Manufacturing-Industrialization Must Become Reality For Africa

June 12, 2026

Mr. Gyude Moore, in his essay below, has highlighted the most important challenge for African nations in determining their future. Will African nations create robust manufacturing industries? Manufacturing and infrastructure, especially railroads and power generation, are the two most essential elements to maintain a healthy physical economy. In order to feed the population and provide a quality standard of living, African nations must become industrialized. To achieve peace and prosperity, the level of the physical economy must be sufficiently developed to meet the material needs of its population. This requires eradicating poverty, eliminating hunger, and providing citizens with meaningful productive employment. Without a manufacturing sector and a density of infrastructure, nations will not survive, and the people will suffer undue hardships.

President Franklin Roosevelt  defined freedom from want as the universal right to basic economic security: having enough food,  shelter, jobs, and free from the threat of extreme poverty. No nation has attained prosperity nor has it become economically sovereign, without a robust manufacturing sector. Until recent decades, manufacturing thrived in the the United States, China has achieved this in the last two generations.

As Mr. Moore writes, now is the time for African nations to fulfill that goal.

How China Forced Europe to Reconsider Africa’s Industrialization by W. Gyude Moore, May 28, 2026

Excerpts below. Emphasis added.

Europe’s retreat from slavery was not driven by moral enlightenment alone. Religious and philosophical objections to slavery had existed for centuries. They became politically decisive only when changes in production, power, and elite incentives made abolition compatible with Britain’s national interest. Societies often tolerate moral critiques for long periods until material conditions shift the coalition structure around them. A similar inflection point may now be emerging in the economic relationship between Africa and Europe.

For decades African leaders – Kwame Nkrumah, Amilcar Cabral, Julius Nyerere – and academics like Samir Amin, made a simple argument to Europe and the broader industrialized world: a continent cannot sustainably develop if it participates in the global economy primarily as a supplier of raw materials and a consumer of finished goods.

That argument was often dismissed as ideological, or just nostalgia from the independence era. African calls for beneficiation, industrialization, and value addition were treated as economically unsophisticated or politically protectionist. The global division of labor was presented as natural and efficient. Africa would export ores, cocoa, timber, tea, oil, and agricultural commodities. Others would process, refine, manufacture, brand, finance, and capture the overwhelming share of value. That arrangement persisted for decades because it worked for those already occupying the commanding heights of the global economy.

When manufacturing migrated from Europe and North America to Asia, many African policymakers hoped this would create space for industrial activity on the continent. Instead, the old hierarchy largely relocated. Africa still exported raw materials. The processing, branding, financing, and technological learning moved elsewhere. Today, iron ore and bauxite still leave as direct shipping ore and concentrates. Cocoa leaves as raw beans. Timber leaves as logs or rough-cut lumber.

The argument African leaders made repeatedly was not complicated. A continent that exports low-value commodities while importing expensive manufactured products will eventually encounter structural limits to prosperity. It will remain vulnerable to commodity cycles, deteriorating terms of trade, foreign exchange instability, and persistent external dependence. More fundamentally, it will never accumulate the industrial capabilities that generate durable national wealth.

That argument rarely found receptive audiences in Europe because Europe occupied the advantageous end of the arrangement. Until now.

Europe is increasingly confronting a version of the same vulnerability African states have warned about for generations. China’s extraordinary industrial rise has altered the geometry of the global economy. Europe no longer faces merely a low-cost manufacturing competitor. It increasingly faces the prospect of strategic industrial dependence.

Chinese firms dominate or threaten dominance across sectors central to the next industrial era: batteries, solar, electric vehicles, refining, rare earth processing, steel, consumer manufacturing, and increasingly advanced industrial machinery. Europe now worries openly about deindustrialization, supply chain vulnerability, and excessive dependence on external manufacturing ecosystems.

That means Liberia should not remain an exporter of direct shipping ore if pelletization can be done near Buchanan. Guinea should not remain primarily a bauxite exporter if alumina refining can be financed. Zambia and the Democratic Republic of Congo should move beyond copper and cobalt concentrates into semi-fabricated products and battery precursor materials. Cocoa producers should export more cocoa liquor, butter, cake, and powder rather than raw beans. Kenyn tea, Ethiopian and Ugandan coffee tea should be exported as branded and semi-processed products rather than bulk commodity. Timber should leave as furniture, panels, flooring, and engineered wood products, not merely logs or rough cuts. African industrial policy should focus less on immediately replicating East Asian electronics manufacturing and more on systematically climbing value chains already rooted in African comparative advantages.

This does not require autarky. It does not require hostility toward Europe or China. And it certainly does not require pretending Africa can industrialize in isolation. The goal is not sudden industrial transformation, but a steady rise in the complexity and value of what Africa already exports. Every successful industrial region in history protected, financed, subsidized, and nurtured its movement up the value chain. Europe did. The United States did. East Asia did. China certainly did.

Africa now has leverage it has not possessed in decades. Europe needs diversified industrial partnerships. The whole world needs African minerals. Europe needs alternative processing ecosystems.

The test of Europe’s seriousness beyond the rhetoric of Macron in East Africa or Meloni and her Mattei Plan, is whether Europe is willing to support the difficult conditions required for African industrialization alongside African governments. Lower-cost capital, energy infrastructure, technology transfer, market access, logistics systems, and tolerance for African industrial policy will matter far more than speeches about sovereignty.

Read Moore’s entire article: how-China-forced-Europe-to-reconsider

Read below, my earlier posts on this topic:

Ending The Legacy of Colonialism: Eliminate Poverty With The Industrialization of Africa

Energy Poverty Is Killing Africans & Preventing Industrialization

We Can Eliminate Poverty & Hunger in Africa in One Generation With A “Credit Bank”

With Manufacturing, Modern Farming & Energy From GERD, Ethiopia Can Be A Leading Economy in Africa: Interview

Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for 35 years. He is a teacher, writer, public speaker, consultant on Africa, and an analyst of global strategic relations. Mr. Freeman strongly believes that economic development is an essential human right. He is the creator of the blog: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.comalso publishes on: lawrencefreeman.substack.com, “Freeman’s Africa and the Worldand on X @lkfreemansafrica

We Can Eliminate Poverty & Hunger in Africa in One Generation With A “Credit Bank”

April 10, 2026-Lawrence Freeman speaking at a forum sponsored by “Watch Democracy Grow,” at the National Press Club in Washington DC.

April 20, 2026

Watch my presentation in which I presented a brief overview of the necessity for the long overdue industrialization of Africa. This would require massive investments in infrastructure, especially in the manufacturing sector. Colonialism, neocolonialism, and the inadequacy l of the global financial institutions, have deprived Africa of these basic elementary building blocks for a developing economy.

I have discussed for many years the necessity of having an institution dedicated to issuing credit for infrastructure. In consultation with my African friends and colleagues we understand the need for the creation of an African infrastructure Development Bank. This institution would have only one lending purpose: providing long-term, low-interest credits for infrastructure. It would be prohibited from paying other outstanding debts or other expenses unrelated to this single objective. The need for such a credit bank is that there are no other financial institutions that will fund long-term investments in infrastructure. The private sector is not capable of making such investments. Although they can make significant contributions to the process of expanding the productive capacity of African economies. Historically, economic development has taken place with state-led industrialization. This has been the case in Europe, Asia, and the United States. The contributions of Alexander Hamilton and Sun Yat sun are exemplary.

Public or government backed credits can be allocated for low interest-rates for long-term loans necessary for infrastructure, particularly in the energy and transportation sectors.

I know that without this credit generating  institution of development credits, African nations will not be capable of providing for the daily needs of its citizens. President Franklin Roosevelt understood this. That is why he advocated at the Bretton Woods Conference in July 1944, for the creation of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Sadly, his policies died with him on April 12, 1945. Read: Franklin Roosevelt Intended to Industrialize the ‘Global South’: The Case of Ethiopia

Let me be absolutely clear. Without such a credit bank providing investments in essential, elementary infrastructure, Africa will not become industrialized. Thus, abandoning African nations to be plagued with the failure of abject poverty. However, with such a properly administered credit institution, we can eliminate hunger and poverty in African nations in one generation.

