CAN THE WORLD SURVIVE WITHOUT AFRICA ??

[Mr_Brilliant$]

About 65% of the world Arable land, which is the land suitable to farm most of the most sorted after Agric produce in the world like Cocoa (for chocolate and some other produce) and so on..

What a load of BS
US, Russia, Canada, China and Brazil hold 50% of the whole agricutural land in th world.
You're telling me that Africa, with 20% of the size of the world's land, holds 60% of the agricultural land?

As usual, it's pure bullshit propaganda from an NGO trying to get money, the truth is:

Don’t just come say things without understanding, “Arable Land” I said, not holding the current agricultural lands in operation. Go check the meaning of Arable land and you’ll understand what I meant..

Iron ore        2–15% of global reserves  

So 2% is a flex right now?  

You just mentioned only Iron ore: Because Africa holds just 2-15%.

How about Platinum (60-90%), Chromium (80-90%), Cobalt (50-70%) and Manganese (50-82%). Didnt you see all of these ones.?  

[Mr_Brilliant$]

The world can not do without Africa and Africa can not do without the world, Africa is blessed with lots of natural resources but still has the poorest standard of living because of the type of leaders in Africa.
The reality is that Africa is the one surviving off other countries, Aids, loans, migration, Africans with all the natural resources are not benefiting from it. The world on the other hand gets natural resources from Africa legally or through questionable practices.

Thats it, the damage was done to Africa when European countries like the United Kingdom,
Netherlands, Belgium and Germany stamped their authority there and plundered and carved
up the continent for themselves making enormous wealth from the natural resources.

You are correct aoluain, of a true, the damage was done centuries and decades ago, by several countries in the world, both in Europe, North America and so on.

Africa isnt going anywhere so its a non conversation talking as if they are. Global trade is all
connected for better or worse and we are living in a global supply chain, some countries are
making and taking more than others.

We’re definitely living in a global supply chain, and I like how you did acknowledge that some countries are making and taking more than others..
Africa will for sure not go anywhere, but sooner or later Africa will decide to come together and have a structure that will make a lot of changes in the world economically..

The question you have to ask yourself is has the world not been moving forward without Africa from the inception of time. The world has been moving on without the help of Africa. I think that the first sets of adventurers had contact with African in the 15 to 16 century which culminated in the sharing of Africa in the 1885. Before now the world has been moving developing without Africa so the equation is that the world will continue to move without Africa.

Stop speaking blindly and go make proper research man, all of this you said and wrong informations, which i classify as media information..

…

100% Correct

Sad reality, haven't had up to 30% of mineral resources coming from them, still they can't utilize all of them to their advantage to make their country a great nation without exporting them overseas to make some other things out of them.

It's a hard time for Africa to rise up as a dependable country that produces almost all the things they make use of in their country, without giving a large portion of their mineral resources to the American and Chinese governments to utilize on their behalf

Indeed a sad reality, but it’s behold what we see in the surface, Africa is suffering from both it’s corrupt leaders and the corrupt western world leaders indirectly in the system..

I think you've placed too much importance on Africa. Aside from the few countries that exploit that continent, nobody cares about Africa. The idea that if the world could survive without them is beyond absurd. None of the minerals you mentioned are critically important to humanity. Let the countries that exploit you worry about that, it doesn't matter at all to the average person. I think this is the funniest thread I've seen on the forum lately.

So many persons do care about Africa pal, you are probably ignorant of that….
 “None of the minerals you mentioned are critically important to humanity”  this your statement says how ignorant you are..

[Razmirraz]

For a very long time now, over several centuries, Africa has been one of the biggest suppliers of mineral resources the world depends on..   Speaking of gold, Agric produce (like cocoa), diamonds, cobalt, copper, iron ore, to oil and gas, a lot of what powers industries in both Europe, America and even Asia comes from African soil.. 
Many of the technologies we use today, like batteries, smartphones, cars, and so on rely heavily on minerals that are either mined or sourced from Africa..

So many industries around the world rely heavily on these resources, because it help them keep their production going and also their economies moving.. If access to them is suddenly cut off, a whole lot of global supply chains will feel it instantly, and most of them will even struggle to keep up..

