Honestly, would Africa be better off if it had never been decolonised?

Honestly, would Africa be better off if it had never been decolonised?

Imperialism is always a problem.

Depends on the criteria. It would have better infrastructure and institutions but lack sovereignty.

Personally I think the free market would have fixed things

The west african kingdoms were very open to european commerce patterns even after slaves stopped being a commodity

Absolutely

yes, without question

Yes they would not be oppressed by human civilization and could live like the savages they are forever.

it would have been better never to colonize in the first place. Of the options decolonize and never decolonized, both are shit desu

Why on earth would it be? Atrocity has always had a home in Africa.
If you seriously think life in Africa was better before colonization you probably believe in noble savages and think Roots is a piece of historical literature.
Of all the absolute brainlets in this thread so far, you are without a doubt the worst

The internal structure of each empire was different and as such decolonization was handled differently. The question therefore has no simple answer.

Ultimately though nationalism and a desire for self governance would have kicked the Europeans out of Africa violently like in Algeria/Angola/Mozambique if peaceful decolonization hadn't occurred.

>Algeria/Angola/Mozambique
Would never exist were it not for colonialism infact most of the continent would be stuck in the stone age for centuries maybe millenia while the few kingdoms are in the bronze age forever.

Yes. They would be stable countries. Free? fuck no but freedom is a meme if you aren't prepared to work hard AND smart.
Even with full support from their mother countries?

>implying African "nationalism" was not just soviet pawns

Friend...

Should have just said "stayed colonized," ADHD brainlets skimmed right over the "de."

Second.
The best imperialism is the spanish one.

Even the lowliest African nations were at least iron-age, and many had gunpowder weapons. Also, Algeria wasn't nearly that far behind and was already established as a nation.

>Even the lowliest African nations were at least iron-age
Yh in weaponry and thats it, they were socially more primitive than Sumerians.
>gunpowder
Yh the ones controlled by non black muslims not the jungle shitholes like the Kongo Kingdom or the Benin/Ghana Empire.

Benin had contact with the Portuguese and had access to guns and gunpowder. Their response to Britain's Punitive expedition was to say the least, less than stellar. Even Ghana had guns via trade. What do you mean by socially primitive?

I think you dont really understand what you are talking about:

Decolonization was a very complex and long process that wasnt simply "the civilized whites up and left". It rather was the long process of setting up a political or militant resistance against the colonial administration; the international backing of these movements by either the S.U. or the U.S.
Also consider the rise in militancy and hatred against white nationals; combined with the increasimg costs of mantaining such systems were increasing as the people got access to guns and ammo.

>Algeria
>bronze age

So the Benin empire was problamatic?

No, they can't do anything for themselves

Decolonization in and of itself isn't a bad thing; how it was handled was terrible. It would've worked if the European powers had actually taken a couple decades to create and entrench democracies, develop robust economies, and had their colonial companies progressively sell off shares to local industrialists as their economy improved.
However, they did the exact opposite. They hastily threw together provisional governments and GTFO, taking all their industrial assets with them. Unsurprisingly, this vast political void was quickly filled with feuding warlords, resurgent ethnic rivalries, and eventually kleptocratic military dictatorships. The economies remained relatively unindustrialized and reliant on mineral wealth, which foreign businesses quickly took advantage of.
The only real exceptions in sub-Saharan Africa were South Africa and Rhodesia, because they had relatively large white settler populations who had been there for decades (if not centuries), so there were already Western-backed economies there. However, they soon collapsed into instability and ethnic strife. Rhodesia was doing fairly well even after the creation of Zimbabwe until Mugabe expelled all whites from parliament and began seizing land. South Africa, rather than work at mending race relations, instead chose to hold onto the Apartheid system for several decades too long, leading to more ethnic tension and 'shock therapy' integration that's been degenerating ever since Mandela's corpse cooled.

Considering they were on the coast of Nigeria, they probably had thousands of ethnicities under their oppressive boot.
So, yes.

It would have less infrastructures but better sovereignity, you mean

Not him, its true that Algeria would never exist in that shape without colonies. When the french conquered it in 1830, "Algeria" was only Algiers and its surroundings.
Algeria is a pure French creation, nothing is sane in its frontlines. And Im not "pol" Dont know what I have algerian friends but the truth must be said

No it would be full of backwards tribes and some kingdom states and islamic states. It wouldnt even have simple infastructure or the capacity to compete economically on the world stage.

Bump

This, Algeria was just the Regency of Algiers (which was where the Barbary Pirates were based until the Yanks BTFO them in the 1800s) and a bunch of Berber tribes that couldn't be further from a centrally organized government.

t. learned about Algeria after my great-grandfather served there during the Algerian War

>would Africa be better off
Better for whom?
>if it had never been decolonised
Unlikely. It just wasn't part of the political climate of the time. Both super powers at the time wanted to stop the direct "imperialism" and propagated memes of "freedom fo da peepuls" and "self(tm)-determination".