We thank the organizers of the Conference of the Assembly of African Peoples for the friendly invitation they kindly extended to our movement.We would like to express our gratitude to His Excellency Prime Minister Nkrumah and to the people of Ghana for the fraternal welcome given us.

We would also like to thank the representatives of the independent peoples present here for their continued defense of the Congo in international tribunals.

I hope they will regard these words, delivered in the name of all our compatriots, as an expression of our sincere gratitude.

The Present Situation in the Congo
Up until the end of last year, there was no legislative council any where in the Congo. All the organs of the country were — and still are — consultative.

Since January of this year, the political structure of the country has undergone modification, the most important change being the creation of communes in certain cities in the Congo.

Legislation to that effect has been passed with regard to rural districts and will be applied in the course of the coming year.

But the new decrees concerning the organization of cities and rural districts have not yet granted these institutions complete autonomy.

In the urban councils, as in all the other consultative organs of the country, a system of representation has been instituted that gives the European minority and the African majority an equal number of seats. There is no need to underscore the fact that this is anti- democratic.

Realizing the progress that has been made by the various segments of the population and taking note of the demands repeatedly put forward by its subjects, Belgium has recently sent to the Congo a commission charged with the task of acquainting itself with the aspirations of the people at first hand.

We for our part believe that on this occasion the country clearly expressed its preference for self-determination.

The Belgian government has promised to deliver its solemn decision on this subject next month.

Our Program of Action
The Congolese National Movement, which we represent at this great conference, is a political movement, founded on October 5, 1958.

This date marks a decisive step for the Congolese people as they move toward emancipation. I am happy to say that the birth of our movement was warmly received by the people for this reason.

The fundamental aim of our movement is to free the Congolese people from the colonialist regime and earn them their independence.

We base our action on the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man — rights guaranteed to each and every citizen of humanity by the United Nations Charter — and we are of the opinion that the Congo, as a human society, has the right to join the ranks of free peoples.

We wish to see a modern democratic state established in our country, which will grant its citizens freedom, justice, social peace, tolerance, well-being, and equality, with no discrimination whatsoever.

In a motion we recently transmitted to the minister of the Congo in Brussels, we clearly stipulated — as did many other compatriots of ours — that the Congo could no longer be treated as a colony to be either exploited or settled, and that its attainment of independence was the sine qua non condition of peace.

In our actions aimed at winning the independence of the Congo, we have repeatedly proclaimed that we are against no one, but rather are simply against domination, injustices and abuses, and merely want to free ourselves of the shackles of colonialism and all its consequences.

These injustices and the stupid superiority complex that the colonialists make such a display of, are the causes of the drama of the West in Africa, as is clearly evident from the disturbing reports of the other delegates.
Along with this struggle for national liberation waged with calm and dignity, our movement opposes, with every power at its command, the balkanization of national territory under any pretext whatsoever.

From all the speeches that have preceded ours, something becomes obvious that is, to say the least, odd, and that all colonized people have noticed: the proverbial patience and good-heartedness that Africans have given proof of for thousands of years, despite persecution, extortions, discrimination, segregation, and tortures of every sort.

The winds of freedom currently blowing across all of Africa have not left the Congolese people indifferent. Political awareness, which until very recently was latent, is now becoming manifest and assuming outward expression, and it will assert itself even more forcefully in the months to come. We are thus assured of the support of the masses and of the success of the efforts we are undertaking.

This historical conference, which puts us in contact with experienced political figures from all the African countries and from all over the world, reveals one thing to us: despite the boundaries that separate us, despite our ethnic differences, we have the same awareness, the same soul plunged day and night in anguish, the same anxious desire to make this African continent a free and happy continent that has rid itself of unrest and of fear and of any sort of colonialist domination.

We are particularly happy to see that this conference has set as its objective the struggle against all the internal and external factors standing in the way of the emancipation of our respective countries and the unification of Africa.

Among these factors, the most important are colonialism, imperialism, tribalism, and religious separatism, all of which seriously hinder the flowering of a harmonious and fraternal African society.

