Nigeria and the entire African continent can never grow, develop or escape abject poverty, dearth of modern infrastructure until we are able to decolonize the economic structure surreptitiously imposed on us by the western powers.
The question is: Can Tinubu and other present African leaders, business gurus, intellectuals see clearly that Africa is in a structural trap re-adjusted to be tighter by the so called- “international” Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank and others during the military regime headed by Gen. Ibrahim Babangida (Rtd)?
And can they find a way to unlock various chains by which we are bounded without the fear of the ever-present regime change program of the western powers ?
To find a lasting solution to our perennial economic problems, this task will need a re-think by intellectuals, National Assembly, State Governors, opinion leaders, journalists and the academia. My own take here is to spark a discuss and hopefully it will ignite sufficient interest.
Most African countries including Nigeria fought bitterly to gain independence from their colonial masters starting from the late 30’s to the 60’s and many achieved a ‘qualifiable’ political independence but all African countries failed woefully to achieved economic independence up until now.
In the words of Micheal Parenti, we are not just under-developed, we are actually “over-exploited”.
He posited that “It is when we use words like ‘over-exploited’ that we get a chance to re-think and make right decisions about our economic state’.
Many people who are equally concerned and passionate about “growth and development” of Nigeria in particular and Africa in general have pointed to me several times that after 50 or 60 years of independence from our erstwhile colonial masters, we should not be complaining and our destiny should be firmly in our hands.
They are right in reeling out statistics of bad governance, greed, incompetence and criminal looting perpetrated by our so-called leaders.
Howbeit. I will urge the readers of this article to consider another point of view, or add the current thinking of others to the prevailing ‘self-afflictions’ as an erudite lawyer puts it.
My first and most crucial pleading here, is that we do a re-think of the nagging palava tagged underdevelopment itself. What exactly is it? When did it start and how did it start? Are our woes an aforethought of the scheming ọf western powers or are we totally inept?
We all know the story of Mike Lazaridis all too well. Many years before he became a household name, he was a recognized science prodigy. In middle school, he created Solar Panel and showcased it at a science fair. He went on to create the famed BlackBerry hand phone.
The beauty of the device was that phones could be held in people’s hands and they could type with their thumbs etc. Then came Steve Jobs. His engineers saw the success of the MAC laptops and the iPod and suggested that they create a hand phone with ‘touch screen’ and put a whole computer in it.
For 6 months he stubbornly refused to buy into the idea but eventually he agreed and iPhone was born.
Mike Lazaridis on the other hand saw clearly in 2007 that MAC was actually put in iPhone.
Yet Mike stuck to his belief in features that made BlackBerry a sensation in the past. He boldly stated that people, celebrities, politicians and top executives are only interested in wireless devices that work for emails and calls, but they don’t want the ‘entire computer’ put in their pockets with apps for home entertainment.
In 2008 ,the company valuation exceeded $70 billion even without a reliable browser. So he lived in the past comfort zone.
The opportunities he missed in instant messaging was later seized by WhatsApp.
Meanwhile, just four years after iPhone was launched, it accounted for half of Apples revenues.
In the fourth quarter of 2020, iPhone sold more than 90 million pieces worldwide. And today the company is worth 3.38 trillion dollars. What made the difference?
It is the ability of Steve Jobs to restate the issue at hand and re-think his strategies, while it is the inability of Mike Lazaridis to recap and re-think his strategies.
Like Lazaridis, what we belief to be ’the case’ is capable of locking us in an assumptive prison we create for ourselves with the help of our adversaries.
In other words, we have managed by a subtitle help from our western powers to set it on stone that our leaders and the civil servants are the sole cause of our poverty, instability, and under-development. We even call for revolutions at times and we sometimes willy-nilly call for military take-over and more often than not, we think in terms of election as a veritable change agent.
We are so sure democracy is the best form of government even when it is glaring that those who are shoving democracy into our lives do not practice one man-one-vote.
Think on Americas’ electoral college syndrome.
You can win the popular vote and loose the presidential election.
Or Britain where the House of Common is by popular election and the House of the Lord is by heredity and Queen or Kingly appointment.
Again, in this article, my take is that we should also look at the external factor and re-think our vision as a country and right strategies of our own making.
Mike Lazaridis stuck to his gun till end.
