I read all that earlier, but you missed something while trying to invalidate an argument that your post actually didn't invalidate.....
A corollary of Herbst’s argument is that the impact of the
slave trades may have been felt most strongly after colonial independence. This is because this is when precolonial political structures suddenly increased in importance, as they became central
determinants of the success of the newly formed state. Using
Figure VIII, I examine whether the evolution of incomes since
1950 is consistent with this hypothesis. The figure shows average
per capita GDP between 1950 and 2000 for two groups of African
countries.20 One group consists of the 26 countries with the lowest measures of ln(exports/area), and the other is the 26 countries
with the highest measures of ln(exports/area). As shown in the figure, throughout the period low-slave-export countries are richer
on average than high slave export countries. Also interesting, however, is the difference in the evolution of income between the two
groups of countries. Although the low-slave-export countries were
richer in the early 1950s when most countries were still under
colonial rule, the income gap between the two groups increased significantly over time and became most pronounced after the late
1960s and early 1970s, when most countries had gained independence.21 This pattern is consistent with the slave trades affecting
early state development, which may have mattered during colonial rule but mattered much more after independence.
Because
those parts of Africa that were most severely impacted by the
slave trades tended to have the least developed political systems,
after independence these countries continued to have weak and
unstable states, as well as slower economic growth.
Genocides of indigenous Africans took place all across North Africa, especially Egypt. The Arabs in Sudan are still trying to erase the indigenous population.