This is why we passionately cry out with all the delegates:

Down with colonialism and imperialism!
Down with racism and tribalism!
And long live the Congolese nation, long live independent Africa!

(1958) Patrice Lumumba, “Speech at Accra”

Patrice Lumumba’s “Speech at Accra” explains the movement of the Congolese people as they move towards emancipation from the colonist regime of Belgium. His people of the Congo are being oppressed by the Belgians, and the action to start the movement is based on the Universal Declaration of the Right of Man. Although this idea comes from a colonizer country, the French, it should be implemented within any country because of the idea guarantees rights to every citizen. This source relates to the segments we learned about independence and emancipation. Those themes are prevalent because the colonizers were extremely racist and bigots to the people of Africa. Patrice Lumumba is a prominent figure when it comes to the independence of the Congo. The Congolese are not rebelling against anyone in particular, such as Belgium’s, but the injustices and domination of the colonizers. 

“We, the black students of South Africa, believing that the black man can no longer allow definitions that have been imposed upon him by an arrogant white world concerning his being and his destiny and that the black student has a moral obligation to articulate the needs and aspirations of the black community hereby declare that:

A. We black students are:

1. an integral part of the black oppressed community before we are students coming out of and studying under the oppressive restrictions of a racist education;

2. committed to a more disciplined involvement in the intellectual and physical world and to the consistent search of the black truth;

3. committed to work towards the building of our people and to the winning of the struggle for liberation and guided by the central purpose of service to the black community on every technical and social level.

B. We, therefore, reject the whole sphere of racist education and commit ourselves to:
1. the intellectual and physical development of our community and to the realization of liberation for black peoples of South Africa;

2. the definition that education in South Africa is unashamedly political and we, therefore, believe that black education is tied to the liberation of the black people of the world.

C. We hereby commit ourselves to:
1. the assertion, manifestation and development of a sense of awareness politically, socially and economically among the black community;

2. the belief that black students should maintain a spirit of fraternity amongst themselves, free from the prejudice of white fallacies by virtue of their common oppression;

3. attempting to break away from the traditional order of subordination to whites in education and to refuse to be educated for them;

4. encourage and promote black literature relevant to our struggle;

5. ensure that our education will further the preservation and promotion of what is measured in our culture and our historical experience.

SASO: Statement of Objectives

Preamble
We, the black students of institutions of higher learning in South Africa believing:
1. that black students in South Africa have unique problems and aspirations pertaining to them;

2. that it is necessary for black students to consolidate their ranks if their aspirations are to be realized;

3. that there is a crying need in South Africa for black students to re—assert their pride and group identity,

Therefore
Adopt this constitution in the belief that unity and positive reawakening will result among the black students of South Africa.

Objects
1. To promote contact and practical co—operation among black students in South Africa.

2. To represent black students nationally and internationally.

3. To establish contact among South African students.

SASO Policy Manifesto
1. SASO is a black student organization working for the liberation of the black man first from psychologi— cal oppression by themselves through inferiority complex and, secondly, from the physical one accruing out of living in a white racist society.

2. We define black people as those who are by law or tradition, politically, economically and socially discriminated against as a group in the South African society and identifying themselves as a unit in the struggle towards the realization of their aspirations.

3. ASO believes that
a. South Africa is a country in which both black and white live and shall continue to live together;

b. that the white man must be made aware that one is either part of the solution or part of the problem;

c. that, in this context, because of the privileges accorded to them by legislation and because of their continual maintenance of an oppressive regime, whites have defined themselves as part of the problem;

d. that, therefore, we believe that in all matters relating to the struggle towards realizing our aspirations, whites must be excluded;

e. that this attitude must not be interpreted by blacks to imply ‘anti—whitism’ but merely a more positive way of attaining a normal situation in South Africa;

f. that in pursuit of this direction, therefore, personal contact with whites, though it should not be legislated against, must be discouraged, especially where it tends to militate against the beliefs we hold dear.

