A private banking consultant, Nilla Selormey, has reiterated the need for Africa to develop a diaspora strategy that will utilise skills of returnees to harness opportunities in the continent.
She said the strategy must have clearly defined goals based on sectoral analysis that highlight key opportunities in each sector of the economy.
The strategy, she explained, must also involve the segmentation of the African Diaspora into unique segments in order to develop targeted policies.
Addressing a business conference organised by the African Management Services Company (AMSCO), an arm of the International Finance Corporation (IFC), Ms Selormey said a critical first move for any African government would be to set a vision that should lead the development of the strategy.
“A vision that is compelling enough to persuade action; and a vision that will drive how we intend to position ourselves to attract the needed attention,” she said, when she addressed the theme, “Homecoming revolution: the future is now, a look at the African Diaspora”.
She said Africans in the diaspora were a potent force for transforming Africa and now was the time for a return to Africa, saying, “there are both push factors, pushing them out of the more developed world and pull factors, pulling them back into Africa.”
Ms Selormey shared the success stories of two returnees, Dr Patrick Awuah, the founder of the Ashesi University, and Dr Ashifi Gogo, the founder of marketing technology company Sproxil in 2009, who excelled in their various endeavours after returning to take advantage of opportunities on the continent.
She said while Dr Awuah was named among the world’s 50 greatest leaders in 2015 by Fortune Magazine, Dr Gogo’s Sproxil Defender technology used to verify the authenticity of products won the company the world’s most Innovative company in health care by Fast Company, and the seventh most innovative worldwide in 2013.
Africa, a continent of opportunities
She said the continent held enormous opportunities that must be harnessed through partnerships to develop the continent.
She identified some of the areas as agriculture, health care, infrastructure, education, financial services, technology and energy.
“Our resource rich Africa presents a “greenfield” opportunity for development with the abundance of its natural resource, vast lands, and the evolution of a young, confident, intelligent and resourceful, hungry and eager to learn and earn generation,” Ms Selormey stated.
Since June 2014, when oil began to plunge, the financial services industry in sub-Saharan Africa outperformed its emerging markets counterparts by 11 per cent.
By and large, the continent has done remarkably well and has outperformed other developing regions and the rest of the world.
That notwithstanding, Mr Selormey, who was the inaugural Managing Director of Universal Merchant Bank, said financial inclusion was low at less than 20 per cent in many countries on the continent, a potential Africans in the diaspora could look at.
“Consider the fact that most countries on the continent lack a proper consumer credit scoring system, hampering the efficient access to credit. This specific problem lends itself to interesting potential solutions with all the advances in big data and predictive analytics,” she stated.
To read more Click or Copy link:
You Might also like
By Elliot Booker — 3 years ago
Did you know that half of all Americans will eventually be diagnosed with cancer at some point in their lives? In other words, it’s only a matter of chance whether you will or won`t be one of those people.
According to World Health Organisation (WHO), cancer takes 7.6 million lives every year, which makes it one of the leading causes of death. It is believed that deaths of cancer will continue to rise over 13.1 million by 2030.
For over 60 years that market has been tapped into Western medical treatment centers, which provide chemotherapy and radiation to help shrink cancer tumors. Like we’re told, cancer is random, it’s genetic, and sooner or later, it’s going to get us.
However, more and more studies suggest that accumulation of toxins in the body is the underlying cause of cancer, as it reduces cell oxygenation, damages the DNA, causes inflammation, and leads to hormone imbalance. Therefore, dealing with these toxins and diminishing their effect is the first step towards preventing its development.
Recently, multiple studies started focusing on the use of herbs for cancer prevention, even using them along with Western medical treatment.
The idea that simple plants or herbs can have anti-cancer effects is sometimes a controversial subject. Although many people have experienced their benefits, there are still a great many skeptics. For every person who believes that herbs and plants can slow or even kill cancer cells, there is another who will only believe in the merits of chemotherapy.
Here’s a list of best 10 herbs for preventing and treating cancer and how to use them:
Wheatgrass is considered a detoxifying medical herb. Health benefits include improving red blood cell count and neutralizes environmental pollutants within the body. Also, wheatgrass shows benefits in cancer prevention.