Steve Jobs for a while also stuck to his guns but later did a critical re-think and the result is now history.
Let’s view the historical background again. What was slavery?
We can all agree that it is condition of being “legally” owned by someone else and forced to work and obey them after being bought or capture in war or raids as booty.
Slaves are therefore legal properties of their owners. Let’s even look at the United Nation’s definition of slavery. Article 1. “For the purpose of the present convention, the following definitions are agreed upon: 1. Slavery is the status or condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised”.
Tales and words associated with slavery are not printable here and it is not the actual subject of this article.
However, one may ask; who actually abolished slavery?
History books all over the world celebrates Britain as being the first to abolish slavery throughout its empire by the slavery act of 1833.
Meanwhile, France began the move and actually abolished slavery in 1794 at the height of the French and Haitian revolution but founding out that goodies are no more flowing in and that Britain and America were ‘enjoying’ the blood and tears of Africans, they re-introduced it under Napoleon in 1802.
Forty-six (46) years later in 1848, the French re-abolished it. United states of America followed suit with the 13th Amendment to the US Constitution in 1865.
Note that it is the very people who enslaved us that abolished it. Not us! So, what was the ‘trade-off’.
Meanwhile, it is interesting to note that over 90% of white men in Britain, US and France opposed the abolitionist idea.
They believed that anti-slavery activism would create “economic instability and would threaten the racial order”.
In the US, almost 99% of the Southerners were anti-abolitionists because slaves powered their cash crop economy and those who fuel pro-slavery advocates were mostly the Irish import and exporters in the US.
Definitely there has to be a trade-off.
Is it because the slave trade was becoming unsustainable and very violent in most of the empire. No o not at all.
Slavery was firmly embedded in the constitution frame work and in the economy of many of the countries involved.
What about the political challenges for re-election of pro-abolitionist?
In the US, France and in England the question arose about what will be done with over 20million slaves if liberated.
Would a white society allow them to work as equals and get paid as equals?
I am sure that It will be profitable for Africans to read the parliamentary and constitutional arguments against abolition by the Garrisonians.
It will be recalled that in America, pro-slavery elements moved into secession path when Abraham Lincon was elected the president.
So, what was the winning strategy. Have you thought on it?
Colonialism was the winning strategy.
The people were convinced that millions of Africans would be shipped to the Caribbean Islands and the African continent itself, save for the elements needed for dirty and domestic works.
Secondly, those countries would still be governed indirectly by their ’master’ politically, economically and religious wise. Bingo! Fast forward to independence.
Freedom cannot be partial. But colonialism was a perfect intellectual design which was sold to the ‘holding powers’ that allowed the” abolition of slavery” and then gave independence to Africans.
So, the post-colonial role has many agendas:
1 Africa will serve as the center for raw materials for the rapidly industrializing world. Is that still the situation today?
2. Africa must be schemed to consume the products made in the world power’s factories and also buy their technologies. Can that still be true in 2024?
3. Africa will be the dumping ground for obsolete products and equipment’s that are no more needed in their countries. Is this the case as of now?
4. All promising African intellectuals, scientists and technologists would be outsourced to Europe, America for peanuts by various tactics like Visa Lotteries, Technation Program of Britain (Talents &Promise) and other methods.
Institutions like World Bank, UNICEF, IMF, USAID, UKAIDS plays this colonial role perfectly using words like, Cooperation, AIDS, Technical Assistance etc. All these are not happenstances but designs created to make sure we remain at the bottom of the ladder.
Like colonialism, post-colonialism is a system. It is put in place surreptitiously for mineral resources extraction, perpetual debt repayment and fostering civil wars and banditry by supply of weapons and munitions to keep the cycle going while some of our so-called leaders loot the left-overs and ship it out to the western and lately the eastern worlds for keeps in their banks.
Have you wondered also that our so-called external debts are denominated in Euros and Dollars?
The repayments are so designed that we cannot invest in building up our public infrastructure, health and education, talk less of research and development.
At the pace we are being bombarded and at the rate we are taking the line and the hook, we will never develop.
The repayments of foreign Loans are by force.
They are prioritized over all other things and you dare not renege.
Now, If you choose to look at the fundamentals for life sustainability and growth, you will think up growing your own food, producing your own energy and manufacturing your own essential goods.