4.
a. SASO upholds the concept of black consciousness and the drive towards black awareness as the most logical and significant means of ridding ourselves of the shackles that bind us to perpetual servitude.

b. SASO defines black consciousness as follows:

Black consciousness is an attitude of mind, a way life
i. The basic tenet of black consciousness is that the black man must reject all value systems that seek to make him a foreigner in the country of his birth and reduce his basic human dignity.

ii. The black man must build up his own value systems, see himself as self—defined and not defined by others.

iii. The concept of black consciousness implies the awareness by the black people of power they wield as a group, both economically and politically and hence group cohesion and solidarity are important facets of black consciousness.

iv. Black consciousness will always be enhanced by the totality of involvement of the oppressed people, hence the message of black consciousness has to be spread to reach all sections of the black community.

c. SASO accepts the premise that before the black people should join the open society, they should first close their ranks, to form themselves into a solid group to oppose the definite racism that is meted out by the white society, to work out their direction clearly and bargain from a position of strength. SASO believes that a truly open society can only be achieved by blacks.

5. SASO believes that the concept of integration cannot be realized in an atmosphere of suspicion and mistrust. Integration does not mean an assimilation of blacks into an already established set of norms drawn up and motivated by white society. Integration implies free participation by individuals in a given society and proportionate contribution to the joint culture of the society by all constituent groups. Following this definition, therefore, SASO believes that integration does not need to be enforced or worked for. Integration follows automatically when the doors to prejudice are closed through the attainment of a just and free society.

6. SASO believes that all groups allegedly working for ‘integration’ in South Africa … and here we note in particular the Progressive Party and other liberal institutions … are not working for the kind of integration that would be acceptable to the black man. Their attempts are directed merely at relaxing certain oppressive legislations and to allow blacks into a white—type society.

7. SASO, while upholding these beliefs, nevertheless wishes to state that black consciousness should not be associated with any particular political party or Slogan.”

(1969) SASO Black Students’ Manifesto

The Saso Black Students’ Manifesto occurred in 1969. These students were from South Africa and believed that the black man cannot allow the definitions and stereotypes of the white world describing their destiny. They state that they are going to reject racist education and commit themselves to the liberation for the people of South Africa. They will revive their truth and marriage and rid the ways of the colonizers. This document relates to our class because the discussion of education was prominent. It was used to manipulate and change the people of Africa. Within their manifesto, they will become aware politically, socially, and economically among the black community. This manifesto shows that Africans are not going to follow the Colonial ways, discussing how they must reject all value systems that seek to make him foreign in his own country. This means rejecting Christianity, and other teachings in school, which will make the citizens of South Africa stronger. 

The book Machete Season by Jean Hatzfeld discussed the life of the killers in Rwanda during the 1994 genocide. This genocide is due to ethnic tensions between the Tutsi and the Hutu. The Hutu was the group that started the genocide because of the plane crash of president Cyprien Ntaryamira. Shortly after that, the Hutu militia groups started slaughtering Tutsi’s because they blamed them for destroying the plane. Hatzfeld discussed their life, he had interviews and also collected many testimonies in which these men and discussed why and how they were able to kill innocent people. His book is constructed of a collection of ten members and their testimonies. These testimonies give gruesome details, portray the violence, as well as the psychological manipulation of these men by the government, but those reasons should not help justify what these, as well as many Hutus’, did to the Tutsi people.

When I first read the preface of the book I was extremely surprised when I realized that Hatzfeld was able to interview the Hutu men that were convicted for killing Tutsi individuals during the Rwanda genocide. Within his book, I thought he did a great job arranging the chapters, to show the progression as well as the lead up to the Rwanda Civil War. Also, I found it interesting that right after the independence from Belgium, the first genocide of the Tutsi people occurs. Then after years after that genocide, the Genocide in 1994 begins. The Hutu men had been manipulated to a point of in which their way of thinking was done by orders from others. At the beginning of the book, Hatzfeld explains how even moderate Hutus’ were killed. Although they were not Tutsi’s they were still manipulated to a point where if people were not willing to join the Interahamwe they would be murdered. 