You can use wheatgrass by juicing it daily in 2oz shots. Using wheatgrass during chemotherapy has been beneficial and may reduce symptoms of myelotoxicity. Plus, wheatgrass helps to alkalize the body.
2.Grape seed extract
Several studies have shown that the phytochemicals known as proanthocyanidins in grape seeds have anti-tumor or strong potential cancer preventative abilities that can be isolated from the seeds themselves. Also, they have been found to stop cancer cells from spreading or migrating.
Grape seed extract fights pollution and Candida within our digestive tract. This extract can be found at your holistic vitamin shop and used according to directions.
3.Burdock root (Arctium lappa)
Recent research shows that burdock root is very effective at removing cancer-causing toxins that accumulate in our digestive systems when certain foods are not properly digested. There are several anti-cancer herbal compounds that have used burdock root as a base including “Essiac tea formula” and “Hoxsey formula”.
Because of its strong blood purifying properties, burdock root can stop cancer cells from metastasizing. Burdock root extract can be found at your holistic vitamin shop and used according to directions.
Licorice detoxifies the liver and is a soothing herb with anti-inflammatory properties. It may also be used for the treatment of Candida albicans. Licorice root contains polyphenols that encourage apoptosis (automatic death) in cancer cells. Licorice regulates the production of hormones from your adrenal glands, and it reduces stress chemicals. Chronic stress often triggers the growth of cancer cells. You can use it as a tea mixed with a teaspoon of organic raw honey.
Research from a number of cancer centers including the Royal Marsden has shown its potential as a part of a treatment program against estrogen driven cancers, from breast, uterine, to the prostate. Red clover contains an active ingredient known as genistein, responsible for its anti-estrogen activity. Red clover is another ingredient in “Hoxsey formula”.
Red clover supplements are available in most health food stores as tablets, capsules or in a tincture. Dried red clover leaves are often brewed into a tea with a typical daily dose being about 4 grams of dried red clover to 30 milliliters of water.
Externally, it has been used as a home remedy for skin cancer and is possibly the most well-known anti-cancer herb around. There have been several publications showing that bloodroot has the potential to be a powerful anticancer agent. Bloodroot (Sanguinaria Canadensis) has been shown in several studies to have consistent anti-neoplastic activity; it can shrink tumors and has shown itself to be useful when dealing with sarcomas.
For internal use, mix one teaspoon bloodroot in 250 ml warm water and let it stay for 15 minutes. Drink a half of the tea in the morning and the other half in the evening.
There has been strong evidence lately that dandelion root can inhibit the development and growth of numerous types of cancer, including stopping their metastasizing capabilities. A study done in 2008 provided some scientific proof that dandelion (Taraxacum officinale) extracts had anti-cancer compounds.
Dandelion root tea or capsules can be found at your holistic vitamin shop and used according to directions.
The extracts from mistletoe (Viscum album) is one of the most commonly used oncological drug in Europe. It’s been used as an overall treatment for cancer for years. In one study that involved more than 10,000 cancer patients, mistletoe extract was shown to prolong the survival time of cancer patients. Amazingly, this study showed that the overall survival time of the group that took mistletoe extract was as much as 40% longer.
Mistletoe can be found at your holistic vitamin shop and used according to directions. Also, there are some products that come from mistletoe extract, especially Iscador, which is one of the most commonly used in Europe.
Echinacea is one of the most widely used alternative medicine in the world. It is said to have Cytotoxic effects. The Echinacea plant has been hailed for its ability to help the body heal itself from the common cold. Also, it is used to relieve anxiety and chronic fatigue. Echinacea has been available for years in supplements and extract form and can be used about 2 to 3 times a day. Echinacea can be also consumed as a tea.
Watercress this aquatic plant increases detoxification enzymes in the body and contains phytonutrients that have successfully inhibited carcinogens. Watercress in extract form proved to be significantly protective against colon cancer. In a study at the Norwich Food Research Center in the United Kingdom, “smokers were given watercress which eliminated higher carcinogens in their urine. Dietary factors contribute to the regional variation of stomach cancer and offer clues for further prevention research. Watercress can be found at your holistic vitamin shop and used according to directions.
Note: In order to fight cancer, you can use a combination of the herbs mentioned above!
