By Michael Chishala,
In my opinion, the biggest single benefit of colonialism which is hardly discussed was the introduction of codified law with property rights, plus representative democracy with the 3 arms of modern governments. Before the colonialists, all land essentially belonged to the chief or king and he was the law. At a whim, he or she could give or take away land or confiscate property. There was no concept of title deeds or even just basic human rights codified into a Constitutional Bill of Rights with the right to life, liberty, movement, association or freedom of speech. You could not say anything against the chief, nor could you legally resist confiscation of property.
European nations in the 17th and 18th Century underwent a very strong Philosophical enlightenment period where many things that we take for granted today like human rights were vigorously debated and codified into law in Parliaments. The unchecked power of monarchies was curtailed and representative Republican government introduced. These things today look obvious in hindsight, but tyrannical despotic monarchies were the norm at that time and Africa was no exception.
These colonial reforms introduced more stability and certainty as people were able to trade more freely and invest into new business ventures which led to greater productivity and higher incomes. This period saw the adoption of banking, insurance, pensions, commodity exchanges and stock exchanges which made things more predictable and encouraged investment and entrepreneurship which led to better living standards.
The judicial system with presumption of innocence, due process, and well defined court rules was perhaps the most important component of these colonial legal systems which were alien to Africa. People violating others’ rights, including government officials and even the President or Prime Minister could be punished. Disputes between citizens could now be settled fairly with impartial adjudication and strong deterrence for bad behaviour. One cannot overstate the importance of a strong legal system to development and rapid economic growth.
The Europeans drew from earlier traditions (Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks and Romans) and did the hard work of thinking through and debating all the various aspects of modern nations. Slavery for example was taken for granted everywhere in the world until it was challenged on moral grounds by Christians in Europe and lobbied against until it was abolished by law after public opinion turned against it. The lobbying was successful because there existed Parliaments with elected representatives.
Imagine if there was no Parliament but just a monarchy. There was zero chance slavery could have been abolished because the slave plantation owners could have easily paid off the king or queen to turn a blind eye and ignore the slavery abolitionists. Public pressure would have not come to bear, but because Parliament had elected representatives who could be thrown out, they had to listen to the people who demanded the end of slavery which benefited Africans as explained earlier.
The introduction of rule of law in Africa brought significant development and the establishment of mining, industry, commerce and agriculture. Large scale mining which takes decades to bring returns to the shareholders is only possible in stable nations with a good legal framework and friendly taxation policies run by a strong central government. Chiefdoms are unreliable for executing large scale development projects.
Another critical benefit of colonialism was infrastructure. The colonialists wanted to exploit African minerals so they built railways to make the movement of goods and people in large quantities easy and fast. A single train wagon could carry a load equivalent to what hundreds of men could carry and a train could traverse long distances within days as opposed to months by walking. A typical steam engine train in the 1920s could move 500km in one day. Sub-Saharan Africa particularly benefited because tropical diseases made the keeping of animals for transportation impossible.
After railways came roads and bridges with the adoption of motor vehicles, motor cycles and bicycles. The main roads in Zambia were built by the 1940s and made national administration possible. This was great for Africans as they could use the same roads and railways and access more markets for goods and services as well as travel for work or higher education further away in other colonies. All this was not possible before as Africa was undeveloped with only bush paths for movement and no proper bridges.
There are many other important benefits I could enumerate, but that would make this series go into ten parts and I believe the few I have highlighted shall suffice. Hopefully, this admittedly controversial series has been enlightening to the readers and led to a more holistic view of colonialism. Let’s keep the discussion going!
THE END
Michael Chishala is a Zambian analyst with interests in Philosophy, Law, Economics and History. Email: [email protected]
Ok, enough of this childish school homework.
The author writes as if unaware that traditional law remains valid in Zambia. Maybe should visit rural situations and speak with chiefs for more holistic understanding. Thanks for starting the conversation anyway even if it’s mostly “telling”
Be honest for once. Would you like to go back to the system that was there before Europeans came?
Study Zambian law if you don’t believe me. Anyway do you know what was “there before” or do you know what white missionaries told you was “there before”?
Malabish. If the author is looking for European citizenship then let him apply and see how far he will go. This is inferiority complex at its best. The freedom fighters must be spinning in their graves.
Mal@bish. If the author is looking for European citizenship then let him apply and see how far he will go. This is inf3riority complex at its best. The fr3edom fighters must be spinning in their grav3s.
What would Africa had been like if the Europeans had never arrived? Would Africa nations be like Wakanda in the Black Panther Marvel series? Probably not because there was no Vibranium lol. The answer of whether colonisation was good or bad lies in the middle which I think the author was trying to allude to.
This argument is nonsensical because the author is perpetuating a narrative that seeks to cover up the ugly side of colonisation. To suggest that colonisation had positive aspects is akin to claiming that wars, such as the World Wars, were beneficial simply because they led to new infrastructure-while ignoring the huge loss of life involved. There is also an underlying assumption that Africans were not progressive, but this disregards the rich history of powerful African kingdoms, which is often intentionally overlooked to create the false impression that Europeans brought civilisation to the continent. In reality, without Africa, the Europe we know today would never have existed.
Future Zed, Africa was a backward continent before colonialism with poor people dying of common diseases all the time. Infant mortality was very high and there are historical records some written by Africans about this that are over 100 years old. So if Africa had rich powerful kingdoms, explain why they were defeated by Europeans. Those kingdoms were exploitative and captured and sold slaves and here you are clapping for them as if you have never read any history. Are you also proud of Shaka and all the tens of thousands of people he butchered? Would you like us to go back to corrupt African chiefdoms that were doing business with the Europeans by selling Africans for guns and mirrors?