What do you think?
Rate this book
Dictatorland: The Men Who Stole Africa
The dictator who grew so rich on his country's cocoa crop that he built a 35-storey-high basilica in the jungles of the Ivory Coast. The austere, incorruptible leader who has shut Eritrea off from the world in a permanent state of war and conscripted every adult into the armed forces. In Equatorial Guinea, the paranoid despot who thought Hitler was the saviour of Africa and waged a relentless campaign of terror against his own people. The Libyan army officer who authored a new work of political philosophy, The Green Book, and lived in a tent with a harem of female soldiers, running his country like a mafia family business.
And behind these almost incredible stories of fantastic violence and excess lie the dark secrets of Western greed and complicity, the insatiable taste for chocolate, oil, diamonds and gold that has encouraged dictators to rule with an iron hand, siphoning off their share of the action into mansions in Paris and banks in Zurich and keeping their people in dire poverty.
And behind these almost incredible stories of fantastic violence and excess lie the dark secrets of Western greed and complicity, the insatiable taste for chocolate, oil, diamonds and gold that has encouraged dictators to rule with an iron hand, siphoning off their share of the action into mansions in Paris and banks in Zurich and keeping their people in dire poverty.
432 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2018
About the author
Paul Kenyon
3 books95 followersPaul Kenyon is a best-selling author and BAFTA winning journalist. He has reported from danger zones around the world for the BBC, making more than fifty documentaries and writing widely about his experiences. He reported from Ukraine in 2022 and 2014, and on the Libyan Civil War throughout 2011. He famously travelled the most dangerous migration route in the world, from sub-Saharan Africa to Europe, giving a compassionate insight into the lives of young Africans risking all for a better life. His film-making is noted for its irreverent style and his confrontations with the rich and powerful. During the Libyan Civil War, he tackled Gaddafi's son as he fed his pet lions. In Haiti he faked his own death and funeral to expose a gang of fraudsters. As well as Africa, Kenyon has travelled extensively in Eastern Europe, and describes Romania as his spiritual home after having met his wife there shortly after the revolution.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 262 reviews
May 4, 2019
My knowledge of 20th Century history is spotty at best. There are things I am reasonably well-informed about but large parts of history I have cursory knowledge of. The history of Africa is one of those areas (and even typing this makes me cringe - I have to admit to not knowing a lot about a whole fricking continent) and I was very eager to remedy this. As a starting point this book is absolutely perfect. Paul Kenyon manages to give enough of an overview to situate me to then give enough details to keep my interest.
The book is a reasonably comprehensive history of several countries and manages to also connect these parts to a greater whole that gave me a greater understanding how these different dictatorships happened (or are still happening is some cases). We get a greater look into such varied countries as Zimbabwe, Congo, Libya, Nigeria, Cote d'Ivoire, Ghana, Equatorial Guinea and Eritrea. Paul Kenyon structures his book by way of resources the countries own and how these influenced the histories. Starting with diamonds and gold, continuing with oil, talking about cocoa to then showing the weird, tragic case of Eritrea where it is not even known what resources might be found there.
There are some things these countries all have in common: the way in which colonialism wrecked them, the way in which other powers influenced them (often in the way of proxy wars in the Cold War era), and the way in which power corrupted people who were considered heroes beforehand. It is an endlessly bleak and frustrating history and one that made me think more than once how much people can suck. It is due to Paul Kenyon's wonderful storytelling sensibilities that I managed to keep reading despite the bleak subject matter.
The things that did not quite work for me are probably not fair: for one I sometimes struggled with the structure of the chapters, the timeline was not always very clear and I did not always find the thread connecting these different scenes. However, it is near impossible to tell of history in a neat narrative because history is not neat but rather messy. I would also have liked the sources to be clearer and more extensive. I work in academia and as such I am more used to academic writing which this is not.
Overall, impeccably researched, super readable, important book.
__________
I received an arc of this book courtesy of NetGalley and Head of Zeus in exchange for an honest review.
The book is a reasonably comprehensive history of several countries and manages to also connect these parts to a greater whole that gave me a greater understanding how these different dictatorships happened (or are still happening is some cases). We get a greater look into such varied countries as Zimbabwe, Congo, Libya, Nigeria, Cote d'Ivoire, Ghana, Equatorial Guinea and Eritrea. Paul Kenyon structures his book by way of resources the countries own and how these influenced the histories. Starting with diamonds and gold, continuing with oil, talking about cocoa to then showing the weird, tragic case of Eritrea where it is not even known what resources might be found there.
There are some things these countries all have in common: the way in which colonialism wrecked them, the way in which other powers influenced them (often in the way of proxy wars in the Cold War era), and the way in which power corrupted people who were considered heroes beforehand. It is an endlessly bleak and frustrating history and one that made me think more than once how much people can suck. It is due to Paul Kenyon's wonderful storytelling sensibilities that I managed to keep reading despite the bleak subject matter.
The things that did not quite work for me are probably not fair: for one I sometimes struggled with the structure of the chapters, the timeline was not always very clear and I did not always find the thread connecting these different scenes. However, it is near impossible to tell of history in a neat narrative because history is not neat but rather messy. I would also have liked the sources to be clearer and more extensive. I work in academia and as such I am more used to academic writing which this is not.
Overall, impeccably researched, super readable, important book.
__________
I received an arc of this book courtesy of NetGalley and Head of Zeus in exchange for an honest review.
November 29, 2021
One of few books in recent years that I purchased new (although only because I was given a gift voucher), and an excellent choice it was. Five stars.
In this book Kenyon catalogues the actions of various dictators in Africa, noted below. It was surprising to me how much they were all alike, and how many common threads there were. Each typically started out as an underdog, with idealistic goals who triumphed against either colonial occupation or another tyranny, then rose up up take control and then ultimately be corrupted by that power. There is only one end to the dictatorships they set up, and none of them end well for the dictator. Whispers, subordinates plotting, and ultimately the coup are desperately feared by the always paranoid dictator, and their many millions of dollars of corrupt or stolen money can't stop their downfall.
Kenyon does an excellent job of scene setting and describing the situation in each country and what is happening in the adjacent countries as he tells each story separately. The background, the recent events and all that is in between are set out in a logical and readable narrative, and while each dictator could probably have carried off a book on his own, the power of this book is the comparative and additive value of each successive story to form an overall picture - and it isn't a happy one.
Mugabe passed away in the days I was reading his story. It is not the first book I have read about Mugabe, and he is clearly a nasty piece of work, who didn't deserve as longer life as he had. Certainly the world is a better place without him, but it reinforced how weak organisations like the League of Nations and then the United Nations are in their inability to deal with these despicable setups which cause such humanitarian crises to the detriment of so many.
The parts of this book are:
Gold and Diamonds-
Congo (Mobutu)
Zimbabwe (Mugabe)
Oil-
Before the Dictators (background)
Libya (Gaddafi)
Nigeria (Sani Abacha)
Equatorial Guinea (Obiang Nguema)
Chocolate-
Before the Dictators (background, incl Sao Tome & Principe)
Cote d'Ivoire (Felix Houphouet-Boigny)
Modern Slavery
Eritrea (Isaias Afwerki)
--
In this book Kenyon catalogues the actions of various dictators in Africa, noted below. It was surprising to me how much they were all alike, and how many common threads there were. Each typically started out as an underdog, with idealistic goals who triumphed against either colonial occupation or another tyranny, then rose up up take control and then ultimately be corrupted by that power. There is only one end to the dictatorships they set up, and none of them end well for the dictator. Whispers, subordinates plotting, and ultimately the coup are desperately feared by the always paranoid dictator, and their many millions of dollars of corrupt or stolen money can't stop their downfall.
Kenyon does an excellent job of scene setting and describing the situation in each country and what is happening in the adjacent countries as he tells each story separately. The background, the recent events and all that is in between are set out in a logical and readable narrative, and while each dictator could probably have carried off a book on his own, the power of this book is the comparative and additive value of each successive story to form an overall picture - and it isn't a happy one.
Mugabe passed away in the days I was reading his story. It is not the first book I have read about Mugabe, and he is clearly a nasty piece of work, who didn't deserve as longer life as he had. Certainly the world is a better place without him, but it reinforced how weak organisations like the League of Nations and then the United Nations are in their inability to deal with these despicable setups which cause such humanitarian crises to the detriment of so many.
The parts of this book are:
Gold and Diamonds-
Congo (Mobutu)
Zimbabwe (Mugabe)
Oil-
Before the Dictators (background)
Libya (Gaddafi)
Nigeria (Sani Abacha)
Equatorial Guinea (Obiang Nguema)
Chocolate-
Before the Dictators (background, incl Sao Tome & Principe)
Cote d'Ivoire (Felix Houphouet-Boigny)
Modern Slavery
Eritrea (Isaias Afwerki)
--
January 13, 2019
In this vividly written brutal book, British journalist Paul Kenyon explores the strange and stubborn rule of seven kleptocratic postcolonial African leaders:
Democratic Republic of Congo’s Mobutu Sese Seko (1965–1997)
Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe (1980–2017)
Libya’s Moammar Gadhafi (1969–2011)
Nigeria’s Sani Abacha (1993–1998)
Equatorial Guinea’s Obiang Nguema (since 1979)
Ivory Coast’s Felix Houphuet-Boigny (1960–1993)
Eritrea’s Isaias Afwerki (since 1993).
Kenyon paints a horrific picture of how these tyrannical leaders accumulated and exploited their countries’ vast mineral wealth be it oil, cocoa, gold or diamonds. The sheer brutality of crimes committed by successive dictators on their own citizens to ensure that their own and the western world's imperialistic/capitalistic greed remains satiated is shocking.
Kenyon makes a case that it's not just these dictators to blame for Africa what it is now, and not what it could have been, but part of the blame lies with the western world's insatiable greed for minerals, shiny objects and slaves. The backs of modern European and their offshoot civilizations are built on Africa's back, willingly and in the majority of cases, unwillingly. This comes off of an uneasy assertion, given that much of western Europe is called the land of free. But to move forward towards more peaceful times, it's quite important to accept and talk about the brutal imperialistic colonialism which was imposed on their "subjects" until the late '60s. Much of the modern angst which probably then feeds the hold of rampant religious fanaticism could be seen as a leftover rage since those times. And it's this, which power-crazy despots, misguided youths and genocidal religious leaders exploit, as the book minces no words about this.
The situation is of course, not so simple, and is indeed quite complex with shifting tribal allegiances, power struggles, capitalist greed by multinationals adding to this heady mix, but nevertheless, the two common determinants remain same - hangover of colonial lust for money/power by western European nations and post-colonial greed of despots/dictators.
For someone not acquainted with the African continent's savage history and present conditions, this book is rather a solid start.
My Rating - 5/5
Democratic Republic of Congo’s Mobutu Sese Seko (1965–1997)
Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe (1980–2017)
Libya’s Moammar Gadhafi (1969–2011)
Nigeria’s Sani Abacha (1993–1998)
Equatorial Guinea’s Obiang Nguema (since 1979)
Ivory Coast’s Felix Houphuet-Boigny (1960–1993)
Eritrea’s Isaias Afwerki (since 1993).
Kenyon paints a horrific picture of how these tyrannical leaders accumulated and exploited their countries’ vast mineral wealth be it oil, cocoa, gold or diamonds. The sheer brutality of crimes committed by successive dictators on their own citizens to ensure that their own and the western world's imperialistic/capitalistic greed remains satiated is shocking.
Kenyon makes a case that it's not just these dictators to blame for Africa what it is now, and not what it could have been, but part of the blame lies with the western world's insatiable greed for minerals, shiny objects and slaves. The backs of modern European and their offshoot civilizations are built on Africa's back, willingly and in the majority of cases, unwillingly. This comes off of an uneasy assertion, given that much of western Europe is called the land of free. But to move forward towards more peaceful times, it's quite important to accept and talk about the brutal imperialistic colonialism which was imposed on their "subjects" until the late '60s. Much of the modern angst which probably then feeds the hold of rampant religious fanaticism could be seen as a leftover rage since those times. And it's this, which power-crazy despots, misguided youths and genocidal religious leaders exploit, as the book minces no words about this.
The situation is of course, not so simple, and is indeed quite complex with shifting tribal allegiances, power struggles, capitalist greed by multinationals adding to this heady mix, but nevertheless, the two common determinants remain same - hangover of colonial lust for money/power by western European nations and post-colonial greed of despots/dictators.
For someone not acquainted with the African continent's savage history and present conditions, this book is rather a solid start.
My Rating - 5/5
October 27, 2018
In the 19th century, European countries built their empires that included countries in Africa, but by the mid-twentieth century it became time for them to get out and let them have independence. This book is an account of the disastrous behaviour of some Africans who, like scum, rose to the top of these countries, together with that of these European countries and the US. What the West wanted was to control the vast riches of gold, diamonds, copper, oil, cocoa, and whatever that Africa had, and to do that they closed their eyes and helped facilitate corruption and the removal of human rights of the so-called "liberated" people on a scale that is almost unbelievable. They facilitated the return of slavery, and while it was not called that locally, it might as well have been. Political ends also required meddling. In the Congo, Lumumba was elected President in what was one of the few democratically legitimate elections. But Lumumba had talked to Moscow, so he had to be removed. The CIA assisted the rise of Mobutu, which led to the execution of Lumumba. After all, we could not have Communism in the Congo, with its big mineral resources. In São Tomé and Princípe, the West needed its cocoa; the fact the workers were essentially slaves was overlooked. The corruption of and the total ignoring of environmental issues in Nigeria and some other west coast African countries makes for awful reading. The book runs through the history of a number of countries, and how a small number of dictators, with the collusion of the West turned what could have been a paradise into a hell for the average African. A well-written well-researched history. Also a depressing history, but that was what happened.
June 23, 2018
An extraordinary book! Having struggled to find some books or resources that could sum up Africa's history and it's peoples' suffering, I came across this marvel and bought it instantly. I am extremely happy that this book is going to be part of my collection.
The author put great effort in offering most of the important events as interesting stories to read. He brought together all the dictators from the continent, their cruelties towards people, the corrupt minds, the greed, indifference towards victims, mass killings of innocent and armies alike, slavery, and the colonial powers' exploitations of these countries, just as elsewhere, for the massive natural resources.
