Hacker News Reader

Comment by jeb | Hacker News Reader

This is why china is making quick inroads into Africa. They don't have this blanket perception of Africa, they rather work those spots that actually make them money.

I betya in some strategy meeting in paypal, it was decided to shut down all African countries. Someone clicked some buttons and that's the end of access from Africa.

The Chinese would work differently - they'd still try to squeeze whatever juice can still be got out that. Africa is increasingly becoming Dubai/China focused, and at some point the west will realise that a huge market does not recognize them as viable business partners anymore.

Consider Dubai as a pivoting point for India/China and Africa. That's a new center of the world that is developing independently of the west.

View on HN

> This is why china is making quick inroads into Africa. They don't have this blanket perception of Africa.

I disagree. After all, Africa in Mandarin is feizhou, literally "wrong continent". (USA in the other hand is meiguo, or "beautiful country")

China is going to Africa for resources because that's the only place they can trade peacefully, without relying on the military, like the US does.

Those names for Africa and the U.S are not modern inventions. See my reply below about China resources.

China is making inroads into Africa as part of their plans for resource security. They're aiming for minerals rather than revenue.

You're wrong. That's what the west wanted in Africa, and that's why the west would send machines and one or two foremen there to simply extract the stuff and ship it back.

China is shipping a lot of people to Africa, building a lot of infrastructure. The contracts they are signing are not as exploitive as the contracts the western countries signed. They are not doing the same back-hand deals with dictators.

China is playing a much different game, and it's easy to say that they want to exploit, but it's not quite as simple as that.

For example, the chinese are building refineries. The west had little interest in building refineries, they wanted to only extract.

Basically, let's put it this way: The west had more than 40 years of exclusive access to the African mineral industry. It resulted in little development in Africa, and a lot of wars. Whatever china does, it can't be worse.

Whatever china does, it can't be worse

The Chinese, due to their domestic policies over the last few decades have a huge surplus of young males, in the sense that the male:female balance is badly skewed. Something like 50M young men who can never get married. That's a powderkeg situation. China is shipping these young males to Africa hoping that they'll meet nice local girls, settle down, and effectively found Chinese colonies.

Now I'm not saying there's anything right or wrong about this. But if you want to understand why China is going about resource extraction so differently, you have to look deeper. In other words, minerals aren't the only resources...

When chinese travel to other countries, they tend to create chinatowns. They don't mix with the local population so much - look at Indonesia, Thailand, South Africa, etc.

Thailand is actually a bit of a counter example of this, a lot of chinese immigrants married local, and often some people of chinese origin only still speak thai... It's very different from Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore

I never said the Chinese were there to exploit Africa.

I said they were there for resources, and I'm not sure how you can take issue with that given that China is currently scouring the globe for resources to fuel their manufacturing and ensure stability. You'll also notice that China's investments are all geared towards resources.

I actually happen to think that the Chinese model of "buying/investing to get stuff they want" is much better for all involved than the Western model of "political meddling and misplaced aid" and so I'm slightly confused by why you've ignored the fairly reasonable statement I've made and given me a lecture on something I already believe.

> They don't have this blanket perception of Africa

They never have in 600 years of trading with Africa, starting with the spice routes and, even before, silk road.

> at some point the west will realise that a huge market does not recognize them as viable business partners anymore.

That was probably the history of slavery, colonization, and then Apartheid that was going on before that precluded the viability.

> Consider Dubai as a pivoting point for India/China and Africa. That's a new center of the world that is developing independently of the west.

Interesting, because I see the center being much further east. Think Hong Kong, Singapore, or Shanghai.

Regarding the center: It's not further east. Dubai is setting itself up as the place for the rich from that axis to come and chill out. Hong Kong is just a sea port, Singapore has no wish to have 3rd world citizens in there and Shanghai is just a playground for young french men.

The new center of the 3rd world is in the UAE.

> Hong Kong is just a sea port

... with one of the highest concentration of major banks and biggest financial management hubs outside of NYC.

I thought the center is where the money is, always has been. From Rome to Florence, then London, then to the New World and NYC, and now switching over to Asia.

> Shanghai is just a playground for young french men.

And, Dubai is a place where celebs can go slumming as the streets rise with unpaid mortgages and backed-up sewage systems.

I'm sure the places we've named are more than just their rumor and stereotype.

What I mean is that these far east places are more focused on the west, and less on the 3rd world. Go to shanghai or hong kong - there are very few Africans. But go to Dubai...

The money is in Dubai.

This is what I learned in biz school. Africa is the place to be -an emerging market.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com