A Summation of Thomas Sowell on Geography and Development in Africa by Lengdung

[Oluwatoyin Adepoju]

Lengdung:

Thomas Sowell's explanation of how geography affected Africa and the rest of the world is one of the clearest I've read. I've seen many intellectuals push back on this, calling it "geographic determinism." Of course, that's not true. Sowell is simply stating the obvious. Geography had an impact on why Africa is the way it is.

Sowell does not claim that geography destines a people to poverty or wealth. He says geography shaped the constraints and opportunities that different societies faced. Here is the distinction: a mountain range does not make you poor, but it can make trade, travel, and the spread of ideas much harder. Over centuries, that difference compounds.

Sowell points out that Africa's rivers are fundamentally different from Europe's. The Congo, the Niger, the Zambezi—all major rivers, all critical to the continent. But they are broken near the coast by waterfalls and rapids. A ship sailing up the Rhine can reach deep into Germany, Switzerland, even the Netherlands. A ship sailing up the Congo hits the Livingstone Falls just 220 miles inland. After that, portage. After that, the river becomes a series of lakes and cataracts.

What does this mean in practice? It means that for most of African history, moving goods in bulk over long distances was extraordinarily difficult. European farmers could sell grain downstream. African farmers could not. The division of labor—the specialization that makes economies grow—was stunted before it could begin.

Sowell notes that even where rivers were navigable, seasonal variation made them unreliable. The Niger shrinks and swells dramatically. Sandbars shift. Channels move. Compare this to the Nile, which was navigable for thousands of miles and helped build one of Africa's great civilizations. The Nile was the exception. Most African rivers were the rule.

Europe is a peninsula of peninsulas. It juts into the Atlantic, the Mediterranean, the Baltic, the North Sea. Its coastline is jagged, indented, full of natural harbors. Ships can shelter almost anywhere. Trade routes developed naturally because the sea was an ally.

Africa's coastline is different. Much of it is smooth, with few deep-water harbors. The continental shelf is shallow. Surf is heavy. Landing a ship on much of the West African coast was dangerous for centuries. This is not a moral failing of Africans. It is a fact of geology.

Sowell argues that this meant maritime trade—the kind that connected Europe to Asia, that built Venice, Amsterdam, and London—was far harder to develop in Africa. The Swahili coast of East Africa did build Indian Ocean trade, but this was a narrow strip. The interior remained isolated.

To the north, the Sahara Desert stretches across the continent like a wall. It is larger than the continental United States. Before modern transport, crossing it meant weeks of peril. Camels made it possible, but never easy.

Sowell contrasts this with the Eurasian landmass. Europe, the Middle East, India, and China are connected by steppes, river valleys, and mountain passes that, while difficult, are traversable. Ideas moved: paper from China to Europe, algebra from India to Arabia, Christianity and Islam across continents. The Sahara blocked much of this flow. Sub-Saharan Africa was on the other side of a wall that Eurasia simply did not have.

Here Sowell echoes Jared Diamond, whom he has praised. Eurasia stretches east to west across similar latitudes. This means crops, animals, and technologies that work in one place can work in another. Wheat grows from France to China. Horses thrive from Spain to Mongolia. The same is not true of Africa, which stretches north to south through dramatically different climates. A crop that grows in Morocco will not grow in Kenya. A animal domesticated in Ethiopia may not survive in South Africa.

Over centuries, this meant that innovations spread more slowly. Farming techniques, ironworking, writing—these did not diffuse across Africa the way they diffused across Eurasia. Each region had to reinvent or adapt independently.

Critics call this "geographic determinism"—the idea that geography decides everything. But this is a straw man. Sowell never says geography is destiny. He says geography is context.

Ethiopia developed a literate civilization, a written language, and a Christian church that predated many in Europe. The West African empires of Ghana, Mali, and Songhai built vast trade networks across the Sahara. The Swahili coast became a hub of Indian Ocean commerce. These achievements prove that Africans were not biologically or culturally incapable of development.

But Sowell would ask: why were these the exceptions? Why did they require extraordinary effort—crossing deserts, sailing seas, climbing mountains—while European development could build on easier foundations? The answer is not that Africans failed. The answer is that Africa's geography made success harder and rarer.

Sowell's argument is not about blame. It is about understanding. If you believe Africa's poverty is caused by colonialism alone, you might prescribe political solutions: reparations, debt forgiveness, regime change. If you believe it is caused by racial inferiority, you might prescribe nothing—despair. But if you believe geography played a major role, you think differently.

You recognize that development is hard work everywhere, and that some places start with heavier loads. You recognize that policies which ignore geographic constraints—building railroads where rivers should be, forcing cash crops where subsistence makes more sense—are likely to fail. You recognize that what worked in Europe may not work in Africa, not because Africans are different, but because the land is different.

The world is not flat. Some places have rivers that ships can use. Some do not. Some places have coastlines that invite trade. Some do not. Some places are connected to neighbors by easy paths. Some are walled off by deserts and mountains. These differences do not determine everything. But they shape what is possible. And over centuries, what is possible becomes what is real.

Thomas Sowell did not invent this insight. But he stated it with a clarity that makes the critics uncomfortable. Calling it "determinism" is easier than engaging with it. The truth is simpler: geography mattered. It still matters. Ignoring it does not make it go away.

Source: https://www.facebook.com/share/1Hh37t2Xdk/