leroy
JF-Expert Member
- Dec 8, 2010
- 1,589
- 2,140
A country like Botswana which is basically composed of a single ethnic group (the minorities in Botswana, including whites, Coloureds, Asians, and Khoisan, have zero political aspirations and are such a negligible percentage of the population they can be easily discounted) is the ideal setup in sub-Saharan Africa.
It means no inter-ethnic strife like the Inkatha/ANC violence during the ‘90s and latterly the xenophobic rioting, in South Africa.
No civil war (all the civil wars in modern African history have had their fundamental roots in ethnic sectarian violence). Not even a lingering insurgency or terrorist campaign by anyone who feels marginalized.
Limited potential for nepotism; since everybody belongs to the same ethnic group nobody is getting hired just for being Tswana.
Limited potential for repression a la Gukurahundi, since the government does not feel politically threatened by minorities.
Almost universal acceptance of the political order. The Tswana approve of the Botswanan government because they understand it’s by Tswana, for Tswana. If they vote another party into power, that party will also be Tswana. There is great contentment for this reason.
No large and politically active white population, meaning no history of apartheid or UDI along the lines of what occurred in Rhodesia. White minority rule guaranteed embargoes, disinvestment, and civil and inter-ethnic strife. It also had a nasty penchant for attracting Soviet and Red Chinese guns and bombs, as those things got handed out willy nilly to anybody who wanted to say he was fighting racism in southern Africa.
All of these factors have kept Botswana internally stable since independence. They’ve also buoyed the economy, since the stability in turn allows for economic growth and encourages foreign investment. The longer Botswana went without guerrilla warfare, an act of heavy-handed government repression, civil strife, or coup d’etats, the more the investors took notice and the more willing they became to keep investing.
Botswana also checked one more box: it was run by a relatively conservative government which endorsed free market principles and respected private property. Neighbouring states like Zimbabwe, Angola, and Mozambique run by socialist regimes prone to nationalizing things without compensation not only doomed themselves by doing severe damage to a previously productive domestic private sector but also scared the external investors away and lost most of their valuable foreign exchange as a result. Botswana did not have this problem.
It means no inter-ethnic strife like the Inkatha/ANC violence during the ‘90s and latterly the xenophobic rioting, in South Africa.
No civil war (all the civil wars in modern African history have had their fundamental roots in ethnic sectarian violence). Not even a lingering insurgency or terrorist campaign by anyone who feels marginalized.
Limited potential for nepotism; since everybody belongs to the same ethnic group nobody is getting hired just for being Tswana.
Limited potential for repression a la Gukurahundi, since the government does not feel politically threatened by minorities.
Almost universal acceptance of the political order. The Tswana approve of the Botswanan government because they understand it’s by Tswana, for Tswana. If they vote another party into power, that party will also be Tswana. There is great contentment for this reason.
No large and politically active white population, meaning no history of apartheid or UDI along the lines of what occurred in Rhodesia. White minority rule guaranteed embargoes, disinvestment, and civil and inter-ethnic strife. It also had a nasty penchant for attracting Soviet and Red Chinese guns and bombs, as those things got handed out willy nilly to anybody who wanted to say he was fighting racism in southern Africa.
All of these factors have kept Botswana internally stable since independence. They’ve also buoyed the economy, since the stability in turn allows for economic growth and encourages foreign investment. The longer Botswana went without guerrilla warfare, an act of heavy-handed government repression, civil strife, or coup d’etats, the more the investors took notice and the more willing they became to keep investing.
Botswana also checked one more box: it was run by a relatively conservative government which endorsed free market principles and respected private property. Neighbouring states like Zimbabwe, Angola, and Mozambique run by socialist regimes prone to nationalizing things without compensation not only doomed themselves by doing severe damage to a previously productive domestic private sector but also scared the external investors away and lost most of their valuable foreign exchange as a result. Botswana did not have this problem.