It offers equally great insights into the decision making, priorities of the top layers of the governments, and business partnerships and investments that went into discovering diamonds, gold, cocoa and how those resources earned them high number of billions.
A few lines are just not enough in describing what this book can offer. It is a must read for anyone that is interested in knowing what went through in the past century in Africa.
The author put great effort in offering most of the important events as interesting stories to read. He brought together all the dictators from the continent, their cruelties towards people, the corrupt minds, the greed, indifference towards victims, mass killings of innocent and armies alike, slavery, and the colonial powers' exploitations of these countries, just as elsewhere, for the massive natural resources.
It offers equally great insights into the decision making, priorities of the top layers of the governments, and business partnerships and investments that went into discovering diamonds, gold, cocoa and how those resources earned them high number of billions.
A few lines are just not enough in describing what this book can offer. It is a must read for anyone that is interested in knowing what went through in the past century in Africa.
Read
April 9, 2021For what it is, I quite enjoyed this book, and got quite a bit from it. It's very much a history book written by a journalist, with the good (engaging, lots of eyewitness interviews) and bad (narrative prioritised over analysis) of that. It is a bit of a gawkfest picking out the worst dictatorships in Africa, but if you don't want that you shouldn't read a book called Dictatorland.
I found that the layout of the book into sections determined by what natural resources are in various countries was a little clunky and implied (which was semi-consistent throughout the book) that these natural resources were the main reasons for despotism.
Part One was about gold and diamonds. The first chapter was on Congo: I thought this was really interesting, I knew very little about Congo beforehand. It didn't linger much on the Congo Free State under Leopold II, but it was very interesting to read about the intellectual climate among young black Congolose people towards the end of the Belgian rule, a theme which kept on being one of the most interesting parts of a number of the book's chapters. There was less on the ongoing civil war in Congo than I would have expected, and I wanted to hear a little bit more about Che Guevara's time there, but I can find that in other books. It was good to get a basic outline of decolonisation, Patrice Lumumba's rule and assassination, and Mobutu's subsequent dictatorship.
Chapter Two (still in Part One) was about Rhodesia/Zimbabwe - this was one of my favourite chapters in the book, and I thought it gave a good overview of the white minority government, the dispute between ZIPRA and ZANLA, the Gukurahundi ethnic cleansing, the treatment of whites in Zimbabwe, and Mugabe's rule generally. I find the history of Rhodesia very interesting, and reading this made me want to read more. The best anecdote in it was during Wilson's visit to Ian Smith, where he got very upset at a dinner by a government minister telling a lewd story then doing a 'belly dance' in Wilson's face.
The next Part was on oil - it began with the history of oil production during colonial times, which was alright but not really what I was most interested in. Chapter Four was on Libya, which was the country in the book which I knew most about before starting. I struggled to follow Chapter Five a bit, on Nigeria, but I knew next to nothing about Nigeria before starting it so it was interesting, and I'll probably re-listen to that chapter. Chapter Six was on Equatorial Guinea - the book I read before this was 'My Friend the Mercenary' which had a lot about the attempted coup in Equatorial Guinea that Mark Thatcher was involved with, but this didn't mention that I don't think.
Part Three was on chocolate - Chapter Eight was about Côte d'Ivoire, but Chapter Seven about cocoa production in colonial times was where the book really shone, and was one of my favourite chapters. It details the slavery of cocoa workers in Portuguese São Tomé and Príncipe, and how this was received in Britain. Despite their anti-slavery Quaker reputation, the Cadbury family was very reluctant to take the reports of slavery seriously, and even after the report they commissioned reported that the cocoa farms relied on slaves, they did very little. Eventually a newspaper reported on this fact and was sued by the Cadbury family for libel - the newspaper's defence lawyer was none other than Edward Carson, what a cameo!
Part Four, on 'Modern Slavery', only had one chapter, on Eritrea. The classification system of the book fell apart here - there was some mention of modern slavery in Eritrea, but the book was mostly on the war of independence against Ethiopia and the dictator Isaias Afwerki. The chapter was still really interesting, and it shows the shameful episode of the USSR, GDR, and Cuba supporting the Ethiopian military dictatorship in its war against Eritrea.
Overall I liked the book. Some bits were better than others, and you have to take it as what it is, with the aforementioned limitations. It's made me want to read more about African history though, and I found it pretty decent as an introduction and something to make me more interested.
I found that the layout of the book into sections determined by what natural resources are in various countries was a little clunky and implied (which was semi-consistent throughout the book) that these natural resources were the main reasons for despotism.
Part One was about gold and diamonds. The first chapter was on Congo: I thought this was really interesting, I knew very little about Congo beforehand. It didn't linger much on the Congo Free State under Leopold II, but it was very interesting to read about the intellectual climate among young black Congolose people towards the end of the Belgian rule, a theme which kept on being one of the most interesting parts of a number of the book's chapters. There was less on the ongoing civil war in Congo than I would have expected, and I wanted to hear a little bit more about Che Guevara's time there, but I can find that in other books. It was good to get a basic outline of decolonisation, Patrice Lumumba's rule and assassination, and Mobutu's subsequent dictatorship.
Chapter Two (still in Part One) was about Rhodesia/Zimbabwe - this was one of my favourite chapters in the book, and I thought it gave a good overview of the white minority government, the dispute between ZIPRA and ZANLA, the Gukurahundi ethnic cleansing, the treatment of whites in Zimbabwe, and Mugabe's rule generally. I find the history of Rhodesia very interesting, and reading this made me want to read more. The best anecdote in it was during Wilson's visit to Ian Smith, where he got very upset at a dinner by a government minister telling a lewd story then doing a 'belly dance' in Wilson's face.
The next Part was on oil - it began with the history of oil production during colonial times, which was alright but not really what I was most interested in. Chapter Four was on Libya, which was the country in the book which I knew most about before starting. I struggled to follow Chapter Five a bit, on Nigeria, but I knew next to nothing about Nigeria before starting it so it was interesting, and I'll probably re-listen to that chapter. Chapter Six was on Equatorial Guinea - the book I read before this was 'My Friend the Mercenary' which had a lot about the attempted coup in Equatorial Guinea that Mark Thatcher was involved with, but this didn't mention that I don't think.
Part Three was on chocolate - Chapter Eight was about Côte d'Ivoire, but Chapter Seven about cocoa production in colonial times was where the book really shone, and was one of my favourite chapters. It details the slavery of cocoa workers in Portuguese São Tomé and Príncipe, and how this was received in Britain. Despite their anti-slavery Quaker reputation, the Cadbury family was very reluctant to take the reports of slavery seriously, and even after the report they commissioned reported that the cocoa farms relied on slaves, they did very little. Eventually a newspaper reported on this fact and was sued by the Cadbury family for libel - the newspaper's defence lawyer was none other than Edward Carson, what a cameo!
Part Four, on 'Modern Slavery', only had one chapter, on Eritrea. The classification system of the book fell apart here - there was some mention of modern slavery in Eritrea, but the book was mostly on the war of independence against Ethiopia and the dictator Isaias Afwerki. The chapter was still really interesting, and it shows the shameful episode of the USSR, GDR, and Cuba supporting the Ethiopian military dictatorship in its war against Eritrea.
Overall I liked the book. Some bits were better than others, and you have to take it as what it is, with the aforementioned limitations. It's made me want to read more about African history though, and I found it pretty decent as an introduction and something to make me more interested.
January 31, 2018
Paul Kenyon is a renowned BBC journalist who's worked on various hard-hitting current affairs strands, not least the BBC's Panorama. He's someone whose work I've long admired. When I saw he had written a book on the dictators who've wreaked havoc throughout Africa, I was keen to read it.
Dictatorland is certainly well written and split into four parts, each corresponding to the "resource curses" which allowed brutal thugs to seize and keep power - gold, oil, chocolate and modern slavery - he troops out a succession of tyrants and their horrific idiosyncrasies for his readership to gawp at.
One of the strengths of Dictatorland is how the author demonstrates that Africa, a continent rich in natural resources, was uniquely placed for such misrule. First the colonial empires, and later those who replaced them, had untold wealth at their fingertips and thus had no need to consider the wishes, or even the needs, of the populace. The world's thirst for gold, diamonds and cocoa ensured that brutal misrule was tolerated at best, actively facilitated at worst, by the international community.
That said, there are a number of flaws to this book. While the author does give the background of colonialism and does demonstrate how the colonial rulers abused their colonies, the lion's share of the narrative focuses on the dictators that came after. I felt that the link between the two was missing somewhat. The brutalism of colonialism and how it stunted civic and political development; the arbitrary division of the continent into artificial states which often lumped hostile ethnic groups together; just how actively the Western powers turned a blind eye to the dictators' behaviour, was not fully fleshed out.
It is also unclear just how the author selected dictators to appear in the book. As The Economist pointed out in their review, some like Mobutu of Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo), Gaddafi of Libya and Mugabe of Zimbabwe are obvious choices. But why Félix Houphouët-Boigny, the first President of Ivory Coast, and not the far more brutal Idi Amin of Uganda or Jean-Bedel Bokassa of the Central African Republic? On can only presume that Houphouët-Boigny was chosen as he based his rule on the cocoa trade.
A final issue, is that while this is a fascinating read, it can also be a little tiring. Reading of the wickedness of dictator after dictator, with no real prognosis for change, is a bit repetitive and blunts the reader's outrage. Reading Dictatorland, one might be forgiven the temptation to write Africa off as hopeless, a continent uniquely susceptible to misrule and oppression.
That all said, this is a very well written book. Despite my misgivings outlined above, it did keep me turning the page. If you're interested in dictators, what colonialism has reaped, the damaging legacy the European empires left the continent and the misrule that more often than not results when a country's rulers have untold riches at their disposal, then this is an enlightening, if depressing, read.
Dictatorland is certainly well written and split into four parts, each corresponding to the "resource curses" which allowed brutal thugs to seize and keep power - gold, oil, chocolate and modern slavery - he troops out a succession of tyrants and their horrific idiosyncrasies for his readership to gawp at.
One of the strengths of Dictatorland is how the author demonstrates that Africa, a continent rich in natural resources, was uniquely placed for such misrule. First the colonial empires, and later those who replaced them, had untold wealth at their fingertips and thus had no need to consider the wishes, or even the needs, of the populace. The world's thirst for gold, diamonds and cocoa ensured that brutal misrule was tolerated at best, actively facilitated at worst, by the international community.
That said, there are a number of flaws to this book. While the author does give the background of colonialism and does demonstrate how the colonial rulers abused their colonies, the lion's share of the narrative focuses on the dictators that came after. I felt that the link between the two was missing somewhat. The brutalism of colonialism and how it stunted civic and political development; the arbitrary division of the continent into artificial states which often lumped hostile ethnic groups together; just how actively the Western powers turned a blind eye to the dictators' behaviour, was not fully fleshed out.
It is also unclear just how the author selected dictators to appear in the book. As The Economist pointed out in their review, some like Mobutu of Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo), Gaddafi of Libya and Mugabe of Zimbabwe are obvious choices. But why Félix Houphouët-Boigny, the first President of Ivory Coast, and not the far more brutal Idi Amin of Uganda or Jean-Bedel Bokassa of the Central African Republic? On can only presume that Houphouët-Boigny was chosen as he based his rule on the cocoa trade.
A final issue, is that while this is a fascinating read, it can also be a little tiring. Reading of the wickedness of dictator after dictator, with no real prognosis for change, is a bit repetitive and blunts the reader's outrage. Reading Dictatorland, one might be forgiven the temptation to write Africa off as hopeless, a continent uniquely susceptible to misrule and oppression.
That all said, this is a very well written book. Despite my misgivings outlined above, it did keep me turning the page. If you're interested in dictators, what colonialism has reaped, the damaging legacy the European empires left the continent and the misrule that more often than not results when a country's rulers have untold riches at their disposal, then this is an enlightening, if depressing, read.
May 17, 2023
"This is the story of how a whole continent has been robbed in broad daylight. And how it is still going on today. This is the story of the men who stole Africa..."
Dictatorland was a somewhat interesting book, but not without some fairly glaring flaws and unnecessary low-resolution partisan commentary. More on this below. This review will be a long one, so get comfortable.
Author Paul Kenyon is a BAFTA-winning journalist and writer who has reported from conflict zones around the world for BBC Panorama and has written several books. He made his name confronting criminals in his own prime time TV show on BBC.
Paul Kenyon:
The book gets off to a bit of an unconventional start, with an intro that focuses more on the history of the continent, than a primer on the book's thesis. He talks about the "missing link," The Scramble for Africa, Cecil Rhodes, colonization, and other history, before taking a deep dive into the recent history in the book proper.
He writes with a decent style for the most part, although this was an extremely long book. IMHO, much of the writing here is long-winded and superfluous. The author adds many literary accouterments, tacking on many questionable dressings to his writing. Add-ons like "It was a cold day in May, and the little girl noticed a butterfly float past," or "The rain came down hard, making it difficult to see the road." Although these are not direct quotes, the author peppered the book with (IMO) too many of these unnecessary and dubious additions.
There were some pictures included at the end of the book, that helped provide some context to the writing.
The formatting was fairly well done, with delineated chapters detailing each country talked about.
Kenyon provides a bit of historical context with this quote:
As the book's title intimates; it is an examination of the colonial and post-colonial period of modern Africa, with a focus on some of the more prominent colonies and historical figures.
Of course, the topic of African colonization is an extremely contentious one. The only way to accurately deal with it is to provide as objective an account as possible and refrain from adding unnecessary narrative and personal commentary. Sadly, the author failed miserably at this job here...
Some of the figures and countries covered here include:
• Patrice Lumumba
• Mobutu Sese Seko
• Glenn Kendrick and his diamond mines
• Nicolae Ceaușescu, his assassination
• Robert Mugabi, Ian Smith; Zimbabwe/Rhodesia
• Mohammad Mossadegh
• British Petroleum and Shell
• Libya
• Nigerian oil fields
• Algeria
• Muammar Gaddafi
• Nigeria
• Equatorial Guinea
• Cocoa; chocolate
• Côte d’Ivoire
• Eritrea
Some, or even most in the academic/media class paint colonization as unambiguouslly distilled evil. Predatory Europeans taking advantage of uncivilized tribal people. In the case of Africa, the racial element is heavily emphasized, despite the fact that colonization and warfare historically has happened between all shades of skin and ethnicities.
