The Truth Behind the American Revolution: Gerald Horne

The successful 1776 revolt against British rule in North America has been hailed almost universally as a great step forward for humanity.  But the Africans then living in the colonies overwhelmingly sided with the British.  In this trailblazing book, Gerald Horne shows that in the prelude to 1776, the abolition of slavery seemed all but inevitable in London, delighting Africans as much as it outraged slaveholders, and sparking the colonial revolt. 

Prior to 1776, anti-slavery sentiments were deepening throughout Britain and in the Caribbean, rebellious Africans were in revolt.  For European colonists in America, the major threat to their security was a foreign invasion combined with an insurrection of the enslaved.   It was a real and threatening possibility that London would impose abolition throughout the colonies—a possibility the founding fathers feared would bring slave rebellions to their shores.  To forestall it, they went to war. 

The so-called Revolutionary War, Horne writes, was in part a counter-revolution, a conservative movement that the founding fathers fought in order to preserve their right to enslave others.  The Counter-Revolution of 1776 brings us to a radical new understanding of the traditional heroic creation myth of the United States

TRUTHS BEHIND AFRICAN POVERTY

The Misperceptions About African Poverty from 

From FONDAD: Forum of Debt and Development 

FULL ARTICLE 

The era of structural adjustment, which can be dated approximately to the last two decades of the twentieth century, was a failure for African economic development. Africa was the only major developing country region with negative per capita growth during 1980 to 2000; its health conditions are by far the worst on the planet; its soaring population is exacerbating ecological stresses; and despite the policy-based development lending of structural adjustment, it remains mired in poverty and debt. 

What went wrong?

In the extreme interpretation of the Washington Consensus by its proponents, as well as by its critics, its unambiguous promise is that if a developing country were to implement conservative macroeconomic policies while expanding the role of the private market at the expense of the state, then it would achieve sustained high growth rates on its own. By extension, if a developing country is failing to grow, the problem must be either macroeconomic mismanagement or a hindering of the private market expansion in the country, usually attributed to corruption or more broadly “bad governance”.   

A BETTER EXPLANATION

A better explanation of Africa’s poverty trap would move beyond the limitations of the Washington Consensus to recognise that before privatisation and market liberalisation can unleash private sector-led economic growth in Africa, a massive amount of public investment in health, education, and infrastructure is required, which African countries cannot afford. Africa’s poverty trap is the outcome of a complex web of many interactive factors, including structural conditions and socio-political history:

• Very high transport costs and small markets; 
• Low-productivity agriculture;  
• Very high disease burden;  
• A legacy of adverse geopolitics;  
• Very slow diffusion of technology from abroad.

FULL ARTICLE 

CLICK HERE TO BUY BOOKS ABOUT AFRICAN DEBT

Featured Book: Confessions of an Economic Hit Man

Youtube Video: Apologies of an Economic Hit Man

From: Wikipedia Article: Neocolonialism

The political-science term neo-colonialism became popular usage in reference to the continued European control — economic, cultural, etc. — of African countries that had been decolonized in the aftermath of the Second World War (1939–45). Kwame Nkrumah, president of Ghana (1960–66), coined the term neo-colonialism in the book Neo-Colonialism, the Last Stage of Imperialism (1965)^[5][6] As a political scientist, Nkrumah theoretically developed and extended, to the post–War 20th century, the socio-economic and political arguments presented by Lenin in the pamphlet Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism (1917), about 19th-century imperialism as the logical extension of geopolitical power to meet the financial investment needs of the political economy of capitalism.^[7]

Kwame Nkrumah
http://therisingcontinent.wordpress.com
/2012/07/05/kilombo-2012-annual-event-at-woezor-hotel-ho-ghana-from-24th-to-26th-august-2012/
dr-kwame-nkrumah-ghanas-first-president/

 In Neo-Colonialism, the Last Stage of Imperialism, Kwame Nkrumah said that:In place of colonialism, as the main instrument of imperialism, we have today neo-colonialism . . . [which] like colonialism, is an attempt to export the social conflicts of the capitalist countries. . . . The result of neo-colonialism is that foreign capital is used for the exploitation rather than for the development of the less developed parts of the world. Investment, under neo-colonialism, increases, rather than decreases, the gap between the rich and the poor countries of the world. The struggle against neo-colonialism is not aimed at excluding the capital of the developed world from operating in less developed countries. It is aimed at preventing the financial power of the developed countries being used in such a way as to impoverish the less developed.^[8]

CLICK HERE TO BUY BOOKS ABOUT AFRICAN DEBT