Read below, my previous articles on this topic:

Presidents Roosevelt and Xi Would Have Agreed on Developing the Global South

A Hamiltonian Development Policy for Africa Is A Necessity

For the Development of Africa: Know and Apply Franklin Roosevelt’s Credit Policy

Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for over 35 years. He is a teacher, writer, public speaker, consultant on Africa, and an analyst of global strategic relations. Mr. Freeman strongly believes that economic development is an essential human right. He is the creator of the blog: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.comalso publishes on: lawrencefreeman.substack.com, “Freeman’s Africa and the Worldand on X @lkfreemansafrica

Leaders Emphasize Rail & Electricity is Pathway to Industrialization of Nigeria

Proposed Africa Integrated High Speed Rail (HSR) Network

October 9, 2025

This is my second post on the 2nd International Railway Conference held in Abuja, Nigeria, September 15-16, 2025. My presentation, Railroad Expansion Imperative, Not Optional, For the Future of Nigeria and Africa was delivered on the second day of the conference. I discussed the significance of this conference from the perspective of my profession, physical economy.

On the first day of the conference, Minister of Transportation, Sen. Said Ahmed Alkaliin, and Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, (Gas), Rt. Hon Ekperikpe Ekpo, PhD, addressed the gathering of over 1,000 attendees. They highlighted the necessity for Nigeria to expand its railway system, and utilize its abundant gas reserves to industrialize Nigeria, the most populace nation in Africa. Their presentations are excerpted below.

As a physical economist, I have emphasized for decades the importance of infrastructure, in particular, energy and rail transportation. These are the two most critical categories of hard infrastructure essential for African nations to become  industrialized, replete with advanced agricultural and manufacturing sectors.

Both ministers appropriately underscored at this conference, Nigeria’s intention to use its energy resources and its expanding rail system, including a high speed rail line, to achieve  industrialization. As a result, Nigeria will become a pivotal nation in West Africa and advance, The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA).

Vice President of Nigeria, Sen. Kashim Shettima-(3rd from left), Minister of Transportation, Sen. Said Ahmed Alkali-(3rd from right), with other dignitaries attending the conference.

Excerpts from Min. of Transportation

Today we meet not only to review progress, but to re-imagine the railway as a cornerstone of Nigeria’s transportation which is recognized as enabler of economic growth across jurisdictions.

This Conference seeks to assemble railway experts, industry players, and other stakeholders to share knowledge and experience across jurisdictions on emerging trends, funding opportunities, and prospects of railway services as catalyst for national development. This discussion will maximize the potential of the railway sub-sector as viable option for boosting commerce through geographical mobility and general economic growth through connectivity and collaborations.

I am glad to inform you that the Renewed Hope Agenda of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu Administration has accorded special priority to transportation in recognition of the above reality credited to transportation as gateway to the nation’s economy.

In this regard, I have considered it most expedient to highlight few key achievements by the Ministry under this Administration to expand the scope of discussions during technical sections and attract useful output to enhance the transport sector, thus:

  • Facilitate accelerated execution of the 203km Kaduna-Kano on going rail modernization project from 15% at the inception of the Administration to 53%; and the 387 km Kano–Maradi, with extension to Dutse from 5% to 60%.
  • While the Kaduna-Kano project will be ready for completion and commissioning by December 2026, the Kano-Maradi project will reach Katsina by December this year and be ready for completion and commissioning by March 2027.
  • Successful completion of rehabilitation of Lagos-Kano Old Narrow Gauge for freight of goods from the seaports to connect to Dala Inland Dry Port to put it to use.
  • Attracted foreign investors for the construction of high speed rail from Abuja-Lagos, Abuja-Kano, and Abuja-Port Harcourt, to boost nation’s infrastructural development and revenue generation profile.

Lawrence Freeman with Minister Uba Maihari Ahmadu, Ministry of Regional Development, discussing economic development plans for North East Nigeria

Make the Railway an Economic Tool, Not Just an Asset: The focus must shift from construction alone to ensuring rail corridors serve agriculture, industry, mining, and commerce.

Around the world, railways have always been more than a transport mode. They are nation builders and Engines of Economic Transformation: In Europe, railways enabled industrial revolution. In China, they powered urbanization and export growth. In Africa, railways are emerging as the backbone of regional integration.

The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) presents an enormous opportunity. But without efficient logistics, our businesses cannot compete. That is why Nigeria’s Kano–Maradi corridor is more than a railway project, it is a gateway to West Africa’s markets, opening access for Nigerian goods into Niger Republic and beyond.

As we modernize our railways, we are also positioning Nigeria as a logistics hub for West and Central Africa.

Let us envision a Nigeria where:

Our ports are seamlessly connected to factories by rail; Our highways are relieved of endless trucks; Our youth are employed building and running trains; Our neighbors see Nigeria as the hub of African rail logistics.

This is not a dream. It is a future within our grasp if we work together. Ladies and Gentlemen, the railway is the track of Nigeria’s future linking our economy, uniting our people, and securing our place in Africa and the world.

Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, (Gas), Rt. Hon Ekperikpe Ekpo, PhD

Excerpts from Min. Petroleum Resources, (Gas)

This conference is historic, not only because it brings together some of the brightest minds in infrastructure and transportation, but also because it unveils Africa’s most ambitious rail project: a 4,000 kilometer high-speed rail network capable of reaching speeds of up to 350 kilometers per hour. This bold initiative will redefine connectivity across Nigeria and Africa, opening new frontiers for trade, investment, and industrial growth.

Nigeria’s story of development is incomplete without acknowledging her natural endowments. With over 209 trillion cubic feet of proven natural gas reserves and a potential upside of more than 600 trillion cubic feet, Nigeria is rightly positioned as the Gas Capital of Africa, and among the top ten globally.

For decades, our economy relied on crude oil as its mainstay, while gas resources were underutilized. Gas has been repositioned as the centerpiece of Nigeria’s economic strategy — transforming it from a by-product of oil into the foundation of our industrial and economic future.

Gas is more than an energy resource; it is the engine of industrialization. It powers manufacturing, fertilizer production, petrochemicals, power generation, and clean cooking. Importantly, it also provides a sustainable and affordable energy solution for capital-intensive infrastructure like railways.

British built, old narrow gauge railway system now being refurbished.

High-speed rail requires clean, reliable, and cost-effective power. Nigeria’s abundant gas resources provide that strategic solution. By expanding gas-powered electricity and fueling logistics, industries along rail corridors — including fertilizer plants, petrochemicals, material production, and compressed natural gas hubs can flourish. This will transform rail-connected cities into vibrant centers of industry, commerce, and competitiveness, while strengthening Nigeria’s role under the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA).

These opportunities align perfectly with the Renewed Hope Agenda, which prioritizes industrialization, job creation, poverty reduction, sustainable development, and infrastructure expansion.

As Nigeria leads Africa in pioneering high-speed rail, we must remember that the true engine of this transformation is energy. With our vast natural gas reserves, Nigeria can power her railways, light up industries, create new jobs, and unlock fresh opportunities for her people. This is not just about energy transition — it is about building a bridge to Nigeria’s industrial and economic prosperity.

Let us, therefore, embrace the synergy between energy and infrastructure. With visionary leadership and unwavering commitment, we can transform Nigeria into a hub of innovation, productivity, and inclusive growth.

May this conference mark the beginning of a new chapter for railway development and economic transformation in Nigeria and across Africa.

(all emphasis added)

Read below my earlier posts on this topic:

The African Integrated High Speed Rail Network-(AIHSRN) Will Revolutionize Africa’s Economies

Nigeria Expands Railroads and Strives for Self Sufficiency in Rice

Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for 35 years. He is a teacher, writer, public speaker, consultant on Africa, and an analyst of global strategic relations. Mr. Freeman strongly believes that economic development is an essential human right. He is the creator of the blog: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.comalso publishes on: lawrencefreeman.substack.com, “Freeman’s Africa and the Worldand on X @lfreemansafrica

Energy Poverty Is Killing Africans & Preventing Industrialization

Picture of the Earth from space at night depicting electricity distribution around the globe. (Source: Wikimedia Commons)

July 2, 2025

I am posting below, the latest article by Gyude Moore, because I concur with his insightful analysis. He articulates well, the failure of energy policy for Africa, which must be changed for the survival of African nations.