The many cases of mistreatment and brutality become the sole story of what colonization was.
On the other hand, some authors and pundits downplay the aforementioned brutality and greed that the native people were subjected to. They point out that the colonial powers bestowed complex systems of law, education, economy, and comprehensive infrastructure to their colonial possessions. They also argue that colonization resulted in higher life expectancies, and higher standards of living for all.
Instead of choosing between the above black-and-white binary options, the nuanced and educated reader can recognize that these things are not mutually exclusive. They can both be true and valid; to one degree or another.
"History is never tidy," despite many people's attempts to make it that way. Sadly, that balanced and nuanced view is not provided here by the author...
Also, despite the human rights abuses carried out by some colonial regimes, post-colonial Africa did not turn out to be the utopia that leftist academics and other assorted well-wishers hoped it would be. This turbulent period led to power vacuums, and saw many African leaders instill ruthless one-party dictatorships of "Big Man Rule," headed by corrupt strongmen. Kleptocracy, nepotism, and cronyism were (and still are) commonplace. A decent case has been made that many Africans fared better under colonialism than they did under the corrupt regimes that followed.
The author also did a piss-poor job of covering the modern country of Zimbabwe (formerly known as Rhodesia) and its important figures; Ian Smith, Robert Mugabe, and Joshua Nkomo.
He paints Rhodesia as an apartheid state. It was not. The author went off on a tear here, and I'm not sure how much of what he wrote was accidentally inaccurate, or deliberate lies. I would highly recommend the former Rhodesian PM Ian Smith's autobiography The Great Betrayal to any readers of this review. Most of what the author of this book asserts is dealt with in a long-form fashion there. Kenyon cites the book here, which makes me wonder how he ended up with the narrative he did.
The story of Rhodesia and her eventual downfall is not the one of white versus black racial conflict and fighting that many authors (like this one) would have you believe. Rather, the story of Rhodesia is one of fighting for the values of freedom and civilization against the destructive forces of socialism/communism. It is the story of how a brave and noble country fought to preserve the values that made Western civilization great in the first place, despite being abandoned by their closest allies in their time of need.
In fact, a large part of the story of post-colonial Africa is the story of communist agitation and revolutionary incitement. China, Russia, and even North Korea were trying to stoke the fires of socialism in the power vacuum of post-colonial Africa.
KGB dissident and defector Yuri Bezmenov says this in his book Love Letter to America about the communist M.O.:
"This process has many names: psychological warfare, ideological aggression, propaganda warfare etc. The KGB calls it активные мероприятия, or "Active Measures".
Kenyon blatantly lies about Ian Smith, saying: "As far as Smith was concerned, this ‘mad idea of a handover’, no matter how long it took, was ‘a sell-out of the European and his civilization’, and would inevitably lead to a Congo-style implosion. The violence and looting in Salisbury and Bulawayo, he warned, were evidence of that."
This was incorrect. Smith was not opposed to majority rule, but wanted the transition to be gradual, as just dumping complex systems of economy, law, and infrastructure to mostly illiterate tribal people who have no understanding of these concepts is a sure recipe for disaster. Smith mentions his view of "Evolution, not revolution" in the book many times, and notes that in all other neighboring countries that had seen a hasty colonial retreat - violence, corruption, and failed states inevitably resulted. He wanted to avoid those worst-case scenarios. IMO, Kenyon needs to go back and give it another read. It seems like his politically-partisan inclinations prevent him from seeing the bigger picture.
He paints Smith as an evil man, motivated solely by racism. This is a nefarious accusation and runs contrary to the historical record. Smith literally spent years trying to negotiate with Great Britain, but the author says: "He was Rhodesia’s prime minister, and would use his position to pursue a singular purpose; to achieve independence, at any cost, from Britain."
Even more upsetting, Kenyon waxes nostalgic about Nkomo and Mugabi's communist insurgent forces, which terrorized and killed both white and black people alike; raping and murdering white farmer's wives and daughters, and ruling the black tribal people with intimidation and violence.
Instead, he talks about a retaliatory cross-border raid by the Rhodesian Selous Scouts into neighboring communist-controlled Mozambique. He paints the killed FRELIMO communist insurgent soldiers as poor, helpless martyrs. There is no mention of the fact that it was the same communist insurgents that initiated these cross-border raids in the first place, effectively declaring war on the country, which then allowed the Rhodesian forces to go after them before they crossed the border and attacked again. What should the Rhodesian forces have done? Nothing, and let their country be invaded by thousands of murderous insurgents??
Joshua Nkomo is talked about with glowing language again and again. The author conveniently doesn't mention that he personally ordered the downing of 2 civilian passenger aircraft, killing dozens of innocent men, women and children. In one case, Flight 825, the survivors were shot and then bayonetted, including a mother and her 3-week-old baby. The book "A Handful of Hard Men: The SAS and the Battle for Rhodesia" details these attacks, and they will turn your stomach.
Finally, the book ends without a conclusion, epilogue, or post text of any kind, other than the author's acknowledgments. A strange end to a jumbled book.
***********************
As stated at the start of this review, Dictatorland covered some interesting ground. However, it is a very long book; the audiobook version I have clocked in at ~19 hours. A large chunk could have been edited out for the sake of brevity and clarity.
Also, the above-mentioned criticisms left me with a bad taste in my mouth.
I would not recommend this one.
2 stars.
Dictatorland was a somewhat interesting book, but not without some fairly glaring flaws and unnecessary low-resolution partisan commentary. More on this below. This review will be a long one, so get comfortable.
Author Paul Kenyon is a BAFTA-winning journalist and writer who has reported from conflict zones around the world for BBC Panorama and has written several books. He made his name confronting criminals in his own prime time TV show on BBC.
Paul Kenyon:
The book gets off to a bit of an unconventional start, with an intro that focuses more on the history of the continent, than a primer on the book's thesis. He talks about the "missing link," The Scramble for Africa, Cecil Rhodes, colonization, and other history, before taking a deep dive into the recent history in the book proper.
He writes with a decent style for the most part, although this was an extremely long book. IMHO, much of the writing here is long-winded and superfluous. The author adds many literary accouterments, tacking on many questionable dressings to his writing. Add-ons like "It was a cold day in May, and the little girl noticed a butterfly float past," or "The rain came down hard, making it difficult to see the road." Although these are not direct quotes, the author peppered the book with (IMO) too many of these unnecessary and dubious additions.
There were some pictures included at the end of the book, that helped provide some context to the writing.
The formatting was fairly well done, with delineated chapters detailing each country talked about.
Kenyon provides a bit of historical context with this quote:
"It is the era that followed Europe’s decolonization that this book chiefly explores, although the tendency towards authoritarian rule can only be properly understood in the context of what went before. The colonial retreat came about as a result of the rise of nationalist movements in the 1950s and ’60s, and the realization that attitudes towards imperialism had changed forever. Suddenly indigenous rulers were in control of the precious resources that had previously been in the hands of London, Madrid, Lisbon and Paris. Most were unprepared for governance. The nations they inherited were coarsely mapped European constructs, with borders that took little account of age-old tribal rivalries. Families were left separated by the draftsmen’s blunt pencil. Hostile people were thrown together and told to sort out their differences at the ballot box. The newly empowered leaders chose to advance the interests of their own tribes above the rest. Gems and precious metals were used to reward the loyal and silence the foes. Leaders clung to power for fear that their rivals would corner Africa’s resources and impose their own way of life. Maintaining dominance of a single clan or family mattered above all else. In the tiny oil-rich state of Equatorial Guinea, the Nguema family began a dynasty that has ruled since the Spanish relinquished control in 1968."
As the book's title intimates; it is an examination of the colonial and post-colonial period of modern Africa, with a focus on some of the more prominent colonies and historical figures.
Of course, the topic of African colonization is an extremely contentious one. The only way to accurately deal with it is to provide as objective an account as possible and refrain from adding unnecessary narrative and personal commentary. Sadly, the author failed miserably at this job here...
Some of the figures and countries covered here include:
• Patrice Lumumba
• Mobutu Sese Seko
• Glenn Kendrick and his diamond mines
• Nicolae Ceaușescu, his assassination
• Robert Mugabi, Ian Smith; Zimbabwe/Rhodesia
• Mohammad Mossadegh
• British Petroleum and Shell
• Libya
• Nigerian oil fields
• Algeria
• Muammar Gaddafi
• Nigeria
• Equatorial Guinea
• Cocoa; chocolate
• Côte d’Ivoire
• Eritrea
Some, or even most in the academic/media class paint colonization as unambiguouslly distilled evil. Predatory Europeans taking advantage of uncivilized tribal people. In the case of Africa, the racial element is heavily emphasized, despite the fact that colonization and warfare historically has happened between all shades of skin and ethnicities.
The many cases of mistreatment and brutality become the sole story of what colonization was.
On the other hand, some authors and pundits downplay the aforementioned brutality and greed that the native people were subjected to. They point out that the colonial powers bestowed complex systems of law, education, economy, and comprehensive infrastructure to their colonial possessions. They also argue that colonization resulted in higher life expectancies, and higher standards of living for all.
Instead of choosing between the above black-and-white binary options, the nuanced and educated reader can recognize that these things are not mutually exclusive. They can both be true and valid; to one degree or another.
"History is never tidy," despite many people's attempts to make it that way. Sadly, that balanced and nuanced view is not provided here by the author...
Also, despite the human rights abuses carried out by some colonial regimes, post-colonial Africa did not turn out to be the utopia that leftist academics and other assorted well-wishers hoped it would be. This turbulent period led to power vacuums, and saw many African leaders instill ruthless one-party dictatorships of "Big Man Rule," headed by corrupt strongmen. Kleptocracy, nepotism, and cronyism were (and still are) commonplace. A decent case has been made that many Africans fared better under colonialism than they did under the corrupt regimes that followed.
The author also did a piss-poor job of covering the modern country of Zimbabwe (formerly known as Rhodesia) and its important figures; Ian Smith, Robert Mugabe, and Joshua Nkomo.
He paints Rhodesia as an apartheid state. It was not. The author went off on a tear here, and I'm not sure how much of what he wrote was accidentally inaccurate, or deliberate lies. I would highly recommend the former Rhodesian PM Ian Smith's autobiography The Great Betrayal to any readers of this review. Most of what the author of this book asserts is dealt with in a long-form fashion there. Kenyon cites the book here, which makes me wonder how he ended up with the narrative he did.
The story of Rhodesia and her eventual downfall is not the one of white versus black racial conflict and fighting that many authors (like this one) would have you believe. Rather, the story of Rhodesia is one of fighting for the values of freedom and civilization against the destructive forces of socialism/communism. It is the story of how a brave and noble country fought to preserve the values that made Western civilization great in the first place, despite being abandoned by their closest allies in their time of need.
In fact, a large part of the story of post-colonial Africa is the story of communist agitation and revolutionary incitement. China, Russia, and even North Korea were trying to stoke the fires of socialism in the power vacuum of post-colonial Africa.
KGB dissident and defector Yuri Bezmenov says this in his book Love Letter to America about the communist M.O.:
"This process has many names: psychological warfare, ideological aggression, propaganda warfare etc. The KGB calls it активные мероприятия, or "Active Measures".
Kenyon blatantly lies about Ian Smith, saying: "As far as Smith was concerned, this ‘mad idea of a handover’, no matter how long it took, was ‘a sell-out of the European and his civilization’, and would inevitably lead to a Congo-style implosion. The violence and looting in Salisbury and Bulawayo, he warned, were evidence of that."
This was incorrect. Smith was not opposed to majority rule, but wanted the transition to be gradual, as just dumping complex systems of economy, law, and infrastructure to mostly illiterate tribal people who have no understanding of these concepts is a sure recipe for disaster. Smith mentions his view of "Evolution, not revolution" in the book many times, and notes that in all other neighboring countries that had seen a hasty colonial retreat - violence, corruption, and failed states inevitably resulted. He wanted to avoid those worst-case scenarios. IMO, Kenyon needs to go back and give it another read. It seems like his politically-partisan inclinations prevent him from seeing the bigger picture.
He paints Smith as an evil man, motivated solely by racism. This is a nefarious accusation and runs contrary to the historical record. Smith literally spent years trying to negotiate with Great Britain, but the author says: "He was Rhodesia’s prime minister, and would use his position to pursue a singular purpose; to achieve independence, at any cost, from Britain."
Even more upsetting, Kenyon waxes nostalgic about Nkomo and Mugabi's communist insurgent forces, which terrorized and killed both white and black people alike; raping and murdering white farmer's wives and daughters, and ruling the black tribal people with intimidation and violence.
Instead, he talks about a retaliatory cross-border raid by the Rhodesian Selous Scouts into neighboring communist-controlled Mozambique. He paints the killed FRELIMO communist insurgent soldiers as poor, helpless martyrs. There is no mention of the fact that it was the same communist insurgents that initiated these cross-border raids in the first place, effectively declaring war on the country, which then allowed the Rhodesian forces to go after them before they crossed the border and attacked again. What should the Rhodesian forces have done? Nothing, and let their country be invaded by thousands of murderous insurgents??
Joshua Nkomo is talked about with glowing language again and again. The author conveniently doesn't mention that he personally ordered the downing of 2 civilian passenger aircraft, killing dozens of innocent men, women and children. In one case, Flight 825, the survivors were shot and then bayonetted, including a mother and her 3-week-old baby. The book "A Handful of Hard Men: The SAS and the Battle for Rhodesia" details these attacks, and they will turn your stomach.
Finally, the book ends without a conclusion, epilogue, or post text of any kind, other than the author's acknowledgments. A strange end to a jumbled book.
***********************
As stated at the start of this review, Dictatorland covered some interesting ground. However, it is a very long book; the audiobook version I have clocked in at ~19 hours. A large chunk could have been edited out for the sake of brevity and clarity.
Also, the above-mentioned criticisms left me with a bad taste in my mouth.
I would not recommend this one.
2 stars.