That is correct.
But look anywhere in Africa; all these are in in deficit. Why?
In the words of United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) which hold focal points also for Finance, Technology, Investment and Sustainable Development; “Africa import about 85% of its food outside the continent” this is equivalent of $35 billion annually and projected to reach $110 billion by next year.
The irony here is; why is it not so when we were under slavery and colonial rule?
Africa was the food basket of the western world as at then. So, what happens?
The story of how the post- independence era or neocolonialism was designed by those who ‘gave’ us independence is all over the internet.
Take a good look at the Treaty of Rome of 1955. Officially it is the Treaty Establishing the European Community.
Apart from Custom Union, I have studied the area of interest to Africa as in -Agricultural Production Support and Common Organization of Markets”.
It is mostly and commonly known as Common Agriculture Policy (CAP).
CAP is financed from the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF).
The direct aids to their own farmers are made up of a whopping 31% of the total Euro budget in 2010.
The point here is that in 1955, the Europeans had to find solution to their food problems because they were afraid that radicals may take over the governments in Africa, and may impose tariffs on the essential food they import.
The signs were already on the wall and they needed a great concerted effort to implement their policies during the approaching planting season. That was why the Common agricultural policy (CAP) came on board.
CAP is an extremely large agricultural subsidies representing over 31% of their total budgets’ year-in year-out.
Farmers were to produce core crops like wheat, corn, soybean etc, to guarantee food security.
While it was a secret to Africa and India, United States, Australia, Canada, Russia, Ukraine, etc, were encouraged to do same; not only to guarantee their food security but also to forestall any radical attitude by those in the so -called third world use it to launch the kernel of the plan for neo-colonialism.
Secondly, the massive subsidy given to their farmers made African farmers uncompetitive and forced Africa out of food production business, but cleverly redirected the efforts of the African governments towards cash crops for exports.
In other words, the marching order was: If you want to survive after we have given you independence, start growing these types of crops and we will buy from you at our own price.
Again, these were the roles of dark-opps conslulting firms, UNCTAD, UNIDO, etc the irony here also, is that we were forced to grow crops like coffee, tea, tobacco, cocoa, Kolanut, rubber etc, meaning effectively we were growing and producing what we don’t consume and began to buy from Europeans what we consume and not producing.
That was how a systemic design hooked our society over a period of time. And in time it became our norm.
This is another reason why we have to re-think our education and agriculture policies. Afterall good policies should be good politics.
We all know the story about the Energy Deficit. How is it that Nigeria and Angola, the two largest producers of oil in Africa exports crude oil, (the cheap end) and imports the refined petrol and petrochemical at higher costs.?
Again, this is also by design. I remembered the erstwhile military government of IBB insisting on technology transfer which never happened. Africa, nay Nigeria and Angola were robustly denied the technology for oil exploration, drilling, production and refining.
Whichever way you look, it is deficit all through.
How is it that Nigeria spent $16 billion dollars on electricity and never got what it paid for? Think on it. Wouldn’t the looting leaders care at all for partial success at least?
In manufacturing, we are not able to compete with China because of subsidies as well. Most machines are imported and also their spare parts. All the components assembled in Nigeria are imported including the oil used in servicing and lubricating them. Importing machines puts so much pressure on our foreign reserves which as it were, is forcibly dedicated to servicing foreign debt.
Even if you get the machines, where is electricity to power it? How much is the diesel alternative? Save for foreigners who brings in their machines and expertise, yet they must repatriate their profits in dollars!
Can Tinubu and others decolonize our economic structures?
Nigeria and the entire African continent can never grow, develop or escape abject poverty, dearth of modern infrastructure until we are able to decolonize the economic structure surreptitiously imposed on us the western powers.
The question is: Can Tinubu and other present African leaders, business gurus, intellectuals see clearly that Africa is in a structural trap re-adjusted to be tighter by the so called- “international” Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank and others during the military regime headed by Gen. Ibrahim Babangida (Rtd)?
And can they find a way to unlock various chains by which we are bounded without the fear of the ever-present regime change program of the western powers ?
To find a lasting solution to our perennial economic problems, this task will need a re-think by intellectuals, National Assembly, State Governors, opinion leaders, journalists and the academia.