Electricity is the life blood of an economy; when that lifeblood does not exist, the economy fails to be healthy and livable, and human beings die.

Let me be as blunt as possible.

All the NGOs, human rights organizations, good governance activists, charitable foundations, Western nations and their financial institutions, so called environmentalists, and even the United Nations itself, either out of ignorance or malice, refuse to advocate for the quality and quantity of energy required to end poverty, hunger, and unnecessary deaths in Africa. Solar energy, the latest craze, can light a light bulb or charge a phone, but it is too diffuse an energy source to power an industrial economy. As Moore correctly emphasizes, African nations need abundant powerful forms of energy to industrialize their economies and build their manufacturing sectors.

It is the height of arrogance and moral hypocrisy, for people whose lives and nations exist due to the exploitation of carbon based fossil fuels, to deny that right of exploitation to others. Every aspect of modern Western life depends on manufacturing and electricity. A robust program of utilizing all forms of energy, including small nuclear reactors, should begin immediately to secure Africa’s industrialization. It is the lack of economic development that drives instability and insecurity in African nations.

Key excerpts from Moore’s article:  

“But for all its strengths, the report is silent on one of the most critical aspects of Africa’s energy future: the productive use of electricity—particularly for industrialization. This omission is more than an oversight. It matters. It reflects a broad pattern about how development practitioners think about energy in Africa: too often as a social good to be distributed, instead of a strategic input for economic transformation.

“If Africa is to industrialize, we need a new energy narrative—one that links energy to human development. One that counts kilowatt-hours for steel mills and assembly lines, not just solar lanterns. One that sees energy as the foundation of wealth, not merely well-being.

Image credit – SDG 7 report

Access Without Power: The SDG7 Report’s Silent Gap on Africa’s Productive Future

by W. Gyude Moore from the Africa Project <gyudemoore@substack.com>

Every year, the Tracking SDG7: Energy Progress Report provides a necessary but sobering update on how far the world is from achieving universal energy access. The 2024 edition is no different. It confirms what many of us working in African development already know: that energy poverty in Africa remains an existential problem and the region of the continent south of the Sahara remains the epicenter of global energy poverty.

The report draws much needed attention to the stagnation in global electrification, the widening urban-rural divide, and the increasingly indispensable role of decentralized renewables. The analysis rightly highlights that solar home systems and mini-grids must do the heavy lifting if we are to reach the most remote and vulnerable communities. In doing so, the report provides a valuable, evidence-based foundation for governments, investors, and donors to coordinate their efforts.

But for all its strengths, the report is silent on one of the most critical aspects of Africa’s energy future: the productive use of electricity—particularly for industrialization. This omission is more than an oversight. It matters. It reflects a broad pattern about how development practitioners think about energy in Africa: too often as a social good to be distributed, instead of a strategic input for economic transformation.

Energy as Survival, Not Development

The report measures progress by counting connections and households with basic access. That is essential—access to light, refrigeration, and clean cooking saves lives and lifts burdens, especially for women and girls.

But energy is more than light. It is an indispensable precondition of industrialization. You cannot process cocoa without reliable electricity. You cannot operate a textile mill on a solar lantern. You cannot build the factories, agro-processors, or logistics cold chains that Africa needs if the electricity system is engineered only to power bulbs, not businesses.

What Kind of Access Are We Measuring?

The SDG7 report congratulates progress in off-grid solutions—but it doesn’t ask whether those solutions can support productive livelihoods. There is no mention of voltage stability, grid reliability, or the cost per kilowatt-hour for small and medium enterprises. In most African countries, industrial users face:

· High prices per unit cost

· Frequent outages or load shedding

· Absence of power in designated economic zones

If we are serious about structural transformation, then not all connections are equal. Counting connections without considering quality risks creating a hollow narrative of progress. And this is one of my worries about Mission 300 – that given the self-imposed limits of reaching its goal in 4.5 years, the measure of success will focus on counting connections.

Courtesy of Ken Opalo

Sub-Saharan Africa manufacturing output for 2023 was 234.69 billion US dollars, a 3.05% decline from 2022.

Industrialization Needs Its Own Energy Track

Africa’s population is young, urbanizing, and growing. Every year, millions more enter the labor market. Where will the jobs come from?

We know the answer: manufacturing, processing, value addition. And we know what those activities require: abundant, reliable, and affordable power. Yet the report offers no analysis on industrial energy use, no insight into how to extend abundant power to rural agro-processing clusters, no discussion of the energy implications of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). That’s not just a gap. It’s a blind spot. And this blind spot is reflected in the kinds of solutions offered for the continent’s energy poverty problem.

To be clear, household access must remain a priority. But Africa’s energy strategy must also be judged by its ability to empower—not just individuals, but entire economies. That means:

· Powering industrial parks in the Gambia, Sierra Leone as well as Cote d’Ivoire

· Supporting cold storage and irrigation in Senegal and Malawi

· Energizing green manufacturing zones in Nigeria and South Africa

I would thus recommend a second track in the SDG7 framework—one that focuses not on access alone, but on abundance.

Reframing Energy for Africa’s Future

As noted in the beginning of this blog, the report is a necessary account of what progress is being made on this goal. However, having seen as many “plans for Africa” as any one person should see over a lifetime, I worry that this line of thinking ends up mistaking motion for momentum. The SDG7 report shows us where we are, but I find its proposed solution of where we need to go, incomplete. It tells us how to keep the lights on. It doesn’t tell us how to power prosperity.

If Africa is to industrialize, we need a new energy narrative—one that links energy to human development. One that counts kilowatt-hours for steel mills and assembly lines, not just solar lanterns. One that sees energy as the foundation of wealth, not merely well-being.

The world’s energy agenda for Africa must not be satisfied with lighting our homes while leaving economies in the dark. Read: energy poverty in Africa remains an existential problem 

Read below my earlier posts on this topic.

Energy poverty sustains poverty because electricity is the foundation of all economic development  ­͏     ­͏   Energy Poverty Is Killing Africans-Renewables Are Insufficient 

­͏  Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for 35 years. He is a teacher, writer, public speaker, consultant on Africa, and an analyst of global strategic relations. Mr. Freeman strongly believes that economic development is an essential human right. He is the creator of the blog: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.comalso publishes on: lawrencefreeman.substack.com, “Freeman’s Africa and the Worldand on X @lkfreemansafrica   ­͏  

  ͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏

Hamilton versus Wall Street: Relevance to Ethiopia & Africa

Hamilton versus Wall Street: Relevance to Ethiopia & Africa

By Dr. Birhanu M Lenjiso. Former State Minister of Irrigation Development, & Director General of Oromia Agricultural Authority, Ethiopia

Introduction

About five years ago, my friend Lawrence Freeman, gave me an enlightening book: Hamilton Versus Wall Street: The Core Principles of the American System of Economics published by Nancy Bradeen Spannaus in 2019.

Lawrence Freeman and Dr Birhanu Lenjiso

Alexander Hamilton is regarded as a Founding Father of the United States. Beyond, being a chief of staff to General Washington, one of the most influential interpreters and promoters of the Constitution, and the founder of the nation’s financial system, he was the first Secretary of the Treasury, who established the nation’s financial system, including the national bank, federal assumption of state debts, and a framework for economic growth. As an aide to George Washington, he was an artillery officer and strategist. He was also chief author of the Federalist papers, which urged ratification of the U.S. Constitution. He is credited for shaping early American politics, but also made powerful enemies, most notably Aaron Burr, who fatally shot him in 1804. His legacy continues to influence the U.S. financial system and debates surrounding federal power.