July 10, 2020
Choć ma ten typowy dla anglosaskiego non-fiction sposób wprowadzania bohaterów a la literatura piękna ("Wszedł do pokoju, usiadł i zaczął pisać"), to jest to szalenie ciekawa książka, po której z trudem przełykam czekoladę.
September 6, 2023
Shocking, stunning. Hard to read, harder to put down
November 12, 2019
It might be impossible to understand Africa without knowing the colonial past. But at the same time it is also important what happened immediately afterwards: economic mismanagement and dictators who stole like the ravens. Mobutu, Mugabe, Gaddafi and many other: one even worse than the other.
Power and corruption still is on the agenda of many African governments, but at least there is hope for the future.
Power and corruption still is on the agenda of many African governments, but at least there is hope for the future.
May 6, 2024
This was a solid read. I thought the first three histories (Congo, Zimbabwe, and Libya) were the best. I had some familiarity with these dictators having read related books on these regimes previously. I petered out with the other four countries (Nigeria, Ivory Coast, Guinea and Etritrea) as the stories were not so compelling.
Thorough research and an important book.
4 stars.
Thorough research and an important book.
4 stars.
January 22, 2022
Even in the modern day, a thing that bothers me is how Africa keeps getting referred to as a continent in political/economic/business discourse, and not by specifics of individual countries (barring few exceptions). As evident in the title, the author centres the premise around brutal dictators to unpack the stories of few of them - Congo, Zimbabwe, Libya, Nigeria, Equatorial Guinea, Côte d'Ivoire and Eritrea. We probably identify them just by their toxic and corrupt regimes, but their life journeys reveal much more - all of them started as well-intentioned liberating revolutionaries devoted to the country's future, gradually getting corrupted with power, and eventually morphing into lunatic despots. There are other common and defining themes - world-captivating resources (diamonds, gold, oil, cocoa), the shambolic residue of European colonialism, endless coups, Cold War and American/USSR insecurities.
From traveling across the continent, to establishing the historical & geopolitical context, to tracking & interviewing key players in each of these stories, Paul Kenyon's research is extensive. But he treads the right balance of not overwhelming the reader with too much details, while delivering a thoroughly engaging narrative. Hugely informative, disturbing, fascinating - I can't find any faults with the book, apart from wanting to read about more countries - maybe his next book :)
From traveling across the continent, to establishing the historical & geopolitical context, to tracking & interviewing key players in each of these stories, Paul Kenyon's research is extensive. But he treads the right balance of not overwhelming the reader with too much details, while delivering a thoroughly engaging narrative. Hugely informative, disturbing, fascinating - I can't find any faults with the book, apart from wanting to read about more countries - maybe his next book :)
December 13, 2022
Took me two years to finish not because of the length or entertainment value but because of how painful the experience is. It's evil that's not even profound, just greedy and banal, and it existed not so long ago... here, in Africa. These are RECOLLECTIONS. A brilliant heroic piece of journalism here.
March 20, 2019
I became obsessed with this book almost from page one. It’s most definitely going on my list of ‘books people should read who want to know about africa’. And I’ve already recommended it to everyone I know.
Anyway, this book outlines the dictatorial histories of Congo, Zimbabwe, nigeria, Libya, Equatorial Guinea, Côte d’Ivoire, and Eritrea based on their leaders’ exploitation of resources - gold, diamonds, oil, cocoa, or humans. Each chapter is a thorough history of the primary dictator that brought ruin to his specific country - a bit of background, how he came to power, and what he did once he got there. And it’s amazing, and depressing, and in some cases terrifying.
What I loved about it was that each history was accessible, and readable. And brings the people, places, and events to life. It’s a history book, but it reads like a dramatic thriller or movie. It keeps you turning the pages. It’s well arranged and brings tidbits from so many corners to paint a picture of a man’s ruin. There isn’t any new ground here - all of this stuff is available in other books, but this one just brings it together so perfectly.
My minor complaints - there were many typos in my edition (and it was from a book store, so not a prepublished edition). Minor, but annoying. Especially when the typos involved regular misspellings of someone’s name. Next, there were many events glossed over which led to a few mischaracterizations in the timeline of events, or what affected what. No one who hasn’t read a million books on these topics would probably notice though. Finally, I know it was a history book, but having even a little analysis about the legacy of each of these men (other than for Equatorial Guinea and Eritrea whose dictators are still in power) and how it affects the country today would have been nice. I know that would have made it longer and brought it a bit out of the history realm, but I think those things are important.
At the end of the day though, I loved it, and I’ll continue to recommend it to everyone. Even understanding that 99.9 percent of people will never take me up on that recommendation :)
Anyway, this book outlines the dictatorial histories of Congo, Zimbabwe, nigeria, Libya, Equatorial Guinea, Côte d’Ivoire, and Eritrea based on their leaders’ exploitation of resources - gold, diamonds, oil, cocoa, or humans. Each chapter is a thorough history of the primary dictator that brought ruin to his specific country - a bit of background, how he came to power, and what he did once he got there. And it’s amazing, and depressing, and in some cases terrifying.
What I loved about it was that each history was accessible, and readable. And brings the people, places, and events to life. It’s a history book, but it reads like a dramatic thriller or movie. It keeps you turning the pages. It’s well arranged and brings tidbits from so many corners to paint a picture of a man’s ruin. There isn’t any new ground here - all of this stuff is available in other books, but this one just brings it together so perfectly.
My minor complaints - there were many typos in my edition (and it was from a book store, so not a prepublished edition). Minor, but annoying. Especially when the typos involved regular misspellings of someone’s name. Next, there were many events glossed over which led to a few mischaracterizations in the timeline of events, or what affected what. No one who hasn’t read a million books on these topics would probably notice though. Finally, I know it was a history book, but having even a little analysis about the legacy of each of these men (other than for Equatorial Guinea and Eritrea whose dictators are still in power) and how it affects the country today would have been nice. I know that would have made it longer and brought it a bit out of the history realm, but I think those things are important.
At the end of the day though, I loved it, and I’ll continue to recommend it to everyone. Even understanding that 99.9 percent of people will never take me up on that recommendation :)
February 3, 2021
The end of this book made me so sad because it is still happening. This incredibly written look at power hungry men isn't about some long forgotten past. I asked my father about Libyas influence on oil prices worldwide. And Mum chimed in and spoke about having to fill up according to their license plates. But they didn't know why. These crazy powerful men begin with a simple ideology. - Overthrowing the oppressor. And then next minute, they are the oppressor. They are the mass murderers, the thieves, the manipulators. And no longer for the end game of liberating their people. But now, they just want more and more. and when one is dealing with billions of dollars in oil, or diamonds, or most of the worlds supply of chocolate...
The last chapter is about the current leader of Eritrea. One who seems to live quite a lowly life. He doesn't have multiple properties in France like others in this book. He hasn't filled up bank accounts in other places in the world, he hasn't financed liberation movements elsewhere. he simply imprisoned much of his countrymen and women, and all of his opponents to keep power. So many smart, service-minded people dead. Because of an insecure, quiet man who thought being in power was more important than his initial hopes of independence and rebuilding after being oppressed by the Italians, the Ethiopians, the British, the Muslims.....
Rewind to the early 1900s. How different would it be if the colonies trained and handed back countries without the sneaky sneak. And without the cold war. and without the need to rap and pillage.
Or how different it would have been if now border lines were drawn on the maps by anyone that wasn't born in these lands. instead of 52 nations, what if there had been 300. That continued cultures and traditions and languages further into the future.
history is a freakbag of stories that are uncomfortable but understandable. I loved this book. And apparently my Dad is going to read it too :D Skype dates are about to get even better for us and even worse for mum :D
The last chapter is about the current leader of Eritrea. One who seems to live quite a lowly life. He doesn't have multiple properties in France like others in this book. He hasn't filled up bank accounts in other places in the world, he hasn't financed liberation movements elsewhere. he simply imprisoned much of his countrymen and women, and all of his opponents to keep power. So many smart, service-minded people dead. Because of an insecure, quiet man who thought being in power was more important than his initial hopes of independence and rebuilding after being oppressed by the Italians, the Ethiopians, the British, the Muslims.....
Rewind to the early 1900s. How different would it be if the colonies trained and handed back countries without the sneaky sneak. And without the cold war. and without the need to rap and pillage.
Or how different it would have been if now border lines were drawn on the maps by anyone that wasn't born in these lands. instead of 52 nations, what if there had been 300. That continued cultures and traditions and languages further into the future.
history is a freakbag of stories that are uncomfortable but understandable. I loved this book. And apparently my Dad is going to read it too :D Skype dates are about to get even better for us and even worse for mum :D
September 12, 2019
Enlightening. Informative. And very sad.
Must-read to all who is interested in global affairs.
P.S. Many western countries, their business and banks were/ are immoral greedy bastards also.
Must-read to all who is interested in global affairs.
P.S. Many western countries, their business and banks were/ are immoral greedy bastards also.
September 17, 2018
A century back, if you had to define Africa, you would describe its dusty and barren landscapes, scorching weather and hostile tribes. There was nothing that could excite. These myths and the wrong notion were broken. The Europeans were not fool. They would invest their resources simply not to colonize the nation. Africa was one of major hotspot for slavery. Now this cannot be the sole reason for the European powers to scramble for Africa. They had sensed long back about the continent’s untapped potential. During the Berlin Conference of 1884-85, the European powers divided the continent among themselves. Later, diamonds were discovered across several places like Belgian occupied Congo, Portuguese occupied Angola and British Colonies Sierra Leone and South Rhodesia (Present day Zimbabwe). The geologists were drawn towards the termite mounds on the parched and near lifeless plains of Kalahari desert. Now to build these mounds, the termites require moisture and damp clay for which they have to burrow down deep. When the particles collected by these termites were examined, it gave evidence of diamonds beneath the surface. More such traces were found in other areas too. Eventually, in one of the most sparsely populated country in Africa – Bechuanaland (Present day Botswana), dozens of diamond filled volcanoes were found.
The most demanding source of electricity was coal. It was coal that powered the steam engines in ships and trains. It also drove the electricity. There was no reason for anybody to look for an alternative. During the turn of the 19th century, the age of automobile dawned. The entire British maritime capabilities were dependent on regular and reliable supply of oil. There was nothing suitable in UK and Winston Churchill knew they would have to look elsewhere. Both US and UK looked for unchartered land for oil. The oil was already discovered in Middle East Asia but for strategic reasons, it made sense not to rely exclusively on this continent alone. For centuries, nomadic tribes crossing the Sahara desert have found curious rainbow sheen on the surface of oasis water. Portuguese sailors had observed dribbles of hot tar seeping through the rocks in Africa. Something curious was definitely lying underneath. During the mid-19th century, however oil reserves were being discovered at various places in Africa. However, the colossal oil reserve was unlocked more recently.
On the narrow belt of land ten degrees on either side of the equator, there are shades of jungle canopy, regular rain and absence of hot winds. These are rare climatic conditions which are offered by just few regions of the world. The west Africa is among them. These rare conditions allow cocoa bushes to thrive. The region became most sought after for major chocolate manufacturers of the world including Cadbury. Most of the chocolate bars consumed today are coming from cocoa bushes of Ghana and Cote d’Ivoire (also known to many as Ivory Coast). The cocoa has been driving the economies for these two regions for the last 4-5 decades.
The book is not exactly about which minerals was unearth at which location. Now why then these are needed at all to be mentioned? It’s the lure of these minerals and plants that tethered western nations to the continent for long, even after their colonies gained independence. It’s the wealth that generated power post-independence. The Western nations were compelled to retreat because after World War-II, the international opinion on imperialism was changing. It was even more difficult to hold on to their colonies due to rise in nationalist movements in the 1950’s and ‘60s. Suddenly local rulers were in control of the vast minerals that were in the hand of England, France, Portugal and Belgium. The local rulers were underprepared for governance. The centuries old tribal rivalries again were exacerbated. Hostile people were thrown together to sort out their differences at the ballot box. A lot of hope and optimism was pinned on the newly elected rulers but they were seeking aggrandizement and choose to advance their own interests. These minerals either directly or indirectly were used to reward the loyal and silence their foes. The leaders clung to power with chicanery for fear of their safety. They became paranoid. A single clan or families brazenly began to dominate by dirty means. Democracy was procrastinated for indefinite period. Unfortunately, the embryonic nation never saw the dawn. The book is all about how the continent was looted on a broad daylight and how it still going on.
In Congo, idealist Patrice Lumumba was in the forefront during nationalist movement for independence from Belgium rule. He was a national hero. He became the first Prime Minister. Soon secessionist movement supported by Belgium began to gain steam. He appealed to USA and UN but in vain. He then turned to USSR for support. This led to his differences with the President Joseph Kasa-Vubu and Lumumba staunch supporter Mobutu Sese Seko. Ultimately he was imprisoned by State authorities under Mobutu and was executed. It was alleged to be USA and Belgium conspiracy. They also supported Mobutu in a coup and he was installed in power for next three decades. The Parliament was reduced to naught. He took control of the press. He formed a political party which was hurriedly joined by all politicians for their own safety. Dissidents were caught, tortured and treated mercilessly. He and his family looted the country of billions of dollars. The money resulted from national treasure was siphoned off to his Swiss, Belgian and US account.
The Zimbabwe was a British colony. One of the major contributor was white farmers who used to make significant contribution in agricultural production. The local black population passively tolerated white dominance for years till Robert Mugabe came and mobilized his people against the injustice. Robert Mugabe became the first head of the government. He also declared that white farmers were integral part of the nation. There was a new hope but in years to come, it turned into a despair. His rule is now remembered more for murder, torture, bloodshed, intimidation and persecution of political opponents. White farmers land was forcibly taken and handed over to war veterans as a compensation. The new black farm owner had no skill to manage a farm. They ended up tearing irrigation pipes to sell the lead and abandoned farm machineries. The fields reverted to wilderness. Newly unproductive farms and economic mismanagement led to spiraling of food prices. The country experienced mind blogging hyperinflation. Few became billionaires and most were at the brink of starvation.