To read more Click or Copy link below:Post Views: 988
Malusi Gigaba says economy still largely informed by and still reflected SA’s colonial and apartheid past.By Elliot Booker — 3 years ago
Malusi Gigaba says economy still largely informed by and still reflected SA’s colonial and apartheid past
Finance Minister Malusi Gigaba has called for radical economic transformation — once again saying black business is key to economic growth in SA.
Speaking at a Black Business Council gala dinner on Monday night, Gigaba said: “Leadership bears the burden of responsibility; the responsibility to help serve the challenges of our time … The most difficult challenge of out time … is to transform the South African economy and grow it in an inclusive way.”
He said the economy was still largely informed by and still reflected SA’s colonial and apartheid past.
“Our inability to transform the economy has left the poor particularly vulnerable to the shocks of economic growth.
“Black dispossession has been normalised in our society … there are those shocked by the call for radical economic transformation,” he said.
It was important to move towards a diversified economy that was integrated in Africa and globally, as an exporter.
“We are faced with a challenge of undertaking economic transformation in a context that is not our own doing.
“Let us work together to implement programmes and initiatives. Nothing worth doing is ever easy and the circumstances are never perfect.
“We need to adopt the mind-set that growing black business is the key to economic growth. We need to move beyond justifying the need for econ-omic transformation.
“Growing black business is good for SA. We need to stop talking about black economic empowerment and corruption in the same breath.
“They are not two sides of the same coin.”
He said the character and business of white people was not tainted by scandals.
“We need white business to champion transformation and view it in their commercial interests. This task is both urgent and unavoidable.”
To read more Click or Copy link: https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/national/2017-05-16-growing-black-business-good-for-sa-says-gigaba/Post Views: 299
By Elliot Booker — 2 years ago
It came out in 1968—yet little has changed since the Kerner Commission denounced “white racism.”
In July 1967, when President Lyndon B. Johnson formed a commission to analyze the riots then engulfing several major American cities, the radical wing of the civil-rights movement eyed his appointees with grave skepticism. Not only did the 11-person commission abound with the most conventional of politicians—including its chairman, Illinois Governor Otto Kerner—but a mere two of them were black. Racial militants might have tolerated that paltry number of seats had they been occupied by firebrands such as Stokely Carmichael, who popularized the term black power, or H. Rap Brown, who routinely railed against “the honkies.” These brazen embodiments of the new generation of civil-rights activism would have reliably conveyed the concerns and frustrations of black youth—a presumably vital task for the commission, given that most rioters ranged from 15 to 24 years old.
Instead of black insurgents, however, Johnson tapped the longtime NAACP doyen Roy Wilkins and Senator Edward Brooke of Massachusetts, two men broadly regarded as more acquainted with executive suites than with edgy streets. Detractors viewed Wilkins as so fearful of bucking the Johnson administration that they branded him “Roy Weak-knees.” Although Brooke had recently become the first black person popularly elected to the Senate, national media observed that his time as state attorney general and his personal attributes hardly endeared him to black radicals, who stopped just shy of labeling him an Uncle Tom. “Because of his pale skin, his Episcopalian faith, his reserved New England manner,” Time magazine noted, Brooke “is looked upon as what might be described as a ‘NASP’—the Negro equivalent of the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant.” Both Wilkins and Brooke, moreover, had sharply repudiated the nascent black-power movement, going so far as to equate it with white supremacy. Whereas Brooke called Carmichael and the arch-segregationist Lester Maddox “extremists of black power and white power,” Wilkins termed Carmichael’s ethos “a reverse Mississippi, a reverse Hitler, a reverse Ku Klux Klan.”
With these pillars of the establishment speaking on behalf of African Americans, black-power advocates were convinced that the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders—as the body was officially named—would sanitize America’s ugly racial realities. A few months before the commission’s findings appeared in a document typically called the Kerner Report, the journalist Elizabeth Drew confirmed in these pages that “the word has gone out among the militant Negroes that the commission is a fink operation … and is not to be cooperated with.” She added: “No one here is betting … that the commission’s product will differ radically from one that [LBJ] wants.”