The book, Hamilton versus Wall Street challenges the notion of Hamilton as a proponent of speculative finance, instead revealing his visionary economic principles that prioritized national development, infrastructure, and public welfare over Wall Street’s short-term profits. This sparked my curiosity about how Hamilton’s ideas might provide valuable insights for Ethiopia and Africa, where economic sovereignty and sustainable growth are pressing concerns. My reading, along with my recent discussions with Mr. Freeman inspired me to explore the book’s relevance to Africa, making it a compelling subject for review.

Hamilton versus Wall Street examines Hamilton’s economic philosophy, which laid the groundwork for America’s emergence as an industrial powerhouse. The book argues that Hamilton’s principles of protectionism, infrastructure investment, and a national banking system offer a timeless blueprint for economic development. While the book primarily focuses on the U.S., I believe its concepts resonate beyond, and particularly relevant for developing nations who are striving to secure economic sovereignty. Therefore, my goal here is to evaluate the relevance of the book for Ethiopia and the broader African continent, where countries grapple with industrialization, foreign debt, and economic dependency.

In fact, Spannaus presents Hamilton’s American System of Economics as a counterpoint to the laissez-faire capitalism promoted by Wall Street. To show that the author outlines three key pillars of Hamilton’s philosophy:

  1. Protectionism: that is explained by implementing tariffs and subsidies to nurture infant industries and shield them from foreign competition.
  2. Infrastructure Development: this is about state-led investments in roads, irrigation canals, and later railroads to enhance economic connectivity.
  3. National Banking: this relates to establishing a central bank that focuses on stabilizing currency, managing debt, and funding development projects.

The author tried to illustrate these three principles with historical examples, such as Hamilton’s Report on Manufactures (1791), advocating for industrial self-sufficiency. She also cites the rapid industrialization of the U.S. in the 19th century as evidence of Hamilton’s success, noting, “Hamilton’s system provided the unique basis for building the United States into an industrial power.” Spannaus’ book contrasts Hamilton’s vision with Wall Street’s focus on speculative finance, asserting that his principles remain relevant for nations seeking economic independence – justifying the relevance of this review.

Critical Analysis of the Book

Spannaus did a wonderful job in making complex economic ideas accessible for the reader, it is a well-written and easy to read book. The historical depth, grounded in primary sources like Hamilton’s writings, supports the argument effectively. The book also challenges the dominance of free-market ideology, offering a refreshing perspective on state-led development. However, the book’s U.S.-centric limits its global perspective. In fact, Spannaus briefly mentions its relevance for developing countries but she does not delve into how Hamilton’s ideas apply to post-colonial contexts. Additionally, the book risks oversimplifying Hamilton’s policies and downplaying criticisms of protectionism or centralized banking in modern economies. In general, Spannaus’ clear, engaging prose makes the book accessible to non-economists, although the repetitive emphasis on Hamilton’s genius occasionally detracts from a nuanced discussion of the limitations of his policies.

Relevance to Ethiopia

Ethiopia, one of Africa’s fastest-growing economies, provides fertile ground for applying Hamilton’s principles. With an average GDP growth rate of more than 7% annually over the past decade, Ethiopia has made significant investments in infrastructure, such as the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD), industrial parks, irrigation systems, telecommunications, and roads. However, challenges like foreign debt, reliance on agricultural exports, and limited industrial capacity mirror the early U.S. conditions Hamilton addressed.

  1. Protectionism: Ethiopia’s government has enacted policies to protect local industries for years, such as tariffs on imported textiles to support its garment sector. Hamilton’s advocacy for shielding infant industries aligns with Ethiopia’s strategy to develop manufacturing. Spannaus notes Hamilton’s belief that “government must play a role in fostering industry,” a principle evident in Ethiopia’s state-led industrial parks.
  2. Infrastructure Development: Ethiopia’s ambitious infrastructure projects, like the GERD, reflect Hamilton’s emphasis on state-driven public works. The GERD, funded domestically to maintain sovereignty, aligns with Hamilton’s vision of national control over critical assets. Spannaus highlights Hamilton’s promotion of canals and roads, which “created the arteries of commerce,” a model Ethiopia could adopt to enhance regional connectivity.
  3. National Banking: Ethiopia’s dependence on foreign loans underscores the need for financial independence. Hamilton’s national bank helped stabilize U.S. finances, and a similar institution could assist Ethiopia in managing debt and funding development. Spannaus argues that Hamilton’s bank “provided a stable currency and credit system,” a lesson for Ethiopia as it navigates currency devaluation and inflation.

However, Ethiopia must balance protectionism with global trade integration. Over Reliance on state intervention, as cautioned in the book’s critique of centralized systems, could stifle innovation if not accompanied by market reforms.

The Hamilton statue at Paterson National Park, home of his Society for Useful Manufactures

Relevance to Africa

Africa’s economic landscape, characterized by raw material exports, foreign debt, and underdeveloped industries, makes Hamilton’s principles broadly applicable. Many African nations, such as Nigeria and Rwanda, are pursuing industrialization to reduce dependency on volatile commodity markets.

  1. Reducing Financial Dependency: Africa’s $700 billion external debt burden highlights the need for financial sovereignty. Hamilton’s national banking model could inspire institutions like the African Development Bank to prioritize local financing. Spannaus notes that Hamilton’s system “freed the U.S. from foreign creditors,” a goal African nations could strive for to avoid debt traps.
  2. Promoting Industrialization: Hamilton’s protectionist policies could guide African nations in nurturing industries. Nigeria’s efforts to revive its textile industry through import restrictions reflect Hamilton’s tariffs. Spannaus emphasizes that Hamilton’s policies “built a manufacturing base from scratch,” serving as a blueprint for African economies transitioning from resource extraction.
  3. Regional Infrastructure: Africa’s infrastructure deficit, estimated at $100 billion annually, necessitates Hamilton-style investments. Rwanda’s focus on digital infrastructure and regional trade hubs exemplifies this approach. Spannaus’ description of Hamilton’s infrastructure as “essential for national unity” underscores its relevance for African integration, such as the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA).

Nevertheless, Africa’s diverse political and economic contexts complicate the application of Hamilton’s ideas. Global trade agreements and multinational corporations may limit the feasibility of protectionism, and state-led projects risk corruption without strong governance.

Critical Reflections

Hamilton’s principles provide African policymakers with a framework to prioritize economic sovereignty, but adaptation is essential. Ethiopia’s substantial investment in infrastructure, including the GERD, industrial parks, irrigation systems, and roads, showcases the potential of state-led development, while Rwanda’s technology-driven growth illustrates how Hamilton’s ideas can be modernized. However, the risks of protectionism, such as trade retaliation or inefficiency, must be carefully navigated. The book’s U.S.-centric lens also overlooks Africa’s unique challenges, such as colonial legacies and global economic pressures. Policymakers should blend Hamilton’s ideas with local innovations, ensuring accountability and inclusivity.

Conclusion

Hamilton Versus Wall Street serves as a well-crafted defense of Alexander Hamilton’s economic vision, offering valuable lessons for nations pursuing industrial and financial independence. Its relevance to Ethiopia lies in its alignment with ongoing infrastructure and industrialization efforts, while its broader application to Africa addresses the continent’s quest for economic sovereignty. Although Spannaus’ focus on the U.S. limits the book’s global scope, its clarity and historical insight make it a compelling read. Policymakers in Ethiopia and Africa should consider Hamilton’s principles as a guide, tempered by the realities of 21st-century globalization. For readers interested in economic development, this book provides a thought-provoking starting point for reimagining state-led growth.

Read below my earlier posts:

Nations Must Study Alexander Hamilton’s Principles of Political Economy

A Hamiltonian Development Policy for Africa Is A Necessity

Alexander Hamilton’s Credit System Is Necessary for Africa’s Development

Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for 35 years. He is a teacher, writer, public speaker, consultant on Africa, and an analyst of global strategic relations. Mr. Freeman strongly believes that economic development is an essential human right. He is the creator of the blog: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.comalso publishes on: lawrencefreeman.substack.com, “Freeman’s Africa and the Worldand on X @lkfreemansafrica

Why Nuclear Power and Why Now For Africa?