The Nigeria was a British colony which gained its independence from the British. After independence, it’s political landscape was dominated by perpetual rise and fall of dictators. It has legacy of violent dictators. Their north, east and south factions were dominated by powerful leaders. Still they managed to elect their first president and turn themselves into a federal republic. However, there was division in army too and the nation followed the path of civil war. After each coup, a dictator was overthrown and murdered. Though the elections were held in 1993 but it was annulled and an interim government was set up. This too was overthrown by Sani Abacha. He banned all political parties and controlled the press too. He brutally suppressed all kind of dissents at home. His most brutal act was execution for treason of a writer Ken Saro-Wiwa and other activists who protested against the environmental exploitation. Despite the oil wealth, the life in Nigeria was all about starvation, poverty and murder. His family enriched themselves with huge wealth which was parked in European bank.
In Equatorial Guinea, Macias Nguema eliminated his perceived enemies in a more gruesome manner. There have been hurried mass executions. Entire village was torched to eliminate a single suspected subversive. His militias were cut loose and they would drunkenly kill people or bury them up to their neck in sand to be eaten by ants. He had killed intellectuals, government officials, members of assembly and some of his closest ministerial colleagues and supporter. He was overthrown by his nephew Obiang Nguema in a bloodless coup. Macias was later killed. Obiang ruled for more than 3 decades. As had been the case with other African nations, wealth due to huge oil reserves is concentrated in the hands of the few. Most Equatorial Guinean are living in abject poverty. There is no access to healthcare or education. Opposition is non-existent. Torture and intimidation is common in places.
It’s similar storylines in other countries too. The leader who lead the cause for independence became head of the state. The nation founding father was chosen to lead their nation towards democracy, prosperity and development. The newly acquired wealth was a big booster. However, the outcome turned something else. Though Colonel Gaddafi and Felix Houphouet-Boigny, head of Libya and Ivory Coast respectively had spend huge amount for welfare activities but nevertheless their rule was an authoritarian, one marked by gross human right violation. They ruled for decades and never allowed democracy to flourish. Gaddafi was known more for his outlandish behavior, staying with harem of women soldiers in tent and promoting global terrorism. Felix Houphouet-Boigny became so rich on his country’s cocoa crop that he built a thirty-five-storey high basilica in the jungles of the Ivory Coast
Do the Western nations have any role to play in the abysmal condition of Africa? On the surface it seems no. They are no way responsible. Drill down to the bottom and do the analysis. Behind the facade, their double standard come to the fore. Even though they relinquished controls but still some lingered on to keep a hand on Africa’s mineral wealth. During the cold war era, the ex-colonial powers stayed on citing perceived communist threat. They shamelessly channeled the profits to their nation. The multinational companies from western nations cut deal with authoritarian African rulers. These companies continue to prosper by securing mineral rights. The West ignored and tolerated continent’s most brutal dictators and the human right violations perpetuated by them, for their own vested interest. Actually, the West is directly responsible for endemic corruption and authoritarianism. Though the slave trade came to an end in the 19th century but at the back of this trade, Europeans and North Americans developed wealthy, militarily powerful and technologically advanced society. The irony is that they were treated shabbily and lakhs of people were decimated. If you have seen the movie Apocalypto, directed by Mel Gibson then recall the scene where a tribal village was raided by a group and how they were taken to a city. The reel life event was a reality. This is how slaves were treated by Western nations. Due to slavery and colonialism, the West developed at Africa’s expense. In the present scenario, the exploitation still continues in the name of development. Conditional loans are given to these African countries. Public services such as transport, water supply, sewage and health were privatized. The wealth still flows from Africa to the West in the name of debt repayments. Western corporations are still buying privatized infrastructure and the exploitation of African slaves still continues.
Colonization, nationalism, independence, mineral wealth and dictatorship are the common points that you would find in the narratives. Had the book been simply on dictatorship in Africa then other countries like Rwanda, Togo, Somalia, Liberia, Chad, Cameroon and Uganda too would have found mentions. Such is the sorry state of the continent. Sordid and shoddy deals have become the norm. The widespread shenanigans have ruined the continent. The Machiavellian and diabolic rulers are obsessed with power. Slowly and steadily the countries are falling into China’s debt trap. The most recent example is Djibouti and Zambia is expected to follow suit. The continent itself seems to have been cursed to be a slave state. That’s their predisposition and febrile symptoms refuse to leave. However, the book has been well researched and presented. The manner in which the author had collected information for his book is commendable. He has devoted few pages on his source of information. If you are reading this book, then please don’t skip this part. The wealth of the nation has been linked to dictatorship. The Eritrea conflict with Ethiopians is the only quibble. Otherwise It has been a riveting and engrossing read.
The most demanding source of electricity was coal. It was coal that powered the steam engines in ships and trains. It also drove the electricity. There was no reason for anybody to look for an alternative. During the turn of the 19th century, the age of automobile dawned. The entire British maritime capabilities were dependent on regular and reliable supply of oil. There was nothing suitable in UK and Winston Churchill knew they would have to look elsewhere. Both US and UK looked for unchartered land for oil. The oil was already discovered in Middle East Asia but for strategic reasons, it made sense not to rely exclusively on this continent alone. For centuries, nomadic tribes crossing the Sahara desert have found curious rainbow sheen on the surface of oasis water. Portuguese sailors had observed dribbles of hot tar seeping through the rocks in Africa. Something curious was definitely lying underneath. During the mid-19th century, however oil reserves were being discovered at various places in Africa. However, the colossal oil reserve was unlocked more recently.
On the narrow belt of land ten degrees on either side of the equator, there are shades of jungle canopy, regular rain and absence of hot winds. These are rare climatic conditions which are offered by just few regions of the world. The west Africa is among them. These rare conditions allow cocoa bushes to thrive. The region became most sought after for major chocolate manufacturers of the world including Cadbury. Most of the chocolate bars consumed today are coming from cocoa bushes of Ghana and Cote d’Ivoire (also known to many as Ivory Coast). The cocoa has been driving the economies for these two regions for the last 4-5 decades.
The book is not exactly about which minerals was unearth at which location. Now why then these are needed at all to be mentioned? It’s the lure of these minerals and plants that tethered western nations to the continent for long, even after their colonies gained independence. It’s the wealth that generated power post-independence. The Western nations were compelled to retreat because after World War-II, the international opinion on imperialism was changing. It was even more difficult to hold on to their colonies due to rise in nationalist movements in the 1950’s and ‘60s. Suddenly local rulers were in control of the vast minerals that were in the hand of England, France, Portugal and Belgium. The local rulers were underprepared for governance. The centuries old tribal rivalries again were exacerbated. Hostile people were thrown together to sort out their differences at the ballot box. A lot of hope and optimism was pinned on the newly elected rulers but they were seeking aggrandizement and choose to advance their own interests. These minerals either directly or indirectly were used to reward the loyal and silence their foes. The leaders clung to power with chicanery for fear of their safety. They became paranoid. A single clan or families brazenly began to dominate by dirty means. Democracy was procrastinated for indefinite period. Unfortunately, the embryonic nation never saw the dawn. The book is all about how the continent was looted on a broad daylight and how it still going on.
In Congo, idealist Patrice Lumumba was in the forefront during nationalist movement for independence from Belgium rule. He was a national hero. He became the first Prime Minister. Soon secessionist movement supported by Belgium began to gain steam. He appealed to USA and UN but in vain. He then turned to USSR for support. This led to his differences with the President Joseph Kasa-Vubu and Lumumba staunch supporter Mobutu Sese Seko. Ultimately he was imprisoned by State authorities under Mobutu and was executed. It was alleged to be USA and Belgium conspiracy. They also supported Mobutu in a coup and he was installed in power for next three decades. The Parliament was reduced to naught. He took control of the press. He formed a political party which was hurriedly joined by all politicians for their own safety. Dissidents were caught, tortured and treated mercilessly. He and his family looted the country of billions of dollars. The money resulted from national treasure was siphoned off to his Swiss, Belgian and US account.
The Zimbabwe was a British colony. One of the major contributor was white farmers who used to make significant contribution in agricultural production. The local black population passively tolerated white dominance for years till Robert Mugabe came and mobilized his people against the injustice. Robert Mugabe became the first head of the government. He also declared that white farmers were integral part of the nation. There was a new hope but in years to come, it turned into a despair. His rule is now remembered more for murder, torture, bloodshed, intimidation and persecution of political opponents. White farmers land was forcibly taken and handed over to war veterans as a compensation. The new black farm owner had no skill to manage a farm. They ended up tearing irrigation pipes to sell the lead and abandoned farm machineries. The fields reverted to wilderness. Newly unproductive farms and economic mismanagement led to spiraling of food prices. The country experienced mind blogging hyperinflation. Few became billionaires and most were at the brink of starvation.
The Nigeria was a British colony which gained its independence from the British. After independence, it’s political landscape was dominated by perpetual rise and fall of dictators. It has legacy of violent dictators. Their north, east and south factions were dominated by powerful leaders. Still they managed to elect their first president and turn themselves into a federal republic. However, there was division in army too and the nation followed the path of civil war. After each coup, a dictator was overthrown and murdered. Though the elections were held in 1993 but it was annulled and an interim government was set up. This too was overthrown by Sani Abacha. He banned all political parties and controlled the press too. He brutally suppressed all kind of dissents at home. His most brutal act was execution for treason of a writer Ken Saro-Wiwa and other activists who protested against the environmental exploitation. Despite the oil wealth, the life in Nigeria was all about starvation, poverty and murder. His family enriched themselves with huge wealth which was parked in European bank.
In Equatorial Guinea, Macias Nguema eliminated his perceived enemies in a more gruesome manner. There have been hurried mass executions. Entire village was torched to eliminate a single suspected subversive. His militias were cut loose and they would drunkenly kill people or bury them up to their neck in sand to be eaten by ants. He had killed intellectuals, government officials, members of assembly and some of his closest ministerial colleagues and supporter. He was overthrown by his nephew Obiang Nguema in a bloodless coup. Macias was later killed. Obiang ruled for more than 3 decades. As had been the case with other African nations, wealth due to huge oil reserves is concentrated in the hands of the few. Most Equatorial Guinean are living in abject poverty. There is no access to healthcare or education. Opposition is non-existent. Torture and intimidation is common in places.
It’s similar storylines in other countries too. The leader who lead the cause for independence became head of the state. The nation founding father was chosen to lead their nation towards democracy, prosperity and development. The newly acquired wealth was a big booster. However, the outcome turned something else. Though Colonel Gaddafi and Felix Houphouet-Boigny, head of Libya and Ivory Coast respectively had spend huge amount for welfare activities but nevertheless their rule was an authoritarian, one marked by gross human right violation. They ruled for decades and never allowed democracy to flourish. Gaddafi was known more for his outlandish behavior, staying with harem of women soldiers in tent and promoting global terrorism. Felix Houphouet-Boigny became so rich on his country’s cocoa crop that he built a thirty-five-storey high basilica in the jungles of the Ivory Coast
Do the Western nations have any role to play in the abysmal condition of Africa? On the surface it seems no. They are no way responsible. Drill down to the bottom and do the analysis. Behind the facade, their double standard come to the fore. Even though they relinquished controls but still some lingered on to keep a hand on Africa’s mineral wealth. During the cold war era, the ex-colonial powers stayed on citing perceived communist threat. They shamelessly channeled the profits to their nation. The multinational companies from western nations cut deal with authoritarian African rulers. These companies continue to prosper by securing mineral rights. The West ignored and tolerated continent’s most brutal dictators and the human right violations perpetuated by them, for their own vested interest. Actually, the West is directly responsible for endemic corruption and authoritarianism. Though the slave trade came to an end in the 19th century but at the back of this trade, Europeans and North Americans developed wealthy, militarily powerful and technologically advanced society. The irony is that they were treated shabbily and lakhs of people were decimated. If you have seen the movie Apocalypto, directed by Mel Gibson then recall the scene where a tribal village was raided by a group and how they were taken to a city. The reel life event was a reality. This is how slaves were treated by Western nations. Due to slavery and colonialism, the West developed at Africa’s expense. In the present scenario, the exploitation still continues in the name of development. Conditional loans are given to these African countries. Public services such as transport, water supply, sewage and health were privatized. The wealth still flows from Africa to the West in the name of debt repayments. Western corporations are still buying privatized infrastructure and the exploitation of African slaves still continues.
Colonization, nationalism, independence, mineral wealth and dictatorship are the common points that you would find in the narratives. Had the book been simply on dictatorship in Africa then other countries like Rwanda, Togo, Somalia, Liberia, Chad, Cameroon and Uganda too would have found mentions. Such is the sorry state of the continent. Sordid and shoddy deals have become the norm. The widespread shenanigans have ruined the continent. The Machiavellian and diabolic rulers are obsessed with power. Slowly and steadily the countries are falling into China’s debt trap. The most recent example is Djibouti and Zambia is expected to follow suit. The continent itself seems to have been cursed to be a slave state. That’s their predisposition and febrile symptoms refuse to leave. However, the book has been well researched and presented. The manner in which the author had collected information for his book is commendable. He has devoted few pages on his source of information. If you are reading this book, then please don’t skip this part. The wealth of the nation has been linked to dictatorship. The Eritrea conflict with Ethiopians is the only quibble. Otherwise It has been a riveting and engrossing read.
October 25, 2022
One of my favorite books. I've maxed out the character limit so please see the comments for a continued review- African geopolitics is the real-life version of Game of Thrones. Reading Dictatorland is the first time I’ve learned about the African political landscape (1950s-2000s), so for the edification of committing this complex topic to memory, I have compiled a ‘SparkNotes’ summary, not unlike the book reports I dreaded in middle school.
The Author breaks down the recent major conflicts in Africa into four main commercial drivers with a chapter on each key country:
Gold and Diamonds: The Democratic Republic of the Congo (previously Zaire) and Zimbabwe
Oil: Libya, Nigeria, and Equatorial Guinea
Chocolate: Côte d'Ivoire
Modern Slavery: Eritrea
Each of these countries experienced economic, political, and social whiplash after the discovery of resources they could wield to harness power on a global scale. After reviewing each of these conflicts by country I’ve revised my previous understanding that these African conflicts and brutality were ‘entirely the fault of western influence.’ While it may have been the westerners who equipped peoples with the tools to make the fires of conflict, it was tyrannical despots who lit the furnaces of chaos, fueled the fires, and used the fires to cast doubt, inflame discord, bend will, eviscerate dissent, fuse power, and forge dictatorships.