So the question is simply: CAN THE WORLD SURVIVE WITHOUT AFRICA?

Based on my observations in terms of Africa's contribution as one of the world's largest suppliers of mineral resources, the increasingly "modern" world development would not be able to function or survive as we know it today without the supply of resources from the continent. Admittedly, Africa is the backbone of the global industry, I think we all agree on this point, African countries play a major role in providing essential minerals for the energy transition and future technologies.

The world's dependence on Africa cannot be underestimated, its contribution is very clear in several sectors such as technology and electronics, energy transition such as South Africa which plays a major role as a supplier of platinum (key for hydrogen fuel cells), Zimbabwe also has a large share in the world as one of the largest lithium producers in the world. Global food security also depends heavily on Africa because the countries on the continent play a role in supplying most of the world's needs for commodities such as cocoa, coffee, and cashew nuts, natural products from Africa that are able to drive the global food and beverage industry.

We don't need to discuss CAN THE WORLD SURVIVE WITHOUT AFRICA? Let's start with the simplest thing: if supplies from Africa are stopped, the global manufacturing supply chain will come to a halt, resulting in a drastic spike in technology prices, and the transition to green energy will face significant obstacles. Africa's mineral wealth has helped the world keep the wheels of the economy turning, we have Africa to thank.

[Rruchi man]

"Without Africa" ​​can be assumed to be several things:
1. The continent never existed.

Yes. If the continent Africa never existed, then all the natural resources described will be possible to find elsewhere in another country in deposit.

2. All African countries suddenly decided to isolate themselves.

If all African countries suddenly decide to isolate themselves, it will be a challenge to the world because many of the natural resources found in Africa are very useful to other countries. This is not to say that other continents don't hold importance; they do too but some of them are not at the scale that Africa does.

[viljy]

If you take the question literally, then the world can survive without Africa. Because survival and prosperity are two different concepts. Firstly, without cocoa, people have lived perfectly well for centuries. The main crops are not cocoa, coffee, peanuts, etc. The main crops are wheat and rice.

Coffee, chocolate, and sugar are so-called "colonial goods" in the terminology of Etkind's raw economic theory ("The Nature of Evil. Raw materials and the state."). To put it simply, these goods are not for survival, but for profit, and initially these goods were a luxury.

Secondly, other mineral resources are abundant not only in Africa, but also in other parts of the world. So if the question is specifically about survival, then the world as a whole may well survive without Africa, or for example, without Australia, or without the United States. In general, the concept of peace is very conditional. Any continent can be the core of a certain "world".

[Iranus]

I think you've placed too much importance on Africa. Aside from the few countries that exploit that continent, nobody cares about Africa. The idea that if the world could survive without them is beyond absurd. None of the minerals you mentioned are critically important to humanity. Let the countries that exploit you worry about that, it doesn't matter at all to the average person. I think this is the funniest thread I've seen on the forum lately.

You are probably right to say that the OP is overestimating Africa. But I do not agree with your view that the resources Africa possesses are unnecessary for humanity and irrelevant to ordinary people.

In fact, many mineral and raw material that modern industries depend on are concentrated in Africa. I believe that a large share of the technology products and household devices we use in our daily lives rely on resources that originate from Africa.

[iv4n]

So like I asked before, can the world actually survive without Africa??

This is the wrong question... Why would you go that way?

With Platinum, Chromium, Cobalt and Manganese been among the most strategic minerals needed for modern technology today..

Where is the money? That's the right question... how can Africa make more profit from all those materials? For sure, not by exporting raw materials and importing finishing products...

Chocolate, heart of darkness

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utvtQ8r7fd0

I guess it's worth watching...

[stompix]

Don’t just come say things without understanding, “Arable Land” I said, not holding the current agricultural lands in operation. Go check the meaning of Arable land and you’ll understand what I meant..

So I got another statistic for you, actual data you can understand, zero!