My own take here is to spark a discuss and hopefully it will ignite sufficient interest.
Most African countries including Nigeria fought bitterly to gain independence from their colonial masters starting from the late 30’s to the 60’s and many achieved a ‘qualifiable’ political independence but all African countries failed woefully to achieved economic independence up until now. In the words of Micheal Parenti, we are not just under-developed, we are actually “over-exploited”. He posited that “It is when we use words like ‘over-exploited’ that we get a chance to re-think and make right decisions about our economic state’.
Many people who are equally concerned and passionate about “growth and development” of Nigeria in particular and Africa in general has pointed to me several times that after 50 or 60 years of independence from our erstwhile colonial masters, we should not be complaining and our destiny should be firmly in our hands. They are right in reeling out statistics of bad governance, greed, incompetence and criminal looting perpetrated by our so-called leaders. Howbeit. I will urge the readers of this article to consider another point of view, or add the current thinking of others to the prevailing ‘self-afflictions’ as an erudite lawyer puts it. My first and most crucial pleading here, is that we do a re-think of the nagging palava tagged underdevelopment itself. What exactly is it? When did it start and how did it start? Are our woes an aforethought of the scheming western powers or are we totally inept?
We all know the story of Mike Lazaridis all too well. Many years before he became a household name, he was a recognized science prodigy. In middle school, he created Solar Panel and showcased it at a science fair. He went on to create the famed BlackBerry hand phone.
The beauty of the device was that phones could be held in people’s hands and they could type with their thumbs etc. Then came Steve Jobs. His engineers saw the success of the MAC laptops and the iPod and suggested that they create a hand phone with ‘touch screen’ and put a whole computer in it. For 6 months he stubbornly refused to buy into the idea but eventually he agreed and iPhone was born.
Mike Lazaridis on the other hand saw clearly in 2007 that MAC was actually put in iPhone. Yet Mike stuck to his belief in features that made BlackBerry a sensation in the past. He boldly stated that people, celebrities, politicians and top executives are only interested in wireless devices that work for emails and calls, but they don’t want the ‘entire computer’ put in their pockets with apps for home entertainment.
In 2008 the company valuation exceeded $70 billion even without a reliable browser. So he lived in the past comfort zone.
The opportunities he missed in instant messaging was later seized by WhatsApp. Meanwhile, just four years after iPhone was launched, it accounted for half of Apples revenues. In the fourth quarter of 2020, iPhone sold more than 90 million pieces worldwide. And today the company is worth 3.38 trillion dollars. What made the difference? It is the ability of Steve Jobs to restate the issue at hand and re-think his strategies, while it is the inability of Mike Lazaridis to recap and re-think his strategies.
Like Lazaridis, what we belief to be ’the case’ is capable of locking us in an assumptive prison we create for ourselves with the help of our adversaries. In other words, we have managed by a subtitle help from our western powers to set it on stone that our leaders and the civil servants are the sole cause of our poverty, instability, and under-development. We even call for revolutions at times and we sometimes willy-nilly call for military take-over and more often than not, we think in terms of election as a veritable change agent. We are so sure democracy is the best form of government even when it is glaring that those who are shoving democracy into our lives do not practice one man-one-vote. Think on Americas’ electoral college syndrome.
You can win the popular vote and loose the presidential election. Or Britain where the House of Common is by popular election and the House of the Lord is by heredity and Queen or Kingly appointment. Again, in this article, my take is that we should also look at the external factor and re-think our vision as a country and right strategies of our own making.
Mike Lazaridis stuck to his gun till end. Steve Jobs for a while also stuck to his guns but later did a critical re-think and the result is now history.
Let’s view the historical background again. What was slavery? We can all agree that it is condition of being “legally” owned by someone else and forced to work and obey them after being bought or capture in war or raids as booty. Slaves are therefore legal properties of their owners. Let’s even look at the United Nation’s definition of slavery. Article 1. “For the purpose of the present convention, the following definitions are agreed upon: 1.
Slavery is the status or condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised”.
Tales and words associated with slavery are not printable here and it is not the actual subject of this article. However, one may ask; who actually abolished slavery?
History books all over the world celebrates Britain as being the first to abolish slavery throughout its empire by the slavery act of 1833.