Gold and Diamonds
The Democratic Republic of the Congo (previously Zaire)
Historical context of the DRC: The story of what we know as the Democratic Republic of Congo began with the oppressive Belgian King Leopold the 2nd (responsible for killing over 10 Million Africans). Put simply, Belgian citizens controlled the resources and paid pittance for labor services from the local population. Over the years, a Congolese class of citizens began to gain skills and job training (they called these skilled workers “Évolué'' meaning ‘developed’). Despite their education, they were still regarded as second class citizens through the 1960’s being subjected to curfews and prevented from certain jobs. Slowly, this more educated class of Congolese began demanding more rights and respect, creating African Nationalist parties. One key figure who rode the tidal wave of revolution was a precocious young Évolué named Mobutu Sese Seko.
As a teenager in 1949, Mobutu snuck out of school to see a girl; he was sentenced to 7 years of military service. Having been trained as a french-speaking Évolué, he quickly scaled ranks within the military.
Mobutu became friends with (and personal assistant to) Patrice Lumumba who would lead a nationalist Mouvement National Congolais calling for the ‘liberation of the Congo’. This nationalist party towed the line between capitalist and communist leanings. Ultimately, after Lumumba was elected as the first Prime Minister of the Congo, massive protests occurred.
Within 7 days of election, unrest led to Lumumba’s army massacring rebels. Lumumba dismissed all white officers; appointed Mobutu the head of the state, then asked the Soviets to help restore order. This is where the story gets a bit fuzzy— It is likely, to counteract Lumumba’s pro-Soviet stance, the CIA ‘signaled’ support for Mobutu to take the country in another direction. Mobutu was appointed to Major General by Lumumba– then immediately publicly accused Lumumba of being a communist, and overnight, conducted a military coup d'etat to overtake both the President and Prime Minister. The ‘personal assistant’ who rode Lumumba’s coattails was now the military dictator. Immediately, he ordered the execution of Lumumba. Then, in a move that could only be replicated by Cersi Lannister, he threw a massive memorial ceremony for Lumumba’s greatness— the man he just killed.
In similar Game of Thrones fashion, Mobutu changed his name to ‘Mobutu Sese Seko Kuku Ngbendu Wa Za Banga’ which means ‘The warrior who knows no defeat because of his endurance and inflexible will and is all-powerful, leaving fire in his wake as he goes from conquest to conquest.’ Personally, I think ‘Daenerys Stormborn of House Targaryen, the First of Her Name, Queen of the Andals and the First Men, Protector of the Seven Kingdoms, the Mother of Dragons, the Khaleesi of the Great Grass Sea, the Unburnt, the Breaker of Chains’ has him beat. Continuing the theme, when his first wife died, he took his mistress as his wife and his mistress’s twin sister as his new mistress— *double-double-take*.
If you watch videos of any celebration in Zaire, it looks like a satirical cult of self-flagellation for Mobutu– an absolutely bizarre display of supplicant devotion. The beginning of the destruction of Zaire began in 1973 when Mobutu met with Communist Chinese Chairman Mao. Mao told Mobutu, ‘if Zaire is not economically independent, then it is nothing.’ Taking Mao’s advice a bit too far, Mobutu seized all foreign business (through a pro-African campaign), then reallocated those businesses to his friends and family (his net worth spiked to $5B, 1/3rd of the country’s GDP). Continually, Mobutu’s forces snuffed out political dissidents with force and brutality; while he and his cronies siphoned money from the gold and diamond deposits through black market corruption, essentially starting a quasi-capitalistic side market.
Despite ordering a coup d'etat, executing his political opponents, facilitating blatant corruption, and running his country into the ground, Mobutu was met with international indifference. Presidents Nixon and Reagan both praised his regime as a stabilizing power in the region, and he even hosted ‘the Rumble in the Jungle’ with his friend Muhammad Ali. After his position as dictator for some 35 years, his regime was overthrown in 1996, and he died of prostate cancer shortly thereafter. In classic George R.R. Martin style, this whirlwind of a decades-long power grab ended anticlimactically.
Zimbabwe
Historical context of Zimbabwe: Zimbabwe began as a British colony known as Southern Rhodesia, named after Cecil Rhodes, its founder, and leader of the British South Africa Company, which sought to extract gold, diamonds, and rich farmlands. Check out this fascinating article I found from Jan 1927 published in Geographical Review by Taylor & Francis:
I’d like to highlight the perceived prosperity of this ‘white nation’ in Africa because, at the end of this section, I’ll circle back to some sinister implications now present in modern-day. While this prosperous land was a new frontier for white Europeans– they had essentially taken this land from the natives, and subjected them to their rule. What started as a small colony grew two about 600,000 whites in Southern Rhodesia— quite a large number, but a clear minority compared to the 5.5 Million blacks.
The British parliament safeguarded the rights and property of these white settlers, and when fighting and skirmishes broke out, whites were defended by Rhodesian Front soldiers led by British leaders Winston Field and Ian Smith. African black Nationalist parties began to emerge as well.
Robert Mugabe was an intelligent, and well-spoken Rhodesian, who returned from studying Socialism in South Africa to join the National Democratic Party led by Joshua Nkomo. After the Rhodesian Front won the election of 1962, Mugabe was through in prison for political dissent (much like Nelson Mandela). After years of struggle, the National Democratic Party split into two parties: the Zimbabwe African People’s Union (ZAPU) inspired group led by Joshua Nkomo (backed by the Soviet Union) and the Zimbabwe African National Union led by Robert Mugabe (backed by the People’s Republic of China).
These black nationalists would not submit to the white Rhodesian government, ultimately forming a shaky joint coalition called the Patriotic Front in order to repatriate the majority of the white-owned farmland to the black Africans. After a bloody Rhodesian bushwar with tens of thousands of casualties between the Rhodesian Front and the Political Front, the groups agreed to the Lancaster House Agreement, where the British would take temporary control over the nation in order to hold elections. Robert Mugabe of the ZANU party became the first Prime Minister of the new nation of Zimbabwe.
Expectedly, Mugabe immediately began actions of reconciliation (e.g., renaming cities, and taking down statues of Rhodesian leaders like Cecil Rhodes); however, the white leaders were initially surprised at how amicable the race relations were. His initial successes included dramatically increasing the literacy rate to 80% as well as resettling over 50,000 black families on land purchased from white farmers. He was even recommended by a British foreign secretary for the Nobel Peace Prize.
As cliche would have it: ‘You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain,’ … and villain he became.
Mugabe began to grow wary of Joshua Nkomo and his vestigial party of ZAPU people in the Western regions. He launched operation “Gukurahundi” where his notorious 5th brigade touched towns, murdered and tortured thousands of the citizens in the region.
Mugabe and his inner circle began to compound their opulence. Meanwhile, the citizens of Zimbabwe became destitute, and when the previous fighters for the ZANU forces learned that their pensions had been looted by Mugabe’s cronies, they turned on the white farmers. The accounts of these attacks on peaceful farmers are quite horrific. Mugabe encouraged these attacks and figured it might appease the soldiers, so he told the police to stand down. If you’re looking for an articulate rebuke of Mubage, I suggest you watch interviews with opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai.
Over time, Robert Mugabe doubled down on this strategy and enacted a formal policy of seizing all white-owned farms, officially cutting all ties to European allies. When they redistributed the farms to those without experience, tools, and apathy. Food production immediately decreased by over 75%. Mugabe’s regime then used ‘quantitative easing measures’ (i.e. printing more money), thus spiking the inflation rate – personal side note: I’ve actually seen a $1B Zimbabwe note from a collector in Muscat, Oman. By 2008, the inflation rate was 250,000,000%... inflation is a problem in the United States at around 5%. Mugabe won another election in 2008 due to political violence and vote-rigging… then murdered hundreds of his key opponents, and tortured thousands.
He chose his fatal last action in 2017 (in his 90s) when he fired his Vice President Mnangagwa to make way for his (unpopular) second wife Grace to become president – Grace is known primarily in the country as ‘Gucci Grace,’ for her lavish spending sprees abroad and being 40 years Mugabe’s junior. Mnangagwa loyalists put Mugabe on house arrest, and he died shortly after.
As I conclude, I’d like to circle back to the presupposition held by white Europeans in 1927, that this Rhodesian ‘white nation’ was a bastion of prosperity in a tribal region. Ostensibly, Rhodesia was an oasis of civility until despots and greed plunged the region into chaos. There are some that say, the potential of Rhodesia was squandered. These disillusioned few might also contend that ‘they’re not treating the property I stole as well as I would have.’
Online there has been a malignant discord among Alt-Right racist extremists who call themselves the ‘Rhodeboos’. These 4Chan-mother’s-basement-dwellers promulgate the belief that white power should be restored to Rhodesia. The white supremacist who walked into a historically black church and massacred nine parishioners sported the Rhodesian flag on his jacket– an homage to the revival of the white dominance hierarchy. After doing more research on this topic, the number of visceral racist slurs, jokes, and merchandise for the support of this vestigial ‘Rhodesian Front’ (e.g., Make Zimbabwe Rhodesia Again) is confounding and infuriating.
The victims in all of this, are the citizens of Zimbabwe, who have been whiplashed back and forth in a charade of power-thirsty ruling classes. As referenced in the 1927 article, ‘socially it is a white aristocracy with a black proletariat.’ The socially white aristocracy was replaced by the Mugabe aristocracy while continuing to persecute the remaining Zimbabweans.
There cannot be a ‘tragic downfall of a promising nation’ if that nation is built on a corrupt foundation. In order to appropriately rebuild an abused population, a corrupted culture, and a dilapidated nation, one must start with the restoration of its unsettled foundation. Only then can one build the pillars of stability, opportunity, and prosperity.
Oil
Libya
Colonel Muammar Gaddafi– was known as ‘the Maddog of the Middle East’ but personally, I prefer ‘the Psycho-sadist Tyrant of the Middle East.’ Muammar Gaddafi, was the embodiment of an excentric villain too vile for any modern film to portray. Gaddafi wore Gucci branded accessories and had an all-female bodyguard; he also kept his enemies frozen in a dungeon, built sound-proof rooms around the city to rape hundreds of children, executed men, women, and children by the thousands, sponsored global terrorism, and other atrocities. The United States had a tumultuous relationship with Gadaffi, as he oscillated between the perception of a definition of a sadist tyrant.
Historical context of Libya: Libya was occupied by Italy starting in 1911, where the treatment of the local population was abysmal. Allied forces kicked out the Italians during the WWII battle of Tripoli in 1943 between the esteemed German Rommel, and Italian Bastico against the British Montgomery. Post-WWII, King Idris, with the help of the British, united the three Italian colonies and created Modern, Libya in 1951. King Idris began selling property to the United States for cash, (for his own family’s keeping) causing abrasion with the local population.
Regional Context: Kumal Nasser, led a bloodless coup in Egypt in 1952. He rode the wave of anti-corruption, anti-western, pro-socialist ideals to power, and was highly regarded in Egypt. His bastion of nationalism instigated a movement across the region. He nationalized the Suez Canal and triggered the Suez crisis. Nassar led a coalition of Arab unity– inspiring a young teenager in a rural community.
Gaddafi’s Beginnings: Muammar Gaddafi was born to a poor bedouin family, and he studied the Quran. Gaddafi enrolled in the Bengazi military academy for the express purpose of staging a Nassar-type coup. He brought a loyal group of friends with him, who all knew they would one day overthrow the government. They waited for eight years. 1963, he established a Secret Free Officers group, in 1967, June 7 saw the rising tensions in the region with Isreal, led Egypt, and Libya to attack Isreal, and got – I believe the technical term is– absolutely spanked. In August 1969, King Idris went to Turkey for medical treatment, and Gaddafi and his schoolmates took control. The Free Officers created the Revolutionary Command Council, at age 27 he became the defacto dictator of the region. Surprisingly, the coup was met with indifference both domestically and internationally. Domestically, the population detested the blatant corruption of the king. Internationally, U.S. State Department Chair Henry Kissinger was willing to accept Gaddafi’s assertion of his coup, because he was anti-communist, and, at the time, the main international diplomatic priority was anti-communism.
Gaddafi’s Reign: Colonel Gaddafi started out on sound footing, by nationalizing petroleum production and setting up programs for the poor, he also used the money from petroleum sales to fund programs for clean drinking water.
By contrast, inklings of the worst to come can be seen in his brazen expulsion of the Jews and anyone with ties to the previous Italian regime; he made the Italians dig up their dead family members, and take them with them. When Nassar died in 1970 from a heart attack, the Arabs lost an iconic leader. Gaddafi insisted he was Nassar’s rightful heir. What I don’t fully understand is how the leader of such a small country of 2 million (Libya), felt that they could fill the void of a leader of 35 million (Egypt). This would be like if the Governor of Kansas said, ‘ok I’ll lead you’ after the Governor of California died. Gaddafi wrote his notorious ‘green book’ which is similar to Hitler’s Mein Kampf. Gaddafis’ power-hungry addiction began to consume him and in 1977 Gaddafi attacked Egypt for their refusal to bend the knee.
Gaddafi’s Tyranny: Burning instruments, prohibiting soccer matches, broadcasting mass executions throughout every day and every night, Gaddafi froze his enemies in a dungeon and had ‘pleasure chambers’ constructed in buildings throughout the capital so if he saw a pretty girl on the street, he would have his bodyguard unit pull over, they would take her, and he would rape her. He also held a mansion full of underaged boys ‘services group’ that he would use for sexual sadism. If you have any doubt that this monster deserved to die a slow and painful death, please read this article: DailyMail.co.uk/The-Macabre-sex-chamber
The Author breaks down the recent major conflicts in Africa into four main commercial drivers with a chapter on each key country:
Gold and Diamonds: The Democratic Republic of the Congo (previously Zaire) and Zimbabwe
Oil: Libya, Nigeria, and Equatorial Guinea
Chocolate: Côte d'Ivoire
Modern Slavery: Eritrea
Each of these countries experienced economic, political, and social whiplash after the discovery of resources they could wield to harness power on a global scale. After reviewing each of these conflicts by country I’ve revised my previous understanding that these African conflicts and brutality were ‘entirely the fault of western influence.’ While it may have been the westerners who equipped peoples with the tools to make the fires of conflict, it was tyrannical despots who lit the furnaces of chaos, fueled the fires, and used the fires to cast doubt, inflame discord, bend will, eviscerate dissent, fuse power, and forge dictatorships.