Africa’s only nuclear powerplant in Koeberg South Africa. (Courtesy cbn.co.za)

March 30, 2025

Below is an important article on nuclear power for Africa by a colleague of mine .

Published in Nuclear Network Africa, South Africa, March 25.

Yes, Nuclear for Small Countries in Africa!

By David Cherry

Africa is now on a path toward industrialization. There can be no sovereignty without the national power that comes from industrialization, and that’s where nuclear power comes in. It is no accident that the first five BRICS nations all have nuclear power plants—Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa. It is no accident that the other five full BRICS members either have nuclear power (Iran, UAE), or are building their first plant (Egypt), or have concrete plans for nuclear power (Ethiopia, Indonesia).

Only yesterday it was unthinkable that nuclear power could be available to most African nations. But today, nuclear power is no longer the privilege of the industrialized countries. Technological apartheid has been largely defeated.

The up-front expense of a nuclear power plant is still a consideration, however. Doesn’t this expense restrict nuclear to African nations with relatively large budgets? On the continent today, only South Africa has a functioning nuclear power plant. Egypt’s large plant—comprising four reactors, each producing 1200 megawatts of electricity (1200 MWe)—is now under construction.

And the other countries? Small modular reactors (SMRs) and microreactors give most small African countries the nuclear option. Because these reactors are small and their major components can be produced on an assembly line, their price is within reach of most countries. With these small reactors, the revenue from the first installed reactor can help pay the cost of adding more units on the same site.

There are about 80 SMRs designed or being designed worldwide. Russia and China have SMRs in operation. South Africa’s HTMR-100 is fully designed and ready to be built.

A reactor that produces 20 to 300 MWe is called a small modular reactor (SMR) and one under 20 MWe is a microreactor. Nuclear reactors produce a significant amount of heat that can also be used, but SMRs and microreactors are defined in terms of their electric output. In Japan, Toshiba has its 4S model that will produce 10 MWe, while in the U.S. the TVA model is designed for 15 MWe. There are even smaller ones. The South African HTMR-100 will put out 35 MWe. Other sizes include Russia’s RITM-200 at 55 Mwe, now operating; and in China, two SMRs are now operating: the ACP100 producing 125 MWe, and the HTR-PM, 210 MWe.

Different designs are suitable for different conditions. Some use water to keep the reactor sufficiently cool and must therefore be near a large water body. Designs that use circulating helium for cooling can be placed inland.

But the cost of the reactor itself is not the only problem. No power plant can function if the electricity network lacks the capacity to deliver the electricity to users. Another problem is having enough trained technicians for plant operation. For both problems, the SMR provides relief. The first SMR will not need a large staff, and it can grow as more reactors are added. As for transmission capacity, the first SMR may not require much upgrade of the network.

Why Nuclear and Why Now?

For now, many African governments will expand their use of coal and hydro-power and possibly add natural gas, because even small reactors are not mail-order items that will arrive next week. But now is the time to start along the path to nuclear because of its longer lead time. These other sources will still be important in the energy mix long after nuclear is first up and running.

But why, then, is nuclear necessary? Nuclear is the energy source of the future because uranium and thorium are vastly more energy dense than any conventional source, especially solar and wind. For example, a kilogram of uranium-235 contains two or three million times the energy of a kilogram of coal or oil. (Imagine avoiding the cost of the constant flow of coal-laden trucks from mine to power plant. Nuclear fuel lasting years may weigh only a few kilograms.) Not only that. A nuclear power plant does not have a large footprint compared to any other power plant of equivalent output. These two factors together are the “energy-flux density” of the given combination of fuel and technology. Higher energy-flux density indicates greater efficiency and lower cost per megawatt.

Africa is now on a path toward industrialization. There can be no sovereignty without the national power that comes from industrialization, and that’s where nuclear power comes in. It is no accident that the first five BRICS nations all have nuclear power plants—Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa. It is no accident that the other five full BRICS members either have nuclear power (Iran, UAE), or are building their first plant (Egypt), or have concrete plans for nuclear power (Ethiopia, Indonesia).

David Cherry is an editorial staff member of the Executive Intelligence Review in Washington, D.C., and was formerly of 21st Century Science & Technology magazine and the International Journal of Fusion Energy.

Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for 35 years. He is a teacher, writer, public speaker, consultant on Africa, and an analyst of global strategic relations. Mr. Freeman strongly believes that economic development is an essential human right. He is the creator of the blog: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.com, and also publishing on: lawrencefreeman.substack.com, “Freeman’s Africa and the World

U.S. Elections Approach: America is Better Than This Spectacle

Candidates sound off on hot button issue but have no ideas. (courtesy of palmbeachpost.com)

October 22, 2024

Simply stated, this November’s election in the United States are a disaster. Detrimental to the existence of America and dangerous to the world. Both of the leading candidates for President are imbued with the diseased “rules based order-zero sum” ideology. Neither of them is qualified to lead America, much less articulate a vision to fashion a better world. This is not an exaggeration to the slightest degree.

In this grave time of multiple crises, the United States is bereft of a capable leader, who possess the intellectual acuity to navigate our nation and the world safely through these stormy waters. Sadly, candidates of both parties can at best repeat their talking points, which must include the hot button phrases to evoke mindless applause.

I have been involved in American politics, in one form of another, for over half a century, and have painfully witnessed the moral and intellectual decline of America. Recently, I re-read the speeches of President John Kennedy, our last American statesman, delivered before, during, and after the Cuban Missile Crisis. There is no comparison to the pathetic utterings of our lilliputian nominees today.

This is not what the United States was created to be and not what we  are as Americans.

This leads to the substantive conceptual intent of this essay: re-discovering the principles upon which the United Staes of America was established. This is no easy task. I sympathize with the difficulties my African friends have in understanding the core of what America actually is. Unlike myself, my fellow Americans have made little effort to study the real history of America. To help us learn the truth of the unique American story, I recommend reading, Who We Are: America’s Fight for Universal Progress, from Franklin to Kennedy.* The author, Anton Chaitkin, an historian who I have known for decades, goes beyond the popular narrative of the U.S., in digging deeper to discover the underlying beliefs that created and guided our republic.

How the U.S. became an industrial economic power is unknown even to the overwhelming majority of Americans, many of whom out of ignorance, would rather attack the U.S. with silly myths. Yes, the U.S. is not perfect, but what we are today is quite different from what we were and created to be. Our revolution and emergence as an industrial republic changed the world. Chaitkin, in this book  unearths the secrets of how this was accomplished, and who were the principal leaders.

The U.S. did not achieve its economic power as a result of slavery, greedy capitalist, or free trade, as it has now become popular to repeat. Rather, it was achieved by extraordinary entrepreneurs, industrialists, engineers, scientists, economists, inventors, and brilliant military and political leaders. Chaitkin insists that the U.S. was designed, by exceptional individuals, who were committed to the concept of improvement and progress, not selfishness. This incredible story is disclosed in rich detail in Who We Are.

Who We Really Are

The American Revolution, the defeat of the British Imperial oligarchy, was for something more than simply freedom. Freedom to do what? Chaikin supplies the answer:

The American Revolution carried with it the promise of something beyond civil liberties and self-government. There now existed a new productive power that a free people could use to raise their own living standards.

Adam Smith’s free-trade dogma, and his Wealth of Nations, published in 1776, was an attack on the aspirations of the colonies. Smith, sponsored by the City of London, and the British East India Company, was deployed to counter the intent of the colonies to establish a manufacturing sector. British Imperialism required the colonies be preserved as exclusive exporters of agricultural products. The British oligarchy outlawed the “production of even one horseshoe nail.” Chaitkin writes: The 1750 Iron Act forbade Americans to build any steel making furnace, or any factory or machine for slitting, rolling, or hammering of iron…

They feared the colonists would build an independent capability for the production of goods, undermining England’s colonial policy of dumping cheap products on the colonies.

