but they treat, and are treated by, Britain with great dignity and respect.

Hong Kong and Singapore rapidly developed from backwater ports and mosquito-infested, typhus-plagued shitholes, into magnificent ports and trading hubs and better than First World centres of trade and commerce.

Malaysia has developed remarkably well on its own ever since achieving independence from British rule.

Even India, as backward and messed up as it is, has made immense progress over the past 75 years from what it was at the time of independence. And it has achieved those gains by relying to an extent that only the most hardcore Hindutva nationalists will deny, upon the frameworks and codicils put in place by the British.

And that is all before we get to the most successful former British colony of all – the United States of America, which almost seamlessly picked up the baton of world leadership from her mother country and oversaw the transition from Pax Britannia to Pax Americana with remarkably little fuss and strife.

When historians look back upon the waxing and waning of the British and American Empires, they will almost certainly remark with considerable wonder at how easily and swiftly the values and ideals of the British translated so successfully into those held by Americans.

Furthermore, there is one great and marvelous trait of the British people that must surely be carefully studied and understood. And that is their ability to forgive even the most dire of slights in favour of long-term strategic advantage.

The USA broke away from Britain in an awful war between cousins. There was an immense degree of bad blood and resentment on both sides after that conflict was settled with a crushing French-supported American victory. Yet the British tried very hard to give their American brethren fair terms for commerce and trade. It took another major war to get them to lay off American shipping, but eventually the two nations were able to reconcile and formed a remarkably close bond that endures to this day.

The Empire went to war in a bitter and bloody conflict against the Boers of South Africa, who were and are a culturally distinct people comprised of the descendants of both English and Dutch Protestant settlers in southern Africa. That war was truly awful in scale and scope, and is partly responsible among other things for introducing the term, “concentration camp”, to the world – because that is where the Brits put their Boer captives. Yet, within a generation, the South Africans and Rhodesians were proudly sending their sons to fight alongside the British to preserve the Empire.

Time and time and time again, the sons and daughters of the British Empire have sent their sons to fight and bleed and die for a motherland that most of those latter descendants never knew and never will know.

Why is that?

Because the British were, and to a large extent still are, a fundamentally good people.

I really do believe that, as an article of faith. I have lived in England for two extended stretches of time and I have many kind things to say about these most excellent and stolid people.

But that does not mean that they can fix Africa.

Let us be perfectly clear about one thing:

AFRICA CANNOT BE SAVED.

The best solution, as any old Africa hand will admit, is simply to let Africa sink.

This is not because any of them are unkind or indecent people. Most of those who propose this dreadfully black-pilled solution are better men than I am, and by a considerable distance.

No, they say this because there is simply no way to stop Africa from being Africa.

This is a continent where life is cheap, nutrition is poor, people are incredibly stupid, and corruption is rampant. Disease is endemic. Transportation is shitty. Wisdom is sparse. Bullshit is common.

There is a reason why the British Empire was able to work well in places that they populated with white settlers – because those settlers WERE white. This meant that those settlers brought with them three critical things:

1) Relatively high average intelligence (mean IQs of roughly 100);

2) An excellent work ethic and moral sense, instilled in them through Christianity; and

3) A strong moral desire and compulsion to make the lives of others around them better;

The first of these three critical traits is non-existent in Africa.

Sub-Saharan Africa in particular has a huge problem in this regard. The average sub-Saharan African IQ is around 70 by most standard measures. Depending on which scale you use – whether Stanford-Binet or Wechsler, but it doesn’t really matter overall – this puts the average sub-Saharan African right at or slightly above the borderline level for retardation, in the clinical sense of the word.

This is not to deny the humanity, decency, and many splendid qualities of individual Africans. There are many of them who are lovely, delightful, charming people with endless amounts of basic practical knowledge.

That does not mean that their societies are going to be able to handle complex and difficult technological innovations needed to run a modern society. And, indeed, when you look at most African countries today, very few of them can manage to do so.

The few African nations that are even marginally functional, are so because they have very sensibly kept the old British ways of doing things intact, and have not chased away their white folks. Namibia comes to mind, as does Botswana to some extent. But Zimbabwe has gone utterly down the shitter because its tinpot dictator Robert Mugabe decided to chase away its white farmers, and South Africa is rapidly following suit.