Gold and Diamonds
The Democratic Republic of the Congo (previously Zaire)
Historical context of the DRC: The story of what we know as the Democratic Republic of Congo began with the oppressive Belgian King Leopold the 2nd (responsible for killing over 10 Million Africans). Put simply, Belgian citizens controlled the resources and paid pittance for labor services from the local population. Over the years, a Congolese class of citizens began to gain skills and job training (they called these skilled workers “Évolué'' meaning ‘developed’). Despite their education, they were still regarded as second class citizens through the 1960’s being subjected to curfews and prevented from certain jobs. Slowly, this more educated class of Congolese began demanding more rights and respect, creating African Nationalist parties. One key figure who rode the tidal wave of revolution was a precocious young Évolué named Mobutu Sese Seko.
As a teenager in 1949, Mobutu snuck out of school to see a girl; he was sentenced to 7 years of military service. Having been trained as a french-speaking Évolué, he quickly scaled ranks within the military.
Mobutu became friends with (and personal assistant to) Patrice Lumumba who would lead a nationalist Mouvement National Congolais calling for the ‘liberation of the Congo’. This nationalist party towed the line between capitalist and communist leanings. Ultimately, after Lumumba was elected as the first Prime Minister of the Congo, massive protests occurred.
Within 7 days of election, unrest led to Lumumba’s army massacring rebels. Lumumba dismissed all white officers; appointed Mobutu the head of the state, then asked the Soviets to help restore order. This is where the story gets a bit fuzzy— It is likely, to counteract Lumumba’s pro-Soviet stance, the CIA ‘signaled’ support for Mobutu to take the country in another direction. Mobutu was appointed to Major General by Lumumba– then immediately publicly accused Lumumba of being a communist, and overnight, conducted a military coup d'etat to overtake both the President and Prime Minister. The ‘personal assistant’ who rode Lumumba’s coattails was now the military dictator. Immediately, he ordered the execution of Lumumba. Then, in a move that could only be replicated by Cersi Lannister, he threw a massive memorial ceremony for Lumumba’s greatness— the man he just killed.
In similar Game of Thrones fashion, Mobutu changed his name to ‘Mobutu Sese Seko Kuku Ngbendu Wa Za Banga’ which means ‘The warrior who knows no defeat because of his endurance and inflexible will and is all-powerful, leaving fire in his wake as he goes from conquest to conquest.’ Personally, I think ‘Daenerys Stormborn of House Targaryen, the First of Her Name, Queen of the Andals and the First Men, Protector of the Seven Kingdoms, the Mother of Dragons, the Khaleesi of the Great Grass Sea, the Unburnt, the Breaker of Chains’ has him beat. Continuing the theme, when his first wife died, he took his mistress as his wife and his mistress’s twin sister as his new mistress— *double-double-take*.
If you watch videos of any celebration in Zaire, it looks like a satirical cult of self-flagellation for Mobutu– an absolutely bizarre display of supplicant devotion. The beginning of the destruction of Zaire began in 1973 when Mobutu met with Communist Chinese Chairman Mao. Mao told Mobutu, ‘if Zaire is not economically independent, then it is nothing.’ Taking Mao’s advice a bit too far, Mobutu seized all foreign business (through a pro-African campaign), then reallocated those businesses to his friends and family (his net worth spiked to $5B, 1/3rd of the country’s GDP). Continually, Mobutu’s forces snuffed out political dissidents with force and brutality; while he and his cronies siphoned money from the gold and diamond deposits through black market corruption, essentially starting a quasi-capitalistic side market.
Despite ordering a coup d'etat, executing his political opponents, facilitating blatant corruption, and running his country into the ground, Mobutu was met with international indifference. Presidents Nixon and Reagan both praised his regime as a stabilizing power in the region, and he even hosted ‘the Rumble in the Jungle’ with his friend Muhammad Ali. After his position as dictator for some 35 years, his regime was overthrown in 1996, and he died of prostate cancer shortly thereafter. In classic George R.R. Martin style, this whirlwind of a decades-long power grab ended anticlimactically.
Zimbabwe
Historical context of Zimbabwe: Zimbabwe began as a British colony known as Southern Rhodesia, named after Cecil Rhodes, its founder, and leader of the British South Africa Company, which sought to extract gold, diamonds, and rich farmlands. Check out this fascinating article I found from Jan 1927 published in Geographical Review by Taylor & Francis:
“In Southern Rhodesia, we have a country unique in many respects. Here is a community of white people living in the tropics and leading a life that is a compromise between that of such countries as India and a true European democracy. Climatically and politically it is a white man’s country: socially it is a white aristocracy with a black proletariat. It is, of course, not altogether a new experiment in social evolution, since similar problems are encountered in South Africa; but contrasts are more pronounced in Rhodesia because the evolution of white and black society has been comparatively much more rapid. We have covered, thanks to railways and telegraphs, more history in thirty years than the Cape covered in two hundred. Our white people have passed in a few years from the pioneer stage with its roughness and hardships to the era of up-to-date hotels and motor cars.”
I’d like to highlight the perceived prosperity of this ‘white nation’ in Africa because, at the end of this section, I’ll circle back to some sinister implications now present in modern-day. While this prosperous land was a new frontier for white Europeans– they had essentially taken this land from the natives, and subjected them to their rule. What started as a small colony grew two about 600,000 whites in Southern Rhodesia— quite a large number, but a clear minority compared to the 5.5 Million blacks.
The British parliament safeguarded the rights and property of these white settlers, and when fighting and skirmishes broke out, whites were defended by Rhodesian Front soldiers led by British leaders Winston Field and Ian Smith. African black Nationalist parties began to emerge as well.
Robert Mugabe was an intelligent, and well-spoken Rhodesian, who returned from studying Socialism in South Africa to join the National Democratic Party led by Joshua Nkomo. After the Rhodesian Front won the election of 1962, Mugabe was through in prison for political dissent (much like Nelson Mandela). After years of struggle, the National Democratic Party split into two parties: the Zimbabwe African People’s Union (ZAPU) inspired group led by Joshua Nkomo (backed by the Soviet Union) and the Zimbabwe African National Union led by Robert Mugabe (backed by the People’s Republic of China).
These black nationalists would not submit to the white Rhodesian government, ultimately forming a shaky joint coalition called the Patriotic Front in order to repatriate the majority of the white-owned farmland to the black Africans. After a bloody Rhodesian bushwar with tens of thousands of casualties between the Rhodesian Front and the Political Front, the groups agreed to the Lancaster House Agreement, where the British would take temporary control over the nation in order to hold elections. Robert Mugabe of the ZANU party became the first Prime Minister of the new nation of Zimbabwe.
Expectedly, Mugabe immediately began actions of reconciliation (e.g., renaming cities, and taking down statues of Rhodesian leaders like Cecil Rhodes); however, the white leaders were initially surprised at how amicable the race relations were. His initial successes included dramatically increasing the literacy rate to 80% as well as resettling over 50,000 black families on land purchased from white farmers. He was even recommended by a British foreign secretary for the Nobel Peace Prize.
As cliche would have it: ‘You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain,’ … and villain he became.
Mugabe began to grow wary of Joshua Nkomo and his vestigial party of ZAPU people in the Western regions. He launched operation “Gukurahundi” where his notorious 5th brigade touched towns, murdered and tortured thousands of the citizens in the region.
Mugabe and his inner circle began to compound their opulence. Meanwhile, the citizens of Zimbabwe became destitute, and when the previous fighters for the ZANU forces learned that their pensions had been looted by Mugabe’s cronies, they turned on the white farmers. The accounts of these attacks on peaceful farmers are quite horrific. Mugabe encouraged these attacks and figured it might appease the soldiers, so he told the police to stand down. If you’re looking for an articulate rebuke of Mubage, I suggest you watch interviews with opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai.
Over time, Robert Mugabe doubled down on this strategy and enacted a formal policy of seizing all white-owned farms, officially cutting all ties to European allies. When they redistributed the farms to those without experience, tools, and apathy. Food production immediately decreased by over 75%. Mugabe’s regime then used ‘quantitative easing measures’ (i.e. printing more money), thus spiking the inflation rate – personal side note: I’ve actually seen a $1B Zimbabwe note from a collector in Muscat, Oman. By 2008, the inflation rate was 250,000,000%... inflation is a problem in the United States at around 5%. Mugabe won another election in 2008 due to political violence and vote-rigging… then murdered hundreds of his key opponents, and tortured thousands.
He chose his fatal last action in 2017 (in his 90s) when he fired his Vice President Mnangagwa to make way for his (unpopular) second wife Grace to become president – Grace is known primarily in the country as ‘Gucci Grace,’ for her lavish spending sprees abroad and being 40 years Mugabe’s junior. Mnangagwa loyalists put Mugabe on house arrest, and he died shortly after.
As I conclude, I’d like to circle back to the presupposition held by white Europeans in 1927, that this Rhodesian ‘white nation’ was a bastion of prosperity in a tribal region. Ostensibly, Rhodesia was an oasis of civility until despots and greed plunged the region into chaos. There are some that say, the potential of Rhodesia was squandered. These disillusioned few might also contend that ‘they’re not treating the property I stole as well as I would have.’
Online there has been a malignant discord among Alt-Right racist extremists who call themselves the ‘Rhodeboos’. These 4Chan-mother’s-basement-dwellers promulgate the belief that white power should be restored to Rhodesia. The white supremacist who walked into a historically black church and massacred nine parishioners sported the Rhodesian flag on his jacket– an homage to the revival of the white dominance hierarchy. After doing more research on this topic, the number of visceral racist slurs, jokes, and merchandise for the support of this vestigial ‘Rhodesian Front’ (e.g., Make Zimbabwe Rhodesia Again) is confounding and infuriating.
The victims in all of this, are the citizens of Zimbabwe, who have been whiplashed back and forth in a charade of power-thirsty ruling classes. As referenced in the 1927 article, ‘socially it is a white aristocracy with a black proletariat.’ The socially white aristocracy was replaced by the Mugabe aristocracy while continuing to persecute the remaining Zimbabweans.
There cannot be a ‘tragic downfall of a promising nation’ if that nation is built on a corrupt foundation. In order to appropriately rebuild an abused population, a corrupted culture, and a dilapidated nation, one must start with the restoration of its unsettled foundation. Only then can one build the pillars of stability, opportunity, and prosperity.
Oil
Libya
Colonel Muammar Gaddafi– was known as ‘the Maddog of the Middle East’ but personally, I prefer ‘the Psycho-sadist Tyrant of the Middle East.’ Muammar Gaddafi, was the embodiment of an excentric villain too vile for any modern film to portray. Gaddafi wore Gucci branded accessories and had an all-female bodyguard; he also kept his enemies frozen in a dungeon, built sound-proof rooms around the city to rape hundreds of children, executed men, women, and children by the thousands, sponsored global terrorism, and other atrocities. The United States had a tumultuous relationship with Gadaffi, as he oscillated between the perception of a definition of a sadist tyrant.
Historical context of Libya: Libya was occupied by Italy starting in 1911, where the treatment of the local population was abysmal. Allied forces kicked out the Italians during the WWII battle of Tripoli in 1943 between the esteemed German Rommel, and Italian Bastico against the British Montgomery. Post-WWII, King Idris, with the help of the British, united the three Italian colonies and created Modern, Libya in 1951. King Idris began selling property to the United States for cash, (for his own family’s keeping) causing abrasion with the local population.
Regional Context: Kumal Nasser, led a bloodless coup in Egypt in 1952. He rode the wave of anti-corruption, anti-western, pro-socialist ideals to power, and was highly regarded in Egypt. His bastion of nationalism instigated a movement across the region. He nationalized the Suez Canal and triggered the Suez crisis. Nassar led a coalition of Arab unity– inspiring a young teenager in a rural community.
Gaddafi’s Beginnings: Muammar Gaddafi was born to a poor bedouin family, and he studied the Quran. Gaddafi enrolled in the Bengazi military academy for the express purpose of staging a Nassar-type coup. He brought a loyal group of friends with him, who all knew they would one day overthrow the government. They waited for eight years. 1963, he established a Secret Free Officers group, in 1967, June 7 saw the rising tensions in the region with Isreal, led Egypt, and Libya to attack Isreal, and got – I believe the technical term is– absolutely spanked. In August 1969, King Idris went to Turkey for medical treatment, and Gaddafi and his schoolmates took control. The Free Officers created the Revolutionary Command Council, at age 27 he became the defacto dictator of the region. Surprisingly, the coup was met with indifference both domestically and internationally. Domestically, the population detested the blatant corruption of the king. Internationally, U.S. State Department Chair Henry Kissinger was willing to accept Gaddafi’s assertion of his coup, because he was anti-communist, and, at the time, the main international diplomatic priority was anti-communism.
Gaddafi’s Reign: Colonel Gaddafi started out on sound footing, by nationalizing petroleum production and setting up programs for the poor, he also used the money from petroleum sales to fund programs for clean drinking water.
By contrast, inklings of the worst to come can be seen in his brazen expulsion of the Jews and anyone with ties to the previous Italian regime; he made the Italians dig up their dead family members, and take them with them. When Nassar died in 1970 from a heart attack, the Arabs lost an iconic leader. Gaddafi insisted he was Nassar’s rightful heir. What I don’t fully understand is how the leader of such a small country of 2 million (Libya), felt that they could fill the void of a leader of 35 million (Egypt). This would be like if the Governor of Kansas said, ‘ok I’ll lead you’ after the Governor of California died. Gaddafi wrote his notorious ‘green book’ which is similar to Hitler’s Mein Kampf. Gaddafis’ power-hungry addiction began to consume him and in 1977 Gaddafi attacked Egypt for their refusal to bend the knee.
