AFRICAN LEADERSHIP

Is his eventual second coming the only thing that can save Africa?

What qualities does an African leader must have?

What made Selassie so successful where others failed?

>Selassie
He was a fucking incompetent despot

Sankara was the greatest African leader

Lumumba was clever but he had a big mouth and too many enemies

I don't know who that guy is but he looks cool, like a Disney movie villain.

>successful

Saw his country get colonized even though his predecessors carved out alliances and established routes to modernization.

Failed at every attempt to build his empire

Couldn't consolidate for shit

Got killed by commies after Somalia nearly annexed the east of his empire, which was was again established by his predecessors.

>African
>Successful
Maybe if they ever evolve into something resembling human beings.

>Save Africa
The greatest African leader of all time was Ian Smith. Rhodesia was the only example of a sub-Saharan African country that got remotely close to being a success story. This was because of:
>1. White rule and white ownership of property
Argue all you like about race and IQ. The fact is that the Bantu were and still are thousands of years behind whitey. Running complex, modern industry and agriculture requires an enormous foundation of philosophy, science, law, values... everything that makes civilization, well, civilization. Regardless of genetics, you can't expect a people who hadn't even adopted the wheel 2 generations ago to magically turn into Europeans just because you've given them some Western tech (which will rust to uselessness) and a flag (which will become the emblem of a tribal gang which rapes the population in 0 time.)
>2. Virtual independence from the British Empire since its inception
Rhodesia was founded by a cobbled-together bunch of farmers, adventurers, exiles, prospectors in the 1890s. They were just a bunch of people looking for land to farm and minerals to mine - they had no grand, imperial plans to civilize the local population, and they never saw eye to eye with the Imperial Government (which was at the time fucking up South Africa beyond repair.) For this reason, they were happy to reach peaceful agreements with the local Africans, who benefited from the stability (and, later, employment and technology) they brought. Right until the end of Rhodesia, a huge proportion of the country was 'Tribal Trust Land', where Africans could live their traditional lives undisturbed - while receiving the boon of government protection. It was a near-ideal compromise. Western, capitalist, progressive, productive civilization was taking root in the heart of Africa, with no need for cruelty or oppression. Of course, the fucking Marxists had to screw it all up.
t. Saffer descendant of original Rhodesian settlers

someone actually took time and effort to post this...

But Rhodesia was racist, which makes it evil.

>Emperor
>Doesn't have an empire

ikr, it fucking makes me sick sometimes when I read about that country or go through my mom's old albums. Literally destroyed by the unlimited democracy meme.
It wasn't even racist. Possibly the most racist thing you could pin on them would be the segregated schools. Yes, blacks were given poorer quality education than whites. But that education was still miles better than what they were getting anywhere else in Africa, and would become a major and lasting strength of the country even after it turned commie. The Zimbabwean blacks I've met are much better spoken, polite and knowledgeable than 'muh rainbow nation' blacks. As for the Rhodesian franchise, well, it wasn't limited by race. It was limited by a competency test and a property ownership qualification. The Western Marxist sympathizers and liberals and left-activists were willing to literally run a proud, prosperous little nation into the mud (via sanctions) just to extend the fucking franchise to tribal blacks who were not remotely compatible with, were not interested in and did not want, unrestricted democratic rule. They only voted for Mugabe because his thugs corralled them into the booths and threatened them.

>Sankara was the greatest African leader
lmao

that's not General Taylor

Actually it was less racist than South Africa as the apartheid was less strict in Rhodesia.

>RREE JUST LET ME KILL NIGGERS
-you

That's not what he said at all. He actually had a well thought out post about Rhodesia vs. majority rule.

>second coming
Third

>RREEEE JUST LET ME KILL COMMIES
- Me
Most of the Rhodesian armed forces in the Bush War were black. They were black men, who fought willingly and bravely alongside the whites to defend their country and way of life against looting, drugged-up, cowardly, raping, good-for-nothing, communist niggers. Unfortunately, those niggers had the support of the entire developed world.

>What made Selassie so successful where others failed?
Successfully cucked by both Mussolini and the Derg you mean?

>tfw Solomon dynasty rules for thousands of years until recently
>several thousand years of history and traditions gone
i hate commies so fucking much

Look up Paul Kagame.

he's a dictator that rigs elections.

Litterally what. Zimbabwean nationalists are not commies

I read Dancing in the Glory of Monsters, and it made him sound like a massive autist who ruined everything.

>invade country of 60 million people
>don't spend any time thinking about what will replace the existing government
>don't spend any time working with the well established political opposition in the Congo
>take some burnout from the 60s, put him in charge, and then have your occupying army start randomly harassing people on the streets of the capital city for no reason
>less than a year later, invade the country a second time to depose the guy you put in charge of it
>the coalition you raised to put that guy in charge in the first place now splits, with half of them supporting you and half of them supporting the existing government, so that that way the surrounding countries can squeeze as much money as possible out of the Congo
>resulting stalemate kills more people than any war since WW2

Kagame had a very valid reason to invade the Congo. Also his domestic policy is quite effective. Just because you read the book (a very good book) and only got half the Kagame story doesn't it make it the prevailing narrative.

>great leader
>couldn't handle the political situation for shit
>couldn't diplomacy for crap

no

See, he did it twice.

This leads me to believe that he fucked up the first time.

What's a good book to read up on this stuff? Preferably something without excessive moralfaggotry and humanist bullshit.

Everyone in these threads is going to recommend Dancing in the Glory of Monsters.

That's because it's really good.

>Dancing in the Glory of Monsters
Does this actually deal with Selassie? I thought that book was about the 90's and early 2000's

It doesn't.

It's about African leaders though, I didn't know what you were specifically asking for.