this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2025
357 points (99.2% liked)

World News

39810 readers
3760 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen outlined the EU’s vision as a global economic leader during the World Economic Forum, contrasting Trump’s "America First" policies.

She highlighted Europe’s advantages, including its large single market, social infrastructure, and commitment to the Paris climate accord, while emphasizing new alliances with Latin America, Africa, and Asia.

Avoiding direct criticism of Trump, von der Leyen underscored the EU’s stability and rules-based approach.

Her speech signaled a pivot away from U.S.-centric relations and a focus on global trade diversification.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] datendefekt@feddit.org 36 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Just imagine if we take her by her word and really strengthen our economical relationship with Africa. That is a huge market with huge possibilities. Africa could easily replace China as a manufacturing powerhouse. If we could somehow shake off the colonial baggage and work together, America could go packing!

[–] nednobbins@lemm.ee 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

Africa has a number of factors in its favor that make it a potential economic powerhouse. It has some of the largest natural resource reserves in the world, it has a huge population, it's conveniently located on or near several important trade routes.

It's also cursed with some pretty bad natural infrastructure. The rivers in Africa don't provide good access between the center of the continent and the coasts.

China had about the same GDP a Sub-Saharan Africa in the early 1990's https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD?end=1996&locations=CN-ZG&most_recent_value_desc=true&start=1960 It's taken China 35 years to get from there to it's current spot as 2nd largest economy in the world. And that was for an economy that was growing at nearly 2x the rate of the rest of the world for most of that period. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?locations=CN-1W

That's not to say that Africa can't become an economic powerhouse but it will take a lot of work and time. It would take sustained investment and reinvestment in Africa over several decades.

[–] Gold_E_Lox@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

Africa could easily replace China as a manufacturing powerhouse.

If we could somehow shake off the colonial baggage

They're the same thing.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago

That is a huge market with huge possibilities. Africa could easily replace China as a manufacturing powerhouse.

And China knows it, which is why "belt and road" is a thing.

[–] einkorn@feddit.org 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

In principle, I agree. However, in detail there are the same issues and more as when everything was outsourced to China:

  • While there are stable and democratic states in Africa, a lot of the resources for manufacturing ~~might~~ will come from not so stable parts. I am looking at Congo as an example in particular.
  • If you think about it, it is Colonialism 2.0: Cheap labourers turning basic resources into goods that are too expensive for them to buy themselves, which in return are sold for cheap in relation to local production costs in other countries.
  • Exporting the environmentally harmful jobs elsewhere makes us look good on paper, but has drastic consequences for locals.

While China has until recently and to a significant extent been able to turn the second point around, the environment is where this whole plan might come apart before it even can be put into practice: The African continent is possibly most directly impacted by climate change. In the past, present and future. Don't get me wrong: We are all going to suffer. But the African combination of geolocation and political and social stability is a powder keg.

Don't get me wrong, I do not want to leave Africa and its people in the dust. If we can build a relationship on a basis of mutual trust and long-term benefit, let's go for it. However, I am highly sceptical that in our current political climate the EU and its countries or, let alone companies, would be going to invest more than the absolute minimum to get any form of production going. And investing the absolute minimum to extract the most benefit equals colonialism 2.0.

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 0 points 19 hours ago

while all that is fairly true, competition usually leads to better outcomes across the board. i think that alternatives rather than replacements is the idea, and spreading those opportunities across the globe will probably be beneficial in the long-run