Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Fundamental Value Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bocor who wrote (1789)	6/29/2012 7:40:08 AM
From: bruwin	Respond to of 4720

A difference between the two scenarios, I would say, is the aspect of "tribe", in the true sense of the word. I'm not sure if there is much, if any, of that in the US. There may be different nationalities, different social groupings, different race groups, etc.., in the US, but the individuals within them are probably less likely to vote "as one" as is often the case within Africa's tribal cultures. Another aspect of tribes is the fact that many, if not most of them, still have Chiefs whom they regard as their traditional leaders. It often happens that a Chief may not be part of a political process, such as an election. This can cause alienation and confusion amongst the electorate because they have, on the one hand, a 'politician' who is now seeking their support, and on the other hand, a Chief whom they have traditionally regarded as their leader and spokesman. IMO, this is one of the unique characteristics of African politics where you have traditional tribal norms and cultures coming up against Western style politics and democracy. The outcomes are often different, as to what they may have been, in cultures where there is no tribal factor involved. The common denominator, within or without Africa, is probably, as you say, "(both are) just as difficult to achieve"