Meanwhile France began the move and actually abolished slavery in 1794 at the height of the French and Haitian revolution but founding out that goodies are no more flowing in and that Britain and America were ‘enjoying’ the blood and tears of Africans, they re-introduced it under Napoleon in 1802. Forty-six (46) years later in 1848, the French re-abolished it. United states of America followed suit with the 13th Amendment to the US Constitution in 1865. Note that it is the very people who enslaved us that abolished it. Not us! So, what was the ‘trade-off’.
Meanwhile it is interesting to note that over 90% of white men in Britain, US and France opposed the abolitionist idea. They believed that anti-slavery activism would create “economic instability and would threaten the racial order”.
In the US, almost 99% of the Southerners were anti-abolitionists because slaves powered their cash crop economy and those who fuel pro-slavery advocates were mostly the Irish import and exporters in the US. Definitely there has to be a trade-off. Is it because the slave trade was becoming unsustainable and very violent in most of the empire. No o not at all.
Slavery was firmly embedded in the constitution frame work and in the economy of many of the countries involved. What about the political challenges for re-election of pro-abolitionist?
In the US France and in England the question arose about what will be done with over 20million slaves if liberated. Would a white society allow them to work as equals and get paid as equals? I am sure that It will be profitable for Africans to read the parliamentary and constitutional arguments against abolition by the Garrisonians. It will be recalled that in America, pro-slavery elements moved into secession path when Abraham Lincon was elected the president. So, what was the winning strategy. Have you thought on it?
Colonialism was the winning strategy. The people were convinced that million of Africans would be shipped to the Caribbean Islands and the African continent itself, save for the elements needed for dirty and domestic works.
Secondly, those countries would still be governed indirectly by their ’master’ politically, economically and religious wise. Bingo! Fast forward to independence.
Freedom cannot be partial. But colonialism was a perfect intellectual design which was sold to the ‘holding powers’ that allowed the” abolition of slavery” and then gave independence to Africans. So, the post-colonial role has many agendas:
1 Africa will serve as the center for raw materials for the rapidly industrializing world. Is that still the situation today?
2. Africa must be schemed to consume the products made in the world power’s factories and also buy their technologies. Can that still be true in 2024?
3. Africa will be the dumping ground for obsolete products and equipment’s that are no more needed in their countries. Is this the cas as of now?
4. All promising African intellectuals, scientists and technologists would be outsourced to Europe, America for peanuts by various tactics like Visa Lotteries, Technation Program of Britain (Talents &Promise) and other methods.
Institutions like World Bank, UNICEF, IMF, USAID, UKAIDS plays this colonial role perfectly using words like, Cooperation, AIDS, Technical Assistance etc. All these are not happenstances but designs created to make sure we remain at the bottom of the ladder. Like colonialism, post-colonialism is a system. It is put in place surreptitiously for mineral resources extraction, perpetual debt repayment and fostering civil wars and banditry by supply of weapons and munitions to keep the cycle going while some of our so-called leaders loot the left-overs and ship it out to the western and lately the eastern worlds for keeps in their banks.
Have you wondered also that our so-called external debts are denominated in Euros and Dollars? The repayments are so designed that we cannot invest in building up our public infrastructure, health and education, talk less of research and development. At the pace we are being bombarded and at the rate we are taking the line and the hook, we will never develop. The repayments of foreign are by force. They are prioritized over all other things and you dare not renege. Now, If you choose to look at the fundamentals for life sustainability and growth, you will tick up growing your own food, producing your own energy and manufacturing your own essential goods. That is correct.
But look anywhere in Africa; all these are in in deficit. Why? In the words of United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) which hold focal points also for Finance, Technology, Investment and Sustainable Development; “Africa import about 85% of its food outside the continent” this is equivalent of $35 billion annually and projected to reach $110 billion by next year. The irony here is; why is it not so when we were under slavery and colonial rule?
Africa was the food basket of the western world as at then. So, what happens?
The story of how the post- independence era or neocolonialism was designed by those who ‘gave’ us independence is all over the internet.