Gaddafi’s Tyranny: Burning instruments, prohibiting soccer matches, broadcasting mass executions throughout every day and every night, Gaddafi froze his enemies in a dungeon and had ‘pleasure chambers’ constructed in buildings throughout the capital so if he saw a pretty girl on the street, he would have his bodyguard unit pull over, they would take her, and he would rape her. He also held a mansion full of underaged boys ‘services group’ that he would use for sexual sadism. If you have any doubt that this monster deserved to die a slow and painful death, please read this article: DailyMail.co.uk/The-Macabre-sex-chamber
January 14, 2023
Dictatorland by Paul Kenyon is an incredibly fascinating and well written book. It uncovers at an introductory level many of the worlds most brutal and evil regimes that so many readers may not have been aware of. Kenyon’s writing style skilfully incorporates the colonial histories of Congo, Zimbabwe, Libya, Nigeria, Côte d’Ivoire and Eritrea with biographical accounts of the lives of the dictators and their struggle for independence. As well as this he details the lives of those close to the dictators and includes his own experiences meeting and interviewing people from those countries as his time as a journalist. This makes this read both incredibly informative but also deeply emotional. I would absolutely recommend Dictatorland to anybody with an interest in the history of colonial independence, civil conflict and the fight over resources in Africa. 4.5/5
September 2, 2022
One of the hardest books I have read, in my life. Not because the author used obscure words I didn't know the meaning of. On the contrary he used lucid language to describe some of the most heinous forms of flouting of human rights and sheer torture carried out by the colonizers and then the native dictators across the continent of Africa.
Stories of how the European colonizers ravaged the continent and its people for centuries is well known by now and is as pathetic as it gets. However, it is just heartbreaking to read how the same story of these nations winning independence and then falling into equally horrifying fate, and in many cases perhaps worse, by the home grown dictators whose cruelty knew no bounds. Repeated across Congo, Zimbabe, Nigeria, Equitorial Guinea, Libya, Ivory Coast among others.
The extensive research that has gone into writing the book jumps out. Kudos to Paul Kenyon for coming up with this brilliant work of history and lessons to be learned from it.
Stories of how the European colonizers ravaged the continent and its people for centuries is well known by now and is as pathetic as it gets. However, it is just heartbreaking to read how the same story of these nations winning independence and then falling into equally horrifying fate, and in many cases perhaps worse, by the home grown dictators whose cruelty knew no bounds. Repeated across Congo, Zimbabe, Nigeria, Equitorial Guinea, Libya, Ivory Coast among others.
The extensive research that has gone into writing the book jumps out. Kudos to Paul Kenyon for coming up with this brilliant work of history and lessons to be learned from it.
May 10, 2020
Dictatorland does what any good history book should do. It tells highly engaging and detailed stories, from which the reader can easily extract an overarching theme. It's in the storytelling that Peter Kenyon excels. Personal memories and historic events alike are being retold with such vividness, that you cannot be helped to be transported to that particular time and place in your mind's eye. All the while, it's impossible to escape the similarities in the different stories of the rising strongman and how they all slide into dictatorship and clientalism. For whom is baffled how these strongman can give in to rent-seeking beheaviour on a countrywide scale, I recommend watching the video The Rules for Rulers by CGP Grey on Youtube. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7...), itself adapted from the Dictator's Handbook (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dic...).
September 15, 2020
The tragedy of Africa has always been placed at the feet of those who imposed colonial rule, then deserted its countries, leaving tribal factions to fill the void with kleptocratic thuggery. But nothing can prepare you for Mr Kenyon's lucid and frightening analysis of a phenomenon repeated throughout the continent.
Taking six nations and looking at them from their commodities, gold and diamonds, oil and chocolate, he shows how the fickleness and greed of the controlling colonists opened the way for horrific dictatorships.
The pattern for each country is the same. A young idealistic student leaves a European (usually British) university and returns to Africa promising democratic free elections, shared wealth and land rights. America and Europe panic about the possibility of communist infiltration. Soon the idealists realise their hands are tied by local parties and international corporations, leaving them no room to manoeuvre. They fall prey to corruption, stealing from their treasuries to build mausoleum-style houses while their people sift dirt for food.
Some brave souls manage to negotiate these political minefields, but in Equatorial Guinea they have to deal with a ruler who is clinically insane.
This is a humane, urgent and heartbreaking book - timely too, as China looks to repeat past history in Africa.
Taking six nations and looking at them from their commodities, gold and diamonds, oil and chocolate, he shows how the fickleness and greed of the controlling colonists opened the way for horrific dictatorships.
The pattern for each country is the same. A young idealistic student leaves a European (usually British) university and returns to Africa promising democratic free elections, shared wealth and land rights. America and Europe panic about the possibility of communist infiltration. Soon the idealists realise their hands are tied by local parties and international corporations, leaving them no room to manoeuvre. They fall prey to corruption, stealing from their treasuries to build mausoleum-style houses while their people sift dirt for food.
Some brave souls manage to negotiate these political minefields, but in Equatorial Guinea they have to deal with a ruler who is clinically insane.
This is a humane, urgent and heartbreaking book - timely too, as China looks to repeat past history in Africa.
August 12, 2020
Incredible read. Would recommend it to everyone.
The writer, previously a BBC journalist covering the African continent for most of his career, eloquently arranges the juiciest bits of history and tale around the indigenous revolution of many of the African nations. Slowly some trends of totalitarianism vs democracy emerge, that seem to define the human struggle for freedom and management of collective existence across all cultures.
The writer, previously a BBC journalist covering the African continent for most of his career, eloquently arranges the juiciest bits of history and tale around the indigenous revolution of many of the African nations. Slowly some trends of totalitarianism vs democracy emerge, that seem to define the human struggle for freedom and management of collective existence across all cultures.
May 2, 2022
سيطرت القوى الاستعمارية على معظم القا��ة الأفريقية لعقود طويلة واستغلت مواردها الطبيعية الغنية كالنفط والمعادن والألماس والكاكاو والمطاط. وعندما أعلنت الدول الأفريقية استقلالها، وحان الوقت لشعوبها أن تتنفس الصعداء، جثمت على صدورهم حكومات دكتاتورية لا تقل جشعا وفسادا ووحشية عن المستعمر الأوروبي. وبعد سقوط تلك الديكتاتوريات تبددت الأموال المهربة على البنوك السويسرية والعقارات الفرنسية والبريطانية. يقدم هذا الكتاب أمثلة لما يسمى بديكتاتوريات ما بعد الاستعمار.
- نظام موبوتو في الكونغو
- نظام روبرت موقابي في زيمبابوي
- نظام معمر القذافي في ليبيا
- نظام ساني آباشا في نيجيريا
- نظام أوبيانق ناجيما في غينيا الاستوائية
- نظام فيلكس بوگيني في ساحل العاج
- نظام أسياس أفورقي في ارتيريا
يقدم الكتاب معلومات ثرية من الناحية التاريخية والسياسية والاقتصادية للدول المذكورة وللمؤلف خبرة طويلة كمراسل صحفي متخصص في الشؤون الافريقية في هيئة الإذاعة البريطانية.
- نظام موبوتو في الكونغو
- نظام روبرت موقابي في زيمبابوي
- نظام معمر القذافي في ليبيا
- نظام ساني آباشا في نيجيريا
- نظام أوبيانق ناجيما في غينيا الاستوائية
- نظام فيلكس بوگيني في ساحل العاج
- نظام أسياس أفورقي في ارتيريا
يقدم الكتاب معلومات ثرية من الناحية التاريخية والسياسية والاقتصادية للدول المذكورة وللمؤلف خبرة طويلة كمراسل صحفي متخصص في الشؤون الافريقية في هيئة الإذاعة البريطانية.
June 9, 2023
very interesting and engaging. the book is very well researched and written.
December 28, 2021
Everyone should read, but give yourself space to integrate what you're reading
January 19, 2021
The scope and detail in this book already give it the highest rating. However, Mr Kenyon’s way with the detail he uncovered in his investigations add so much to what might otherwise be a bland narrative along the lines of ‘Dictator X was bad’. Indeed, I am slightly astounded by the specifics the author managed to include across such a diverse geographical area.
The book is divided into chapters per country, with the structure formed by the main commodity the strongmen are supported by: diamonds, oil, and cocoa. The diamonds story starts with Cecil Rhodes and continues into post-independence Congo. The classic Congolese incident where Lumumba and Kasa-Vubu ordered each others arrest, the President and Prime Minister that is, and Mobutu fulfilled both orders perfectly, thereby gaining his own power is only one of the many incidents that are described in the Congo story.
The book continues with Zimbabwe and Robert Mugabe. Mugabe’s rule, and the incidents which led there, really deserve their own treatment for the full story of Smith’s and Wilson’s negotiations to be described—along with Zimbabwe’s effective civil war that took place after that failure. Nevertheless, Mr Kenyon gives a very good overview, and his attempts to focus in on the Rhodesian white population’s views were quite useful for someone unfamiliar with the time and the period.
I was also intrigued by the consideration Nigeria and Libya got. Oil is something I know a very little about, so it was interesting to see how Shell & BP played a major role in the original attempts to find some in Africa. Of course, these came with plenty of corruption, and in many cases the facts behind the deals the oil majors made are very grim (grim enough for there to be plenty of material for more works to be written on those). Mr Kenyon was, however, very keen to dispel any descriptions of Idris having been a benevolent king.
The discussions that follow on Ivory Coast, Equatorial Guinea, and Eritrea are in the same boat. The Eritrean discussions brought into focus something I was very unaware of, namely the Eritrean–Ethiopian wars, though in some ways it felt as if actual detail was missing, perhaps because the dictator in this case, Isaias, is not interested in personal enrichment.
Most compelling, however, was the story of Houphouet-Boigny who comes through as a thrilling character (and, again, one I’d definitely focus more on in the future). His life, including his work in France as a cabinet minister, must have been extraordinary, and the author relishes in bringing out the relatively progressive French stance against the contemporary British and American points of view.
Overall, a strong recommend!
This review was originally posted on my blog.
The book is divided into chapters per country, with the structure formed by the main commodity the strongmen are supported by: diamonds, oil, and cocoa. The diamonds story starts with Cecil Rhodes and continues into post-independence Congo. The classic Congolese incident where Lumumba and Kasa-Vubu ordered each others arrest, the President and Prime Minister that is, and Mobutu fulfilled both orders perfectly, thereby gaining his own power is only one of the many incidents that are described in the Congo story.
The book continues with Zimbabwe and Robert Mugabe. Mugabe’s rule, and the incidents which led there, really deserve their own treatment for the full story of Smith’s and Wilson’s negotiations to be described—along with Zimbabwe’s effective civil war that took place after that failure. Nevertheless, Mr Kenyon gives a very good overview, and his attempts to focus in on the Rhodesian white population’s views were quite useful for someone unfamiliar with the time and the period.
I was also intrigued by the consideration Nigeria and Libya got. Oil is something I know a very little about, so it was interesting to see how Shell & BP played a major role in the original attempts to find some in Africa. Of course, these came with plenty of corruption, and in many cases the facts behind the deals the oil majors made are very grim (grim enough for there to be plenty of material for more works to be written on those). Mr Kenyon was, however, very keen to dispel any descriptions of Idris having been a benevolent king.
The discussions that follow on Ivory Coast, Equatorial Guinea, and Eritrea are in the same boat. The Eritrean discussions brought into focus something I was very unaware of, namely the Eritrean–Ethiopian wars, though in some ways it felt as if actual detail was missing, perhaps because the dictator in this case, Isaias, is not interested in personal enrichment.
Most compelling, however, was the story of Houphouet-Boigny who comes through as a thrilling character (and, again, one I’d definitely focus more on in the future). His life, including his work in France as a cabinet minister, must have been extraordinary, and the author relishes in bringing out the relatively progressive French stance against the contemporary British and American points of view.
Overall, a strong recommend!
This review was originally posted on my blog.
May 16, 2023
An amazing read that reveals the historical facts of the pre and post colonial Africa and exposes few known facts of corruption plaguing the ancient continent.
With the aid of Westerns powers and the control of modern media, the sad ordeal continues to the current day as the strong eats the weak.
With the aid of Westerns powers and the control of modern media, the sad ordeal continues to the current day as the strong eats the weak.
February 3, 2019
2.5 Stars!
Kenyon focuses on a small number of African countries and their horrendous dictators who raped and pillaged their own land and oppressed their own people. These are the kind of regimes that trigger horror stories filled with words like tortured, maimed, hacked and slaughtered.
There is a lot of killing, torture and misery in here, but for me some of the most interesting aspects of this book were the lesser known and more obscure facts about the various dictators and their family. Such as the case of Saadi Gaddafi, one of Gaddafi’s sons, who was signed by a number of clubs in the Serie A in Italy (a country and league that is certainly no stranger to corruption). He was signed by Perugia (he made one appearance on the subs bench). Shortly afterwards he was banned after testing positive for Nandrolene. He was then picked up by Udinese, where he played 10 minutes and finally Sampdoria, where he never got picked at all.
We see the CIA and MI6 involved in rendition, that much beloved euphemism meaning kidnapped, in cahoots with the Libyan dictatorship. We learn about the lesser known horrors of the Equatorial Guinea dictatorship, on xmas eve in 1975, 150 opponents were taken to the national football stadium as “Those Were The Days My Friend” played over the tannoy and nooses were placed around their necks. Though why no mention of Mark Thatcher’s involvement in the attempted military coup in 2004?...That seemed a fairly major oversight.
Elsewhere we learn about the fickle nature of cocoa. Apparently it isn’t an easy crop to grow. It requires a climate that can only be found a couple of degrees either side of the equator. As he explains, “Cocoa ‘farms’ are not farms in any conventional sense. The trees aren’t arranged in neat lines. It is just wild jungle with cocoa trees positioned randomly among the rest…The trees can’t be tamed. Cocoa grows best in its natural habitat, crowded by other trees in the shade of the jungle floor. That’s why it is so labour intensive to harvest.”
This is well-researched and largely informative, but the main problem I had is that I didn’t enjoy Kenyon’s style of writing. There was a coldness that crept into it and I thought this lacked fluency and consistency, and too often it seemed to ramble and get lost in a dense, equatorial jungle all of its own. To me this read as if each country were written about years apart and then patched together later on, in order to crowbar a sense of cohesion, but it felt far from cohesive, there are too many gaps, and times when it made for tiresome reading. I learned some really interesting things, but I also struggled to enjoy it in large parts.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 262 reviews