Foremost historian, Professor Toyin Falola, has criticised Africa’s continued economic dependence on Western financial institutions, particularly the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank.
He argued that these institutions, under the guise of economic support, have systematically undermined Africa’s financial sovereignty, perpetuating a cycle of debt, economic stagnation, and dependency.
He stated this at a lecture titled “Power, Privilege, and Philosophy,” delivered in honor of Professor Femi Badejo at 70 at UNILAG Estate on Saturday.
As one of Africa’s most distinguished historians and scholars, Falola—author of over a hundred books on African history, politics, and culture—has consistently used his scholarship to challenge dominant narratives and advocate for African self-determination in global affairs.
“These organizations impose strict financial policies that cut expenditures, sell public assets, and reduce government control, thereby depriving African nations of the ability to manage their economy for the benefit of their people,” Falola stated. He traced the origins of this economic stranglehold to the Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) of the 1980s and 1990s, which forced African governments to reduce social spending, privatize public institutions, and devalue local currencies—all measures that disproportionately harmed the poor. “SAPs were presented as solutions, but they were economic weapons,” he declared. “They dismantled our ability to invest in our own people, in our own education, and in our own industries.”
Falola illustrated how these policies exacerbated inequalities, weakened national economies, and eroded social welfare. “A nation that cannot feed its people, educate its children, or build its industries without external approval is not sovereign—it is shackled,” he remarked. He highlighted how countries like Nigeria, Ghana, and Kenya had implemented IMF and World Bank-led reforms, only to find themselves in deeper economic crises years later. “We were told to open our markets, sell our assets, and devalue our currencies,” he noted. “But who benefited? Not the African farmer, not the African worker, not the African student—only foreign investors and a handful of local elites who serve as intermediaries in this grand scheme of economic subjugation.”
At the heart of Falola’s argument was the assertion that the IMF and World Bank operate under a neocolonial economic framework, where African nations remain structurally dependent on external financial dictates. “This is their center,” he said. “It is a system designed to extract riches from Africa and enrich a select few through commercial strategies, trade agreements, and economic policies.” He explained that while these institutions often frame their interventions as necessary for economic stability, their long-term effects leave African nations more vulnerable to economic shocks and unable to build self-sufficient economies.
Beyond critiquing these institutions, Falola turned his focus to African leaders, many of whom, he argued, have failed to challenge these exploitative economic models. “It is one thing to be forced into a bad deal; it is another thing to renew that bad deal every election cycle,” he asserted. He condemned African politicians and technocrats who have embraced foreign economic models without critically assessing their impact. “We have leaders who sit at negotiation tables and sign away the future of their nations for loans that do nothing but keep us in debt,” he lamented.
He urged African intellectuals, policymakers, and civil society groups to demand economic models that prioritize internal development over externally dictated reforms. “Africa’s economic liberation will not come from Washington or Brussels,” he declared. “It will come from Accra, from Lagos, from Nairobi, from Johannesburg—when we decide that our future is not for sale.”
African Perspectives on Power, Privilege, and Justice
Falola further expanded his argument by situating Africa’s economic struggles within a broader historical and philosophical context. He traced the continent’s engagement with power, privilege, and governance, noting that “Africa’s convoluted history of power and privilege is defined by conflicts, shifting beliefs, and an ongoing quest for justice.” He emphasized that the African perspective on power differs from Western interpretations, stating that “power is considered a tool for the oppression of people rather than a responsibility to care for society.”
Referencing indigenous African philosophies such as Ubuntu, Falola underscored how communal ideals and leadership responsibilities have shaped the continent’s historical responses to governance. “Before colonialism, African ideas about power reflected the collective decisions of the people,” he explained. “These ideas remain relevant today as they offer solutions to the critical problems the continent is grappling with.”
He critiqued colonialism for introducing exploitative governance structures that persist in contemporary African politics and economies. “Colonialism brought cruelty to Africa and established an oppressive system of control that still influences the continent today,” he argued. However, he celebrated the resilience of African intellectual traditions in resisting these structures. “African intellectuals have always responded with great energy, striving to redefine societal power.”
Falola highlighted how African perspectives challenge the dominance of Western economic models, particularly in the face of global challenges such as environmental crises and widening inequality. “Africa’s perspectives provide a fresh approach to selfish, money-driven ideals in a culture plagued by unfair systems,” he noted. “Ubuntu, for instance, shows our interdependence and shared responsibility in addressing the adverse effects of corporate globalization. It emphasizes that true wealth is not in opulence, but in how we are of service to others.”
He linked these African philosophies to broader global movements, noting their influence on struggles for social justice, independence, and equality. “Pan-Africanism promotes uniting people with African heritage, while the anti-apartheid movement stresses reconciliation and forgiveness,” he remarked. “These ideas have inspired thinkers and activists across the world.” However, he warned that African perspectives are often marginalized in international discourse: “Mainstream narratives from wealthy countries overshadow these viewpoints, shaping knowledge and power in ways that diminish African contributions.”
A Call to Action
For Falola, engaging with African intellectual traditions is not merely a theoretical exercise but a necessary step toward transformative governance and economic independence. “Using African theory to analyze power and advantage is not merely a theoretical exercise—it is a call to action,” he declared. He urged policymakers to create economic and governance structures that benefit the many rather than enriching a select few. “These policies must recognize everyone’s contributions and emphasize empathy, mutual respect, and compassion.”
He called for a deliberate integration of African perspectives in policymaking, education, and global discourse. “African perspectives must be aggressively promoted in cultural interaction, policy decisions, and education, while actively confronting and destroying the barriers that stifle them,” he asserted.
Falola reinforced the urgency of reclaiming Africa’s economic and philosophical agency. “If we do not write our own economic rules, we will forever be governed by those who see Africa as nothing more than a marketplace for their interests,” he warned. “These are not just ancient ideas; they are vital tools for building a more just and equitable world.”
ALSO READ TOP STORIES FROM NIGERIAN TRIBUNE
and then