Take a good look at the Treaty of Rome of 1955. Officially it is the Treaty Establishing the European Community. Apart from Custom Union, I have studied the area of interest to Africa as in -Agricultural Production Support and Common Organization of Markets”. It is mostly and commonly known as Common Agriculture Policy (CAP). CAP is financed from the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF). The direct aids to their own farmers are made up of a whopping 31% of the total Euro budget in 2010. The point here is that in 1955, the Europeans had to find solution to their food problems because they were afraid that radicals may take over the governments in Africa, and may impose tariffs on the essential food they import. The signs were already on the wall and they needed a great concerted effort to implement their policies during the approaching planting season.
That was why the common agricultural policy (CAP) came on board.
CAP is an extremely large agricultural subsidies representing over 31% of their total budgets’ year-in year-out. Farmers were to produce core crops like wheat, corn, soybean etc, to guarantee food security. While it was a secret to Africa and India, United States, Australia, Canada, Russia, Ukraine, etc, were encouraged to do same; not only to guarantee their food security but also to forestall any radical attitude by those in the so called third world use it to launch the kernel of the plan for neo-colonialism.
Secondly, the massive subsidy given to their farmers made African farmers uncompetitive and forced Africa out of food production business, but cleverly redirected the efforts of the African governments towards cash crops for exports. In other words the marching order was: If you want to survive after we have given you independence, start growing these types of crops and we will buy from you t our own price.
Again, these were the roles of dark-opps conslulting firms, UNCTAD, UNIDO, FAO, European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), etc the irony here also, is that we were forced to grow crops like coffee, tea, tobacco, cocoa, Kolanut, rubber etc, meaning effectively we were growing and producing what we don’t consume and began to buy from Europeans what we consume and not producing.
That was how a systemic design hooked our society over a period of time. And in time it became our norm.
This is another reason why we have to re-think our education and agriculture policies. Afterall good policies should be good politics.
We all know the story about the Energy Deficit. How is it that Nigeria and Angola, the two largest producers of oil in Africa exports crude oil, (the cheap end) and imports the refined petrol and petrochemical at higher costs.?
Again, this is also by design. I remembered the erstwhile military government of IBB insisting on technology transfer which never happened.
Africa, nay Nigeria and Angola were robustly denied the technology for oil exploration, drilling, production and refining. Whichever way you look, it is deficit all through. How is it that Nigeria spent $16 billion dollars on electricity and never got what it paid for?
Think on it. Wouldn’t the looting leaders care at all for partial success at least?
In manufacturing, we are not able to compete with China because of subsidies as well. Most machines are imported and also their spare parts. All the components assembled in Nigeria are imported including the oil used in servicing and lubricating them. Importing machines puts so much pressure on our foreign reserves which as it were, is forcibly dedicated to servicing foreign debt. Even if you get the machines, where is electricity to power it? How much is the diesel alternative? Save for foreigners who brings in their machines and expertise, yet they must repatriate their profits in dollars!
Recently, the Chairman of EFCC informed the Senate Oversight Committee on Financial fraud about the agency’s work in the electricity sector. Apart from direct embezzlement,he spoke about the usage of substandard items like using 5.0 gauge instead of 9.0 guage. These equipments are not manufactured in Nigeria and are not permitted to be used in countries from where they are manufactured. Does the Nigerian government has the power to black list companies manufacturing fake materials specifically for us?
Again on Oct 23, 2024, a Nigerian court on ordered the release of Binance executive Tigran Gambaryan after the government dropped money laundering charges against him to allow him to get “medical treatment abroad”. Anthony Blinken the State Secretary of the US government was unfazed about helping a notorious American ponzu Schemer get away scot-free. Can Nigeria resist the American president who ordered the release from the White House?
Also Read:How Africa is Paying for Pursuit of the Last Hamas
We need a re-think on how we can decolonize our economic structure from colonial grips. We need a re-think on how to invest more in agriculture to growth the food we eat and at the same time grow the ones we can export. If we can’t succeed in reverse engineering of machines, we might as well find other ways to break the cycle of borrowing and paying foreign debts in a continuum. Instead of using “developing world”, why not use “over-exploited” world.
No government or any party in government on its own has the wherewithal to confront the western world and increasingly China and Russia to stop our “over-exploitation” of our people and our resources. But together and collectively: journalists, opinion leaders, academia, politicians and other professionals like doctors, lawyers, engineers and other can preach decolonization of our economic structure everywhere and every time and this l believe will spark re-thinking in most critical areas of our life as in food, energy and manufacturing.