The manipulation can be seen in the chapter where the ten men describe how it was all organized. They explained how there was one rule, and it was to kill Tutsi’s.[1] I found this interesting because the people within the Interahamwe had no other orders other than to kill. They went off on their own or with their “gang” as the men interviewed in Machete Season called themselves. It was so simple, that there was no need to train or create structure within the different groups hunting the Tutsi’s. The militia received new members across Rwanda because anyone who rebelled against the Hutu’s were also killed. 

While reading the chapter that describes the first time each individual kills their first Tutsi was breathtaking. I was surprised by Fulgence’s explanation. He stated that he didn’t consider whacking a mama on the head, because she was basically dead.[2] However, when he stormed the church and hit a woman, saw the blood, and felt it on his blade, there was instant remorse and sickness. I think that was a part that showed there were individuals who knew what they were doing was wrong at the beginning. However, they could not leave or abandon the Interahamwe because it would result in them dying as well. Jean-Baptiste and Pio also described their first killings as painful, and both drank after them.[3] Pio described that his mind went cloudy after his kill. To me, this shows how they would become accustomed to killing people. Eventually, they will kill many Tutsis’, and since they have trained their brain to accept that it is okay to do these things. Then, their brains would lose that sense of remorse and be clouded by orders from those within the Interahamwe.

Later in the book, I like how Hatzfeld explains how the Interahamwe were being compared to the Nazi’s due to their totalitarian regime that had taken control. The Tutsi people can be compared to Jews since both groups of their time period faced significant discrimination. Since the government was run by Hutu’s there was justification and support from authorities and judges to do what they are doing. However, what they did is not a justification to kill innocent people. These people were targeted because of their ethnicity, which was immoral and should not have supported the genocide. 

Hatzfeld does an amazing job when describing the call for help from whites who were residing within Rwanda as this genocide began to break out. For example, in his chapter, “The Second Chamber”, he explains how UN soldiers were going into towns and extracting the white individuals within them.[4] This included Nyamata where three nuns and five priests were taken from the town in armored vehicles. This shows that the members of the United Nations understood the issues and problems that were going to arise due to the shot down the plane of their president. A Swiss woman explained to UN soldiers that she wanted to bring Tutsi colleagues of hers back, and the soldiers replied that they have to remain in Rwanda with their brothers and sisters.[5] To me, this shows that European countries did not want to get involved in this conflict. UN leaders and officials had made it clear to the soldiers that they were to not help Rwandans, even though a genocide was brewing.

I personally find this sickening. It shows the inhumanities of the world, especially those who countries who were colonizers and had influences in creating these tensions between ethnic groups. If a country were to help one side, it would show that they left an underlying problem. This can be seen with the first genocide of Rwanda right after Belgium was removed from power. Belgium left diplomats instilled in Rwanda, which shows they tried staying connected to a country in which they created mass problems. However, the main point of this book is to show how the participants in the genocide cannot justify their killings, and that it was inhumane to do them. 

As time continued and the world noticed the immoral and gruesome acts that were happening the Tutsi people, the Hutu were defeated. The men who had been a part of the Interahamwe were now prisoners. To the Tutsi’s this was a blessing, they would no longer have to hind in the swaps or refuge in a foreign country because of the Interahamwe. However, these killers as Hatzfeld puts it would only talk within the prison walls. He explains how Ignace grumbled about being in the book, and would not give further interviews.[6] This to me seems like he was ashamed of what he did. All the innocent people he had murdered could not be justified, and therefore, he did not want to be associated with the genocide. Also, because his neighbors and others would look down upon him. 

I thought that the book Machete Season gave a very good perspective as to what it would have been like to be a Tutsi or Hutu living while the genocide was occurring. The morbid details and gruesome stories about how these ten men and probably many others killed innocent people. It shows how psychologically clouded and manipulating one’s mind can be. Hatzfeld created a book that shows the minds of the killers and explains how their actions cannot be justified. He also hints that more could have been done by the UN and other countries to stop the genocide earlier, which then would have prevented the eight hundred thousand to one million deaths that ensued. 