According to you, Africa, with 20% of the world's surface, and with 30% of it's area covered by the Sahara Desert, magically holds 60% of the crop/agricultural/arable pick whatever you want in the world , of course you have no actual statistics to back either of them like:
Cropland: https://www.worldometers.info/food-agriculture/cropland-by-country/
Agricultural land: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/ranked-the-countries-with-the-most-agricultural-land/
Arable land: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_arable_land_density

But you come with that nonsense.

How about Platinum (60-90%), Chromium (80-90%), Cobalt (50-70%) and Manganese (50-82%). Didnt you see all of these ones.?  

And? Africa has that much in reserves in 4-5 metals, what about the rest of which it has close to none?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_countries_by_mineral_production

Also, this is your flex?
I was born on a continent with high cobalt reserves so I'm proud of it and I feel entitled!?
Normally, people should flex with stuff they have done THEMSELVES!

[Die_empty]

The world was not globalized or interconnected centuries ago, and every kingdom survived. So my take is that the world can survive without Africa but with some negative consequences. An example is what happened in the Strait of Hormuz, where 20 percent of the global oil supply and global liquefied natural gas (LNG) travels through. The blockage of that channel didn't stop the oil and gas supply to countries but it made it more expensive. Countries had to seek alternative suppliers and oil tankers had to pass more distant through alternative routes. Getting raw materials from Africa might be closer for some countries, which means an alternative source will make it more expensive. So Africa's location might be a good reason why some countries seek raw materials form the continent.

Most developed nations also choose to seek raw materials from Africa because they can destroy the environment without consequences. They see Africa as a shithole where they can do anything they want without control and supervision and get away with it. So instead of exploring the resources in developed nations, where they care about the environment and the health of the people they choose a perceived "lawless Africa". So the multinationals prefer to move to Africa, where they cause oil spillage, dump waste anywhere, destroy people's health and get away with it.

Most resources that are in Africa are also in other developed countries but they come to Africa because of cheap labor. These exploring multinational companies could pay African workers peanuts, which is not close to what workers in the home country earn. This makes resources in Africa cheaper.

With a high rate of corruption in Africa, some companies prefer to take resources from the continent because they can easily manipulate figures and cheat the citizens. There have been cases of multinational corporations bribing government officials to obtain access to raw materials fraudulently. In developed nations, companies are highly supervised to ensure that there are accountability and less fraud.

So OP, don't be deceived by the massive investment of multinational corporations in Africa. They are not there because most of these resources are not available somewhere else. It might be because of Africa's location and they see Africa as the cheapest source of raw materials.

[Spaceman1000$]

For a very long time now, over several centuries, Africa has been one of the biggest suppliers of mineral resources the world depends on..   Speaking of gold, Agric produce (like cocoa), diamonds, cobalt, copper, iron ore, to oil and gas, a lot of what powers industries in both Europe, America and even Asia comes from African soil..  
Many of the technologies we use today, like batteries, smartphones, cars, and so on rely heavily on minerals that are either mined or sourced from Africa..

So many industries around the world rely heavily on these resources, because it help them keep their production going and also their economies moving.. If access to them is suddenly cut off, a whole lot of global supply chains will feel it instantly, and most of them will even struggle to keep up..

So the question is simply: CAN THE WORLD SURVIVE WITHOUT AFRICA?

Because with the look of how things are connected today and has been going for years, it is so clear that Africa is not just part of the system, but rather,  it is a major foundation holding a very large part of it together..

Let’s break it down..

Research shows that Africa holds:.
Gold               About 40% of global reserves   
Diamonds       50–56% of global production / reserves   
Cobalt       50–70% of global supply    
Platinum        60–90% of global reserves   
Chromium       80–90% of global reserves   
Manganese.   50–82% of global reserves   
Copper       10–12% of global reserves   
Iron ore        2–15% of global reserves   
Uranium       15–18% of global reserves
And also         About 65% of the world Arable land, which is the land suitable to farm most of the most sorted after Agric produce in the world like Cocoa (for chocolate and some other produce) and so on..

With Platinum, Chromium, Cobalt and Manganese been among the most strategic minerals needed for modern technology today..

So like I asked before, can the world actually survive without Africa??

