Djibouti and The French

I was recently offered an opportunity to take a side trip to Djibouti, a small country in Africa. It didn't work out, and truthfully, I don't mind. While I want to visit that continent someday, I'm pretty sure that country isn't one of the places I want to visit. It's very poor and the locals speak French. Which got me to thinking about the powers that colonized Africa.

It brings into relief the fundamental difference in the way the French colonies and the British colonies were governed, and their fate once the colonial powers left. (I discount Liberia, since while it was set up by the US as a repatriation point for African slaves, it was never really managed by the US in any meaningful way).

Anyways, it seems as if the core difference is that the French did most of the work themselves, and the Brits delegated the natives to do most of the work.

This may make it seem as if the French were "nicer", but in truth, it did a lot more damage. First, the population was left with no skill set in building or maintaining infrastructure or operation of government services. So when the French left, there was no one on the ground who had the training necessary to keep the lights on. Yes, there were basic technicians and clerks, but few if any trained local professionals. Which meant the systems fell into disrepair almost immediately, and have been, in most cases, steadily devolving ever since. I won't go into the basic issues with French technologies or corruption issues, but suffice it to say, pretty much anything made by Peugeot is a POS and bribery as a way of life didn't help issues. In truth, the French weren't out to expand an empire. They were there strictly for the mineral/agricultural resources, and couldn't give a shit whether the people survived them or not.

The Brits, otoh, when they left, did leave behind a trained and capable workforce who could run the country and maintain/create new infrastructure. They were out to increase the Empire, and that meant building a capable workforce who could eventually contribute taxes etc. This meant that the Brits invested time in training the people of their colonies and instilling the sense of pride and homogeneity needed to create a new nation. By rights, the Brit former colonies in most cases had a very good chance of making it. Unfortunately in almost all cases tribalism and local greed have been slowly dragging down what should be prosperous nations that have both mineral wealth and fertile soil.

Regards,
-Bouncer-