Surprisingly, when the Kerner Report surfaced, in February 1968, black-power supporters felt cheered, and President Johnson was chagrined. H. Rap Brown, who was in a Louisiana jail cell for inciting a crowd, released an exultant statement: “The members of the commission should be put in jail under $100,000 bail each because they’re saying essentially what I’ve been saying.” For his part, an infuriated LBJ canceled the White House ceremony where he had been scheduled to accept a bound copy of the report, avoided public commentary on the eagerly anticipated document, and refused to sign customary letters recognizing the commissioners for their service. But Johnson’s effort to ignore the report failed utterly. The Kerner Report became an instant publishing phenomenon; Bantam sold almost 1 million paperbacks in the first two weeks. Public appetite ran so strong that Marlon Brando read aloud excerpts of the volume on a late-night television talk show.
Fifty years have now elapsed since the Kerner Report appeared, but even in our current age of woke-ness, the document stands out for its unvarnished, unflinching identification of “white racism” as the fundamental cause of urban unrest. Works written by committees (especially government committees) have a well-deserved reputation for inducing somnolence, but the Kerner Report somehow managed to frame its indictment of racial oppression in several stirring formulations that have endured. “What white Americans have never fully understood—but what the Negro can never forget—is that white society is deeply implicated in the ghetto,” the commission stated. “White institutions created it, white institutions maintain it, and white society condones it.” The report warned, in perhaps its most celebrated passage: “Our Nation is moving toward two societies, one black, one white—separate and unequal.”
Some aspects of the report may resonate even more loudly today than they did in the late 1960s. For example, the commission’s repeated emphasis on the role of police brutality in alienating black citizens and sowing the seeds of urban discontent now assumes added significance, given the many images of unarmed black men whose deaths at the hands of the state have been seared into the national psyche. Indeed, some of the report’s assessments could—eerily and depressingly—have been written yesterday to describe America’s recent racial disturbances, in locales ranging from Ferguson, Missouri, to Baltimore, Maryland: “Almost invariably the incident that ignites disorder arises from police action.” Apart from its sharply phrased critique of the riots’ origins, the report promoted an ambitious policy agenda, including major measures in the domains of education, employment, housing, and welfare.
How did a government document that black radicals anticipated would be a whitewash end up instead denouncing “white racism”? This improbable turn of events animates Steven M. Gillon’s deft, incisive, and altogether absorbing history of the Kerner Commission, which he convincingly depicts as “the last gasp of 1960s liberalism—the last full-throated declaration that the federal government should play a leading role in solving deeply embedded problems such as racism and poverty.”
The puzzle of the commission’s severe assessment of the conditions plaguing urban America only intensifies when one considers that Johnson held leverage over its chairman. It was widely understood that the Illinois governor hoped LBJ would nominate him to a federal judgeship. But Gillon, a history professor at the University of Oklahoma, makes clear that Kerner served merely as a figurehead. The commission’s executive director, David Ginsburg—a fixture of liberal legal circles since the New Deal—shaped the report’s general approach, tenor, and language more than any official commissioner did, helping forge a fragile consensus among its members. Yet identifying the report’s central force also fails to explain its bracing conclusions. After all, LBJ chose Ginsburg for the important, if under-the-radar, senior staff position precisely because he was a Johnson loyalist, one who, as Elizabeth Drew put it, enjoyed a reputation as “the insider’s insider.”
LBJ was far from inexperienced in the ways of blue-ribbon panels. During his five years in the Oval Office, he appointed a staggering 20 commissions. This prolific rate prompted at least one source to confer on Johnson the dubious nickname “the Great Commissioner.” (One suspects that Abraham Lincoln would not have been tempted to swap appellations.)
With LBJ’s hand-selected personnel at the helm of a well-oiled apparatus, the question remains: Why did the Kerner Report assume its pungent tone and advance bold proposals rather than simply blessing the Great Society programs in anodyne language? Three primary reasons emerge from Gillon’s meticulous re-creation of the proceedings.
First, the commissioners’ visits to riot-torn cities around the country proved galvanizing. Some members had a vague understanding of life in ghettos, but the conditions they witnessed firsthand were far more dire than anything they had imagined. Unemployment was pervasive, schools had insufficient funds and virtually no white students, and neighborhoods lacked access to adequate sanitation. More sobering still was the profound sense of disillusionment and anger that the commissioners encountered.