Chaitkin’s primary thesis is:

Over the course of the long American Revolutionary War with Britain, a small group of nationalists associated with [Benjamin]Franklin in Philadelphia, and with General Washington in the field, came to form the core of a ‘national party,’ with its particular political economic tradition, that persisted well beyond the Revolution. It may be said to have brought about the modern world, by industrializing the United States, and fighting for the industrialization of other countries, over the determined opposition of the rulers of the British Empire.

Alexander Hamilton, the young genius, who served as General Washington’s aide de camp during the war, led the political battle for the creation of a national government from thirteen bankrupt colonies. It was Hamilton’s design of a national bank to issue credit for development, and his sound policy to pay off their huge debt from the war, which saved the colonies from collapse after their successful revolution. His insistence on a strong central government, creation of a manufacturing sector, and use of tariffs to build nascent industry, became the foundation of what was later named, the American System of Political Economy. It is no exaggeration to assert, that what  became the United States, was built by Alexander Hamilton, George Washington, and Benjamin Franklin. And that the export and application of these ideas in the nineteenth and twentieth century transformed the rest of the world.

For a thorough treatment of Alexander Hamilton and his thinking, I suggest you read historian Nancy Spannaus’ book  Hamilton Versus Wall Street: The Core Principles Of the American System of Economics. Nations Must Study Alexander Hamilton’s Principles of Political Economy

Baltimore and Ohio Railroad (courtesy of americanjourneys.com)

What We Built

Chaitkin writes on Hamilton’s American System:

The American mission of progress, embodied in Hamilton’s proposals, and the fight over implementing that program, form the essential core of world history ever since. All later economic progress has preceded from that revolutionary policy outlook. The fundamental contest of the two sides, progressive nationalism versus finance-based imperial interest, has continued up to the present.

Hamilton, Franklin, their followers and many states opposed slavery as immoral, and economically regressive practice that would retard progress. They believed that the full implementation of Hamilton’s design for a manufacturing driven economy would end the plantation economy with its slave labor conditions and destruction of the soil.** Everyone Should Know The Truth About Slavery in America

Not accidentally, beginning in the early nineteenth century, the industrial economy of the U.S. entered a new phase of physical economic growth, becoming the engine of the world. This exciting development is depicted in Liftoff (chapter 9).

The cooperating nationalists who together attained national power in 1824-1825 went on to solve fundamental problems that had kept the USA backward and weak. They would develop the first canals and railroads, connecting regions separated by natural geography. They would create the American coal industry and America’s modern iron industry, making the essential components of advanced production. They would bring to life new globally-important centers of skilled work and engineering genius…

Pennsylvania would become the center of America’s great industries, and the world headquarters for nationalist economies.

This effort was led by such luminaries as John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay, James Monroe, Matthew Carey, Nicholas Biddle, Friedrich List,  and other leaders of the American system.

“Erie Canal dramatically reduced the cost of moving people and goods between the Atlantic Ocean and the Great Lakes.” (Courtesy of ppaccone.medium.com)

The accomplishments included:

  • Anthracite coal production increased from 400 tons in 1820, to 3.5 million tons in 1847.
  • Iron production increased from about 20,000 tons in 1820, to 800,000 tons in 1847.
  • The 363-miles-long Erie Canal was completed in 1825, and 15 years later over 3,000 miles of canal have been built.
  • There were  three miles of railway in operation in 1826 and nearly 6,000 in 1847.

The growth in physical economy in the first half of the nineteenth century was spectacular. It transformed the U.S. and gave the world a new, non-imperialist model of development, which was successfully disseminated to Europe, and Asia. President Lincoln was to continue this progress, despite the Civil War, with initiation of the first ever continental railroad.

Conclusion

Since the death of President John Kennedy, America has lost any semblance of its commitment to scientific industrial progress. U.S. has also lost its enthusiasm to uplift other nations achieve physical economic growth. Using the principles of  Hamilton’s American System of Political Economy, discussed above, we could have assisted African nations in already having eliminated poverty. Our failed political leadership, supported by a largely uneducated citizenry, has also irrationally opposed China’s progress in eliminating poverty.

Thus, we have brought ourselves to this crisis point. Americans will be faced with a tragically sad quandary of not having a candidate who truly represents the profound principles upon which the U.S. was established. How we got to this point is another conversation, that I addressed in an earlier article: Why Is US-Africa Policy So Bad? Decline of American Culture!

The purpose of this commentary today is to demonstrate to you, by reviewing  Anton Chaitkin’s new book, Who We Are, that America was once a better nation, with qualified leaders. Now, our challenge is to find our way back to being those kinds of Americans.

*Volume I: 1750s to 1850s. published 2020, paperback-435 pages. Who-We-Are

** Nancy B Spannaus, Defeating Slavery: Hamilton’s American System Showed the Way. Published 2023, paperback-383 pages.

Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for 35 years. He is a teacher, writer, public speaker, and consultant on Africa. Mr. Freeman strongly believes that economic development is an essential human right. He is the creator of the blog:  lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.com, and also publishing on: lawrencefreeman.substack.com, “Freeman’s Africa and the World.”

South Africa Led the World in Small Nuclear Reactors: Africa Needs Nuclear Energy Today!

May 30, 2024

Watch this video from africanagenda.net.

Read my earlier posts:

South African Activist Campaigns for Nuclear Energy For Africa: Essential for Industrialization

South Africa: A Leader on the Continent for Nuclear Energy

“Electricity is the lifeblood of a nation” Nuclear Energy Can Be A Solution To The Continent’s Dearth of Electricity

Nuclear Power A Necessity for Africa’s Economic Growth

African Nations Desperately Need Energy for Economic Growth

Africa`s Future Depends on Adopting Nuclear Power Generation

In the Next Decade, Nuclear Power for Africa Is A Necessity, Not An Option

Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for 35 years. He is a teacher, writer, public speaker, and consultant on Africa. Mr. Freeman strongly believes that economic development is an essential human right. He is the creator of the blog:  lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.com, and also publishing on: lawrencefreeman.substack.com, “Freeman’s Africa and the World.”

Energy Poverty Is Killing Africans-Renewables Are Insufficient

Access to electricity for sub-Saharan nations is abysmal. A leading factor in the prevalence of poverty and hunger. (Courtesy of researchgate.net)

W. Gyude Moore published a useful article on the vital need for African nations to produce more energy: On the question of Africa’s Energy Poverty

However, I extend the implications of his analysis of energy poverty to its full impact on the lives of hundreds of millions of Africans. To wit: energy poverty is the leading cause of preventable deaths in Africa. Western political-financial elites are using their pseudo concern to “save the world” from climate change, to prevent African nations from producing vital energy from their abundant natural resources of hydrocarbons. In effect, attempting to deny nations suffering from a dearth of electricity, the right to develop their own energy sources sufficient to industrialize their economies. Hunger and poverty will not be eliminated on the African continent without nation-wide grids providing abundant and accessible electrical power.

Renewables are not capable of powering an industrialized economy. Their low energy flux density, the concentration of heat-power needed to transform minerals, is inadequate. Intense levels of heat and energy are required to convert ores into working metals. Nuclear power is orders of magnitude superior to other forms of energy in satisfying these requirements. Oil, gas, and hydro are energy sources that can be used in transition to nuclear energy. Yet, African nations are given diktats to not develop their sovereign resources and instead rely on inferior energy sources, displaying their disdain for their sovereignty and the welfare of their citizens. Thus, ensuring that African nations will never be able to become manufacturing based industrialized economies capable of eradicating poverty and hunger. One can make the argument that denying African nations this required energy capacity is a new form of colonialism, to keep them undeveloped. It is the effect, if not the intent.

Excerpts from Moore’s article: In Resolving Africa’s Energy Poverty – ALL Options Remain on the Table

Africa’s energy poverty is now a national security crisis. The region’s large and growing population places relentless pressure on small and dwindling resources, exacerbating the crisis of diminished state capacity. The specter of social and political disruption haunts regional stability, from coastal West Africa to the Great Lakes. Africa’s poverty translates into weak economic resilience and heightened vulnerability to shocks – internal and external. The recent spate of global crises has only worsened the problem. After decades of improvement, the World Bank reports that inequality is rising – that the global poor bore the brunt of the economic scarring of the pandemic, with incomes falling in the poorest countries more than they did in rich countries. “As a result, the income losses of the world’s poorest were twice as high as the world’s richest, and global inequality rose for the first time in decades.” These losses are most pronounced in Sub-Saharan Africa where “incomes are falling further behind the rest of the world.”  