The world will definitely survive without Africa, just the way Africans have been surviving without owning 1% of this mineral resources you mentioned, as an African I can bet you that it is just a harmful of percent of Africans that have seen real diamond 💍💎, majority of the African citizens don't even know what a diamond looks like, some of these resources you mentioned are shipped out of Africa in large quantity, and the people and communities that owns some of these properties are left poor and miserable. You don't even want to talk about the issue of gas and crude oil, because if you go to the houses in many African communities, there is barely electricity, and yet those persons living there have been surviving. So if Africans can survive without having a majority share or even owning 1% of this minerals,  why can't the rest of the world survive.

[Marvelockg]

So like I asked before, can the world actually survive without Africa??

It is one thing to own all these resources and a complete different thing to have control over them and use them to your advantage. Africa owns a lot of resources by name but In terms of being in total control of it, we all know they are acting as though they don't own most of it. Crude oil for instances is in abundance in Africa but the refinery process takes place elsewhere. is that fair enough.

That aside, there's no single country or continent that can go extinct and the rest of the world will cease to exist or struggle badly as a result of it. the creator of the world is wise to have given different kinds of resources to the different part of the world which in combination makes the world a complete place that's habitable. If there's ever a situation that results in continent going towards self sufficiency and not depending on other continent,  Africa hasn't gotten to that level where she can supply all her basic needs without sourcing from other continent. They are not there yet and the world wasn't build for a continent to leave in isolation

[Karl_3000]

8% of the world's gas and 12% of the world's oil, while having 20% of the population!
The world would be perfectly fine; you should ask yourself the opposite question!

Africa will be fine but they can not have the development the world have today because of how corrupt they are. The world will be very good without Africa but I believe any country can survive without another, only just that the world may not be developed the way it is now if continents are separated.

One bad thing I noticed about Africa is how they are exporting almost raw materials but not having the brain to turn some into good products. Competitive development is still far from Africa until they know what they are doing wrong.

[Dex_master25]

8% of the world's gas and 12% of the world's oil, while having 20% of the population!
The world would be perfectly fine; you should ask yourself the opposite question!

Africa will be fine but they can not have the development the world have today because of how corrupt they are. The world will be very good without Africa but I believe any country can survive without another, only just that the world may not be developed the way it is now if continents are separated.

You forget that many of the developed countries were developed by the hardwork and brains of the Africans. You forget how the Western world enslaved Africans and stole many artifacts from Africa for their benefits, I haven't even talked about how deals were signed to make sure Africans surrendered many of these resources freely all for cheap aids and help that were promised.
We know Africa is corrupt, but most of these corruption came from the western world who laid the seed and benefit from it in total.
The world can definitely survive without Africa, but the real question is how long?

[Kelward]

Definitely the rest of the world can survive without Africa, because without African natural resources they will find alternatives and perhaps depending on African natural resources is what is limiting it from seriously looking deep for alternatives, example is the gradual shift from petrol vehicles to electric vehicles. The question should be whether African countries with all their natural resources would know what to do with them if these developed countries are not buying or scamming them to collect their resources.

I think that since most African countries are too backward to develop their finished products then it should be a win win for them and the countries that milks their resources who wouldn't allow African countries to prosper. Africans shouldn't think that the rest of the world cannot do without them because without the rest of the world they cannot do anything with their abundant resources. Africa, needs visionaries and proactive leaders to lead them otherwise they will remain a goldmine of the world where they go to collect treasures and they wouldn't care about it's development.

[goldkingcoiner]

Sure, survive yes. We can survive in most conditions, even if one or another country disappears. But it would be harder for everyone, especially economically because we would no longer have access to many things, as OP mentioned. There is no point in using dramatic terms like survival.

We base our economic needs ands wants off of what is available.

[BitBakerr1]

The world can actually survive without Africa, you most understand that when theirs a problem a solution most be discovered, it is true that Africa is actually a continent with a lot of natural resources that is surviving the world right now however you need to also understand that Africans really don’t have what it takes to actually know what this natural resources can actually do for humanity, and again before this natural resources was discovered people were surviving so even if this natural resources are not in existence people will still survive and there will be another alternative that I’m sure of.
We need each other in life to survive and that is why unity and working together usually achieve great things than working alone and in disunity.