In Detroit, Michigan, and in Newark, New Jersey, where the two deadliest disturbances of 1967 occurred, many rioters declared that they would not fight for the United States, even in a major war. During one particularly unnerving field visit, in Cincinnati, Ohio, a young Presbyterian minister who held a degree from Columbia University calmly informed the commission that the recent spate of violence represented “just the beginning.”
Look, man, we’re hip to you white people. We know … it’s no good trying to appeal to your morals; you’ve shown you don’t have any morals. The only thing you believe in is your property—that’s what this country is all about, baby—so we are going to burn it down.
Second, such provocative encounters convinced the commission that only tough language would reach its dual intended audiences. For white Americans, the commissioners concluded that firm rhetoric was necessary to jolt them out of their collective slumber about the nation’s inner cities. Shortly before the report appeared, one member—Senator Fred Harris of Oklahoma—explained: “I believe that white people in America are decent people [and that] if they can be shown the terrible conditions in which other Americans live and how this threatens our society, they will join together to try to solve these problems.”
For black Americans, by contrast, tough rhetoric was required to prevent the black-power movement from gaining more adherents. The report expressly condemned black-power advocates for retreating from the integrationist vision and dismissed the self-styled revolutionaries as mere Booker T. Washingtons with attitudes. But for those criticisms to seem credible, the report also needed to contain language excoriating the nation’s racist past and present.
Finally, the Kerner Report was shaped by a desire to avoid the hostile receptions that had greeted two recent governmental tracts. Following the Watts riots in 1965, a California report explained the violence by invoking what came to be known as “the riffraff theory,” the notion that a group of perpetual misfits (many of whom had migrated from the South) had plotted the unrest. Scholars immediately assailed this view, and the commission’s own profile of the typical rioter in 1967 belied the stereotype: Generally, rioters were educated, lifelong residents of their city who—crucially—had at least seen or suffered police brutality. Also in 1965, Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s report chronicling the increase in single motherhood in black families, with its emphasis on cultural and psychological factors, drew fierce criticism for “blaming the victim.” These cautionary tales primed the Kerner Commission to focus on structural obstacles confronting black communities, rather than on the supposed personal failings of the rioters.
Half a century later, the nation’s racial demographics have upended the black–white paradigm that prevailed in 1968; no serious analysis of race could now disregard that increased diversity. Even more distant from the current national climate, however, is the commission’s repeated insistence that the fate of inner-city African Americans stands inextricably connected to that of their fellow citizens. To take just one example, the report stated:
This Nation is confronted with the issue of justice for all its people—white as well as black, rural as well as urban … In speaking of the Negro, we do not speak of “them.” We speak of us—for the freedoms and opportunities of all Americans are diminished and imperiled when they are denied to some Americans.
Though such sentiments in 1968 may have been more aspirational than actual, the collective perspective now sounds lamentably alien.
Yet the continuities between the Kerner Commission era and contemporary realities seem even more pronounced than the ruptures. In the political realm, a direct line connects Richard Nixon’s successful campaign for the White House in 1968 to our most recent presidential election. Nixon disparaged the Kerner Commission’s findings as too permissive, playing up his promise to restore “law and order” in America. “I am the law-and-order candidate,” Donald Trump pledged to a crowd in Virginia Beach in July 2016, and since assuming office he has practiced a singularly divisive brand of politics, seldom missing a chance to pit “them” against “us.” Furthermore, while many African Americans have made momentous strides in the past five decades, cities still contain destitute neighborhoods filled with racial minorities, which—as in the late 1960s—serve as breeding grounds for despair and alienation. The Fair Housing Act of 1968—the only major tangible legislative achievement traceable to the Kerner Report—has failed to address those grim pockets of isolation.
When LBJ spoke briefly to the commissioners at the start of their undertaking, he tasked them with answering three basic questions about the recent unrest: “What happened? Why did it happen? What can be done to prevent it from happening again and again?” On the Kerner Report’s 50th anniversary, the stubborn persistence of racial ghettos gives rise to another, deeply disconcerting query:Post Views: 387