Nothing aggravates this condition more than the continent’s persistent energy poverty. It is thus a positive sign when at this year’s IMF/World Bank Spring meetings, the World Bank and the African Development bank agreed to invest in providing electricity to 300 million Africans by 2030. But the announcement raises a lot of questions, including Todd Moss’s: “What will the Bank do differently?” If the idea is to double down on renewables alone, this only accentuates the glaring divergence between what Africa needs and the “solution” the Bank is offering. In times of existential crises, no options are left off the table. Unless Africa increases the diversity and complexity of its exports, its poverty will persist…

Moore makes the decisive point below that even when African nations establish policies to process their own resources, to ban the export of raw resources: they don’t have the energy for smelting, transforming the ore..

No Balanced Energy mix, No Industrialization

Africa’s export diversification is inextricably tied to its infrastructure – mainly power – endowment. Namibia, Zimbabwe, the DRC and others have all passed laws banning the export of unprocessed minerals. The legitimate attempts by these governments to ensure that their minerals are extracted and processed “in a way that helps [them] realize the full economic benefits of their resources’, should be applauded.”

But the viability of these bans remains contested, and these efforts are very likely to stall, since insufficient smelting capacity has led to repeated issuance of waivers for similar bans in the DRC.

About 80% of global energy consumption is tied to transport and heating (residential and industrial). This focus here is industrial heating (100 to 2000 C). The absence of adequate power supply to smelt ores in a commercially viable way has condemned the continent’s commodity exporters to ship their raw ore to China or India. South Africa, the continent’s most complex commodity exporting economy exports its chromite ore to China for processing into ferrochrome, which is used to manufacture corrosion, acid and heat-resistant steel.

Or take aluminum – the metal that is produced from bauxite. Guinea has the world’s largest bauxite reserves at over 7 billion metric tons. However, aluminum making is one of the most energy-intensive processes in the world. “Only paper, gasoline, steel, and ethylene manufacturing consume more total energy in the United States than aluminum. Aluminum production is the largest consumer of energy on a per-weight basis and is the largest electric energy consumer of all manufactured products.”[xv] In Guinea and Sierra Leone, converting raw bauxite into intermediate metals will require prodigious amounts of installed and dispatchable power. Renewables have struggled to be cost competitive with burning fossil fuels to smelt ores. Even the most basic levels of beneficiation (removing impurities and improving the grade of the ore) often require electricity endowment that many commodity exporters lack. Unless Africa is able to increase the availability of cost-competitive energy at a scale, adding value to its mineral exports will remain a pipe drain. If the average Ethiopian continues to consume a mere 79.25 kWh per year, Ethiopia will struggle to match Bangladesh (497 kWh per year) in apparel manufacturing. If the average Nigeria consumes only about 150 kwH per year, Nigerian firms will struggle to compete with their Vietnamese counterparts  (2450 KwH per year)

Ethiopia’s Grand Renaissance Dam (GERD) will be a game changer for East Africa; generating 5,150 megawatts of electricity

Fossil Fuels (Including Coal)  and the Existential Question:

While Europe, China and India pursue increasing coal as an energy source, African nations are intentionally denied lending for development of coal powered plants, even though coal is abundant on the continent.

At this year’s Spring Meetings,  “The Big Shift Global”, a global movement against fossil fuels, protested against the Bank’s financing fossil fuels. Their best intentions notwithstanding, this activism condemns Africa and Africans to indigence, since the countries adding the most fossil fuel capacity do not borrow from the World Bank. This earnest, but misguided, activism simply provides a convenient cover for rich countries’ World Bank executive directors who want to push the bank away from financing natural gas in Africa.

Increasing Africa’s energy per capita consumption is an existential question – from keeping South Sudanese children alive in extreme heat to earning more from African exports. African governments ought to understand that outsourcing existential questions to outsiders whose intentions are, at best, ambivalent is a dereliction of duty to their people.

When coal-powered electricity is rising in prominence in the world’s largest industrial countries, it is unreasonable to expect Africans to “save the world”, by sacrificing their poverty reduction and industrialization goals on the unrealistic “hope” of an all-renewable energy mix. Every form of energy generation must remain on the table. Where viable, nuclear energy ought to be pursued too – whether the partner of choice is China or Russia, especially since Rosatom and the African Commission on Nuclear Energy (AFCONE) have approved a plan for cooperation. China has made progress on small modular reactors; this option and all others must remain on the table...

Both the World Bank and some private capital are hesitant to extend financing for new fossil fuel. Because this is a national security imperative, African governments should be prepared to make hard choices about using domestic resources, making cuts to spending elsewhere to fund these plants.

For economies where coal power plants are viable, governments must make demonstrable efforts – setting aside land, conducting feasibility studies, and mapping the coal value chain for these plants. For countries where the option is natural gas – the same processes should be set in motion.

Read my earlier posts below:

South Africa Energy Minister Rejects Western Dictates & Hypocrisy Against Africa’s Use of Energy Resources

“Electricity is the lifeblood of a nation” Nuclear Energy Can Be A Solution To The Continent’s Dearth of Electricity

GERD: Utilizing the Blue Nile to Create Energy for Development in Ethiopia & The Horn of Africa

Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for over 30 years. He is a teacher, writer, public speaker, and consultant on Africa. Mr. Freeman strongly believes that economic development is an essential human right. He is also the creator of the blog:  lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.com that has hundreds of articles for you to review.

Everyone Should Know The Truth About Slavery in America

Engraving of slaves picking cotton on a Louisiana planation in the 19th century. (courtesy of istockphoto.com)

February 20, 2024

This post is my contributions to Black History Month in the U.S.

Nancy Spannaus has made an invaluable contribution to the history of the fight over slavery in the United States, with her new book; Defeating Slavery: Hamilton’s American System Showed the Way. Thoroughly documented, Spannaus exposes the falsehood that America was founded on slavery, or that slavery is in the DNA of Americans. Not only are such untruths historically unfounded, but they are downright folly, and display gross ignorance of the history of the United States. Slavery was a disease, a cancer inside the United States, which sadly is still affecting our society today. However, it is not the basis of the more profound accomplishments of the United States, in its better days.

As anyone who understands real economics would know, it is physically impossible for slavery to begat the creation of the United States as an industrialized power. Slave labor, which dominated a whole section of the southern portion of the United States, is not a driver of economic growth, but rather retards development.

I concur with Spannaus, that if the economic principles of Alexander Hamilton had been fully implemented, the southern slave labor economies would have been driven out of existence. Southern United States, which I know well, still displays the backwardness inherent in its legacy from slavery, which President Lincoln intended to eradicate. Unfortunately, the assassination of President Lincoln, also killed his plans for full  reconstruction of the South.

Bluntly stated, the whole 1619 Project , which erroneously purports that the U.S. was founded on slavery, is a fraudulent attack on the United Staes of America. Our nation is imperfect. Its greatest flaw is an uneducated populace that has been dumb downed over the last half century to submit to popular opinion, rather than investigate the truth  on such critical issues as slavery. Spannaus, in her new book unmasks the actual fight for and against slavery in the U.S. And in so doing, has performed an invaluable service to U.S. and to universal history.