---

[1] Jean Hatzfeld, Machete Season (New York, NY: Farrar, Stratus and Giroux LLC, 2003), 10-12.

[2] (Ibid, 21).

[3] (Ibid, 23-24)

[4] Jean Hatzfeld, Machete Season (New York, NY: Farrar, Stratus and Giroux LLC, 2003), 88.

[5] (Ibid, 89).

[6] Jean Hatzfeld, Machete Season (New York, NY: Farrar, Stratus and Giroux LLC, 2003), 127-128.

Dambisa Moyo’s speech at the University of Richmond explained the many problems with receiving aid and how it has led to problematic effects in Africa. She focuses on the development and states that most governments in Africa have corruption. The aid that has been given by the counties who previously colonized them is not being fully used for the African people. Another good point she makes is the idea that if African leaders do not care about African development or that countries citizens, there is no point for individual Americans to care or leaders of more wealthy countries to give money. There is a tendency that African governments and presidents are not leading this change, which incentives people from European nations to come help. This then leads to the misconception that Africans do not care about their country, when in fact, those in government need to be the ones questioned about not caring. She discusses how the aid is nice, however, it could stop or slow the process of granting business money due to the government is going to rely on aid rather than collecting taxes, an stimulating an economy. Also, aid creates inflation, which decreases African currencies and that has many effects. Without money no one can invest, without investments, there is no development. This then leads to African countries not having stable economies which will contribute to poverty. These statements made by her relate to our class and show that the perspective of Africa not developing for centuries is true. I thought her speech was very interesting because she explained the economic views. Even though African counties have their own form of government, it shows that those colonial ideas of exploiting anything to make a profit are instilled within presidents and governments in Africa. I believe that if aid is given, and the corruption of these governments is brought to the worlds attention, Africa can soon develop and stimulate an economy. But until those individuals have to show where the aid has gone, corruption and underdevelopment will continue.

2/26/2020

The colonial system was very detrimental to the cultures of Africa due to changes within their education, infrastructure, and agriculture. The colonial education systems implemented resulted in the disappearance in African cultures and values. Areas that had large white settler populations implemented racist school systems designed to “civilize” Africans so that their cultures would change one generation after another. The Christian education system neglected Africans because most followed Islam. This was discrimination against their religious practices. The infrastructure did not cater to Africans. White settlers often had access to significantly better resources. For example, the infant mortality rate was significantly higher among the locals compared to the European settlers. African social services were highly disproportionate with 40 million Africans relying on a total of 52 hospitals while 4000 Europeans had up to 12 hospitals to receive treatment at. The average amount of patients that a single doctor in some areas had to tend to ranged up to 40 thousand. This can be seen with about 65 percent of native children dying before the age of 2. Colonial agricultural practices were also designed to be repressive and exploited. The level of industry that was achieved by African farmers was well below what it could have been, due to colonial overseers and plantation owners placing limitations on the machinery Africans could use. The lion’s share of the work was done by hand, the Europeans took almost all of the profits, and when nutrient or resource depletion and species extirpation took effect, Africans were left to deal with the consequences. 