Even those African nations which are more or less functional at this point, are plagued by severe and terrible public health crises. This is the most resource-rich continent on Earth, yet it cannot successfully feed itself in an age where Man has basically figured out how to banish famine through technological innovation and biological engineering of crops.This is a continent full of countries where diseases such as malaria, typhus, tuberculosis, dengue, and especially AIDS reap a terrible toll every year – while most of these diseases have long since been exterminated in the West.

It is well past time that well-meaning but deluded Westerners face an awful but necessary truth:

Africa cannot be saved, because of Africans.

I realise and fully accept that the HBD theory which argues that IQ is a highly deterministic factor in the wealth and poverty of nations, has some serious problems. It most assuredly does, because it cannot adequately explain how a nation like Colombia (average IQ: 80) can maintain and preserve a level of civilisation roughly comparable to that of its imperial ancestor, Spain (average IQ: high 90s).

But there is no getting away from the fact that nations with average IQs of around 70 or so seem to have some serious problems simply maintaining basic services and just keeping the lights on.

The final major problem with Mr. Wessels’s idea is that the British of today are not the British who built their incredible and magnificent Empire.

As I have said, I have spent two long spells in London, with many years spent in the USA between those stints. I visited London again back in late August of 2019 and have observed many changes during my many years spent visiting the Sceptred Isle.

The most poignant observation that I can make is that the British people have lost, perhaps forever, the spirit that once made theirs the greatest nation, and then the greatest empire, in the world.

The British Empire was born out of a combination of enterprising spirit, Christian morality, industrial innovation, greed, mercantilism, and population growth.

Not ONE of these factors is present today.

The enterprising spirit of Britons is long gone. I can see it in their faces when I go to the UK. They have gone soft and become weak, pudgy, squidgy, more interested in the latest must-have gadget made using slave labour in China to keep themselves fat and happy and blind, than in going out to conquer the world.

Their Christian morality is a joke. Their Church of England is one of the most cucked-out, converged, pathetically Churchian of all of the denominations out there. The Anglicans refuse to condemn gay “marriage” – indeed, a number of Anglican parishes in both the UK and the USA have openly gay and “married” bishops, as well as female pastors, in direct and blatant violation of both Scripture and basic sense.

Their industrial innovation is still there, sort of, but they are a very far cry from the nation that created and drove the Industrial Revolution forward. Today their tech sector is far more inwardly focused and has long since been leapfrogged in most respects by the Americans.

Their greed is certainly there, but the difference between the Brits of the time of Sir Stamford Raffles and today is that Raffles, the gentleman thief, was as interested in enriching his own country as he was in enriching himself. Today’s British robber-barons aren’t even British, they are Jewish, and they certainly are not interested in enriching Britain.

As for their population growth… they don’t really have any. Their population fertility rate is about 1.871, which is well below the “replacement rate” level of 2.1 and perilously close to the “event horizon” level of 1.6 children per woman.

If Britain were to do as Mr. Wessels suggested and ship their best and brightest off to Africa to rule benevolently over the natives, as Rudyard Kipling once suggested in his classic poem, “The White Man’s Burden”, we would very quickly realise that the modern British Millennial administrator simply would not have the stomach for it – quite literally, in fact, given how nasty some of the African digestive disorders can be.

Not only that, but having been weaned and raised on an unending diet of anti-imperialist propaganda designed specifically to make a white British boy feel horribly guilty about being white and male, said Brit would be totally unable to deal with the very aggressive realities of the Dark Continent.

Instead of the old colonial adventurers who so inspired young boys in the stories of H. Rider Haggard’s Alan Quartermain and Rudyard Kipling’s books, we would get effete soy-latte-sipping numpties who would be tripping over themselves to apologise to the natives constantly for every possible perceived slight.

This is precisely the wrong way to go about administering places in Africa, where strength is respected and might makes right.

So once again we are left with a bleak, dire, and terrible, but inevitable, conclusion:

Let Africa Sink.

It is heartless. It is cruel. It is deeply depressing. It is astonishingly black-pilled.

And it is nonetheless absolutely true.