Another valuable benefit to this book is the rich history of the fight for and against the realization of the unique American System of Political Economy, which Spannaus traces from Alexander Hamilton to President Abraham Lincoln

Slavery Has Always Been A Battle

Spannaus boldly states on page one, that contrary to what many uninformed Americans believe, our American Revolution created the first antislavery movement in the world. Do our citizens even know that before the creation of the United States, the colony of Rhode Island banned slavery in 1652, and the colony of Georgia outlawed slavery in 1733? (p. 2) Or that as early as 1688, the Society of Friends in Germantown, Pennsylvania, issued the first petition against slavery? Astonishingly, five decades after 1619, there was only one British colonial territory, South Carolina, which was explicitly founded as a slave economy. (p. 39)

Massachusetts was a leading colony advocating the elimination of slavery. Sam Adams, a leader in the Revolutionary War, in 1766, chaired a town meeting on slavery, which instructed the state’s representatives: that for the total abolishing of slavery among us, you move for a law to prohibit the importation and purchasing of slaves for the future. (p. 63)

Pennsylvania was also a hotbed of the anti-slavery movement. Anthony Benezet, an immigrant, who became a leader and activist in Pennsylvania for the education of black children and the elimination of slavery,  published numerous tracts against slavery. But Benezet did more than write. In 1775 he established a first known organization dedicated to the abolition of slavery anywhere in the world.” (p. 77)

In 1775 , Pennsylvania quakers, under the guidance of Benezet, established the Society for the Relief of Free Negroes Unlawfully Held in Bondage. Years later its second iteration became, the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting Abolition of Slavery and for the Relief of Free Negroes Unlawfully Held in Bondage, commonly called the Pennsylvania Abolition Society. (pp. 77-78)

Alexander Hamilton, one of the nation’s founding fathers, first secretary of treasury, and leader in the fight against slavery. (Courtesy of blogs.shu.edu)

Revolutionary figures John Jay and Alexander Hamilton formed the New York Society for Promoting the Manumission of Slaves, in 1785. The preamble to their association read in part:

The Benevolent Creator, and Father of all  Men; having given to them all equal right to life, liberty, and property, no sovereign power on earth can justly deprive them of either but in conformity to part impartial laws…(p. 134)

Yet slavery spread even with public sentiment against it. To outlaw enslavement of our fellow Americans required our bloody Civil War, at a cost of 750,000 lives. However, after almost 250 years since the founding of our nation, and almost 160 years since the ending of the Civil War, we are still engrossed in fighting the legacy of slavery. Why wasn’t slavery extinguished and how could that have been accomplished?

U.S. Constitution adopted in September 17, 1787, (courtesy of billpetro.medium.com)

Slavery Could Have Been Eliminated

In her book, Spannaus makes a unique contribution to the discussion of the elimination of slavery. She boldly asserts that had Alexander Hamilton’s economic principles been fully executed across the United States, slavery would have been extirpated from American society. While this idea may seem foreign to many, it is actually elementary. It requires people freeing  themselves from the mysterious belief that economic growth is determined by the “invisible hand, or “buy low and sell dear,” or British spawned “free trade.” Once one rejects this deliberate miseducation by our society, and comprehends the principles of physical economy, we understand the following: an uneducated, poorly paid, poorly fed, and over worked labor force is less productive and yields less profit to the economy. A backward slave labor system that squeezes out “profit” from the exploitation of backbreaking manual labor in growing sugar, cotton, and tobacco, cannot compete with the labor force of an industrialized economy.

Alexander Hamilton expressed this concept as early as 1774, two years before the revolution.

Were not the disadvantages of slavery too obvious to stand in need of it, I might enumerate and describe all the tedious train of calamities, inseparable from it. I might shew that it is fatal to religion and morality; that it tends to debase the mind, and corrupt its noblest springs of action. I might shew, that it relaxes the sinews of industry, clips the wings of commerce, and introduces misery and indigence in every shape. (p. 165)

Spannaus summarizes that Hamilton emphasized two concepts that are central to industrial progress: the productive powers of labor and the need to stimulate the creative powers of the human mind. Both are starkly antithetical to the feudal slave labor system. (p. 166)

Hamilton opposed slavery because it debased human beings, and he knew that slave based agriculture system would weaken the United States. The British not only ran the transatlantic slave trade but invested in the southern slave labor economy as a means of breaking apart our Republic, while making huge profits in the process.

Industrialization Required

Henry Charles Carey, chief economic adviser to U.S. President Abraham Lincoln. (courtesy of en.wikipedia.org)

In his Report on Manufacturers,* Hamilton argues the necessity for the United States to become a manufacturing society, but also to exploit, if you will, the capital of the human mind. In the above cited Report, Hamilton writes that manufacturing, unlike slave-labor, serves: to cherish and stimulate the activity of the human mind, by multiplying the objects of enterprise. (pp. 170-171)

As Spannaus underscores throughout her book, industrialization of the United States was the means to eliminate slavery before the Civil War. Having Failed to accomplish that, a comprehensive full-throated reconstruction effort for the defeated Southern slave-economy following the war was required. This is what the well-known followers of Hamilton, and proponents of the American System, such as President Lincoln and Henry Carey, understood.

Henry Carey was a towering intellectual force in the nineteenth century. He was an American System economist, advisor to President Abraham Lincoln, and authored the Slave Trade: Domestic and Foreign, and How It May be Extinguished, (1853). Carey wrote on the negative effects of slavery. Spannaus refers to Carey extensively throughout her book and devotes almost the entirety of chapter sixteen to his thoughts. Typifying the outlook of the advocates of the American System, Carey wrote in 1865:

Had our legislation been of the kind which was needed for giving effect to the Declaration of Independence, that great hill region of the South, one of the richest, if not absolutely the richest in the world, would long since have been filled with furnaces and factories, the labourers in which would have been free men, women, and children, white and black, and the several portions of the Union would have been linked together by hooks of steel that would have set at defiance every effort of the ‘wealthy capitalists’ of England for bringing about a separation. Such, however, and most unhappily, was not the course of our operation. (p. 224)

Frederick Douglas and Abraham Lincoln. Giants in the fight against slavery. (Courtesy of history.com)

Constitution Not Pro-Slavery

Many poorly informed detractors of the U.S. Constitution denounce the framers by selecting a word, a phrase, or a sentence, which they allege  proves the United States is racist nation founded on support for slavery. This conclusion is usually reached without any serious intellectual investigation of the historical and factual context. It has now become popular to attack the Founding Fathers in obeisance to the latest politically correct dogma. The U.S. Constitution was written by mortal human beings with imperfections. However, this noble document, the Preamble in particular, articulated principles that transformed the world. It helped to ignite liberation movements against British colonialism across the globe, including in Africa.

The great American statesman, Frederick Douglas, who was born a slave on a plantation on the Eastern Shore of Maryland, understood this well. Douglas became an informal advisor to President Lincoln despite some  disagreements. He distinguished himself by breaking  from the abolitionists because of their support for the dismemberment of the Union. Americans and non-Americans alike, would benefit from reading Douglas’ writings. In his remarks below, Douglas responds to the provision in the U.S. Constitution that set the date of 1808, for the banning of importation of slaves. Like Dr. Martin Luther King, Douglas recognized the importance of the U.S. Constitution and Declaration of Independence and insisted that the United States deliver on its noble intention. Speaking in 1860, seven decades after the Constitution was ratified and a year before the outbreak if the Civil War, Douglas spoke on the constitutional banning of slavery:

American statesman, in providing for the abolition of the slave trade, thought they were providing for the abolition of the slavery. This view is quite consistent with the history of the times. All regarded slavery as an expiring and doomed system, designed to speedily disappear from the country. But, again, it should be remembered that this  very provision, if made to refer to the American slave trade at all, makes the Constitution anti-slavery rather than for slavery…Thirdly, it [Constitution] is anti-slavery, because it looked to the abolition of slavery rather than its perpetuity. Fourthly, it showed that the intentions of the framers of the Constitution were good not bad. (p. 157)

It will be well worth your time to read Spannaus’ new book.

Defeating Slavery: Hamilton’s American System Showed the Way, by Nancy Spannaus. Defeating-Slavery-Hamiltons-American-System  

*See Chapters on Report on Manufacturers, Spannaus, Bradeen, Hamilton Versus Wall Street: The Core Principles of the American System of Economics, iUniverse, 2019

Read my earlier post: Nations Must Study Alexander Hamilton’s Principles of Political Economy

Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for over 30 years. He is a teacher, writer, public speaker, and consultant on Africa. Mr. Freeman strongly believes that economic development is an essential human right. He is also the creator of the blog:  lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.com