• What is the intended audience for the letter?
• The intended audience for the letter is his wife stated in the first line of the document. However, there is an underlying political message written within it so his wife could share it wither others to show the corruptions that is and had been occurring within the Congo. 
• Does the intended audience influences how Patrice Lumumba wrote this letter?
• Yes, because Patrice Lumumba writes with extreme emotion. He explains how the Congo is not the only country frighting for their independence from colonial systems. In his letter he states how his wife should not weep if he passes or is imprisoned because his end goal, like many others is a free Congo. 
• Does Lumumba’s background impact what he says and how he says it?
• Yes, Lumumba’s background plays a significant role in what he states in his letter. He is an activist within the Congo due to the oppression that he and other Africans have endured throughout colonial rule. He explains how corruption has influenced countrymen into siding with the colonizers, rather than the people of the Congo. He says these things in an angry tone because colonizers use wealth and lies to convince the United Nations and Belgium’s western allies that what they are doing is justifiable.
• How does Lumumba convey emotions in the letter?
• His emotions are conveyed in the letter by explaining how he would never fall to the feet of the colonizers. He would rather “die with his head high, unshakable faith, and the greatest confidence in the destiny of my country rather than live in slavery and contempt principals.”(2) This statement shows the anger and frustration that he has against individuals within the colonial system. He would rather die, than be colonized, which also shows his internal motivation and self-pride. He wants to see a Congo that is free, and if it means death to him and his comrades he is willing to do that.
• What message is he communicating in the letter?
• The message Lumumba is trying to communicate is the corruption of the colonial system. Also, he explains how he wants a free Congo, and without justice there is no dignity and without independence there is no free men. He conveying the idea of freedom and how death could be enviable in order to achieve that goal. 
• Is the author arguing against anyone or anything in the letter?
• Yes, he is arguing against the United Nations and the allies of Belgium for not helping the people of the Congo gain their independence. He also argues that because of this, it is up to the people of the Congo to fight for this, and the only way to become freed men is through independence of colonial rule.
• Are there any specific facts or details the author wants us to know?
• He wants us to know that freedom will occur if hope and faith is not given up. He also explains how Belgium has corrupted the world by gaining the support of other countries. These colonizers are doing inhumane practices, and paying off Africans to distort the truth so those countries would support them in their effects of colonialism.
• What historical questions or issues does this letter raise?
• I came up with two historical questions based on the document. The first being “when this war will occur?” because he claims that he will die fighting for independence, yet does not claim fighting he has done. Also within his regime the men he fights with can be convinced easily to change sides with bribery. The second is “How can this fight for independence occur if the colonizers have a grip on any rebellious group?” He has to get the truth of what the colonizers are doing to the world, so fellow country men cannot be persuaded to help the colonizers. He does this in his letter, which has now been made public, and hopefully at the time, it was too so the UN and other nations could see the corruption

Fallon’s main ideas in chapter five and the conclusion are the psychological affects in which the colonial had on Africans as well as how Africa can develop after this oppressive system was implemented. In chapter five, Fallon describes the psychological effects of case studies based out of Algeria. On page 186 he shows the psychological effect that Europeans had by discussing when a woman was raped, and her response was to feel remorse to tell her husband because she felt that she was a disgrace. Her husband became deeply depressed and stared to show other negative psychological behaviors. In the second case Fallon writes about, the individual explains how after his village was raided and burned, he began to experience negative psychological effects. He thought that everyone was an enemy (Frenchman), even other Algerians that had previously saved him. Due to this thinking and paranoia, he attacks people within the mental institute he resides in. In his conclusion, Fallon explains how it would be detrimental to the culture of Africa o try and be another Europe. Those colonizers terrorized their people, which had lasting effects even after they had left. I agree with Fallon that colonizers had created significant psychological effects. Raping women for months because colonizers had the “power” and “authority” to do it. He makes a very good point in his conclusion because the people of African cannot follow the footsteps of Europeans. Europeans psychologically and physically broke Africans. Not only did they kill individuals who did not corporate with them, but they also manipulated their brains to believing anything a European did was justifiable. I find these accounts repulsive and sickening.

The key ideas that Fallon Raises in chapters three and four revolved around the effects of the colonial system, and how it was detrimental for any form of prosperity.  In Chapter three Fallon explains the “national bourgeoisie” which was composed of college graduates, lawyers, some business owners, (however most companies were not owned by Africans) as well as doctors. Within this national bourgeoisie, they saw and believed in the methods Europeans used, which enabled them to develop the areas in which they lived but neglecting the interior of the continent. This leads to chapter four, where Fallon explains how Africans were dependent on Europeans due to the fact that they were trying to create capitalistic countries. He goes on to explain that colonialism destroyed the cultures as well as the history of Africa. Many of the beliefs have been distorted since the era of colonialism due to the fact Africans were being manipulated and “saved” by Europeans. Europeans thought the introduction of capitalism would save these barbaric individuals. Africans became distorted, which then enabled them to take on the task of creating capitalist countries. However, this was an extreme task because Europeans had already extracted many of the available resources. This will diminished economic prosperity,  as well as, any real way to create infrastructure because most resources now had to be imported which is extremely expensive. 

I believe that if Europeans were there to help Africans, they would have created forms of economic prosperity. Europeans try to explain to the world the good that they did, however, they only developed industries that were profitable at the time. Not only did the Europeans disenfranchise a continent, but they also distorted the history of their country. Manipulating Africans into believing that their ancestry ways were detrimental or “barbaric” is absurd. It shows negligence as well as arrogance that is not appropriate. 

The main argument made by Oliver Stanley was that Great Britain was going to develop Africa by colonizing them. On page four Oliver Stanley explains the British Colonial Empire, where he describes how rich in resources regions in Africa are. He also discusses self governments within colonies, and how that can be universal. But, he does not give a date, or any other information about these colonies ever running themselves. Later, he discusses Nigeria, and how the country is now a lot safer than it was before colonial rule. He then describes on page 8, how the destruction of their way of life before the colonial system was good because it created a new system of land distribution. Lastly, he describes how development in Africa as greatly improved with the construction of schools, hospitals, as well as social developments. All of these are positives to the Africans, since they are learning the customs of Europeans. When talking about the colonial system, he explains that America would be a better nation if they decided to colonize the Caribbeans as well as other countries in the Americas. If the United States converts to colonialism, then the British has a justification to keep their colonies.  

Stanley is trying to appease Americans by explaining how great colonialism. However, what he does not realize are that most of the uncivil or not normal practices are what the people of Africa have known for centuries. Building all of the community buildings are benefits to the African society if the resources in which they had was not being stolen from the colonized. Without the previous system, trying to overthrow colonial rule became more difficult. There were no leaders to turn to, when these Europeans started extracting resources from Africa, the Africans could not resist. He does not explain how the colonized are being used as workers for the colonial system. I believe that Stanley wants to influence America into becoming a colonizer to justify the action in which the British have done for centuries. Also, he sounds like a salesman, by trying to give a pitch to make America to become colonizers. 

The Zulu movie shows exactly what we are reading in The Wretched Earth by Frantz Fanon. Colonizers were trying to enforce their practices as well as take the cultures of Africans away from them. In the movie, the pastor and his daughter try to negotiate peace with the king. However, due to the negligence of the British and their army, the Zulu’s were forced into going to war. This led to a series of unfortunate events since the British were outnumbered. The British thought since they were smarter and had more modern weapons they could overpower the Zulu’s. As the movie continues, it shows that the Zulu’s were too much for the British and that they had to retreat into a little base made of sandbags. This movie shows how Europeans thought of Africans. They were bigot and racist towards the individuals who they captured. The Europeans wanted the Zulu to be submissive to them, which is why the Zulu were so hostile towards any European. The priest went to the Zulu society so that he could try to convince the king and his peers to convert over to Christianity. This is important because it was one of the first steps that almost every European county tried.

I thought that this movie was very informative because the Social Studies curriculum does not ask for students or teachers to discuss the African side of imperialism. This movie would be great to show in a class because it describes African society and their way of life well. Europeans describe Africans as inferior people, and that they are not educated and its due to their own cultures. However, their cultures have been around for thousands of years, and before European involvement, it was good. There were shortages as well as conflicts, but nothing compared to European bigotry and slavery. I thought that the description of the British was accurate as well. I also thought that the ignorance of the British and underestimating the Zulus was accurate. This is because in the book How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, it is explained how Europeans thought they were more sophisticated than Africans. That it was their duty to teach Africans how to be civil.