Through mass encompassing empires to strictly defined nation states, history shows that trends in globalization have changed the way we live in the present. It is only Africa that has been stigmatized to a have a stuck and traditional history, an idea which is quite far from the truth. There are many instances in Lonsdale’s argument, that brought me to examples of phenomena in other areas of the world. The major one is the fluidity of identity that first marked societies of the early 14th century to the rigidly defined identities of today. In this instance one could compare China with Africa, at one point in time, one could be sinicized through adopting Chinese culture until it reached a point where Chinese only meant being a Han Chinese individual. Another notable point to observe was how indigenous populations reacted to globalization. Starting with the era of post-colonial globalization in Africa, one can see the long-term effects of European influence when observing the issues with government and conflict on the …show more content…
I believe that the argument Lonsdale provides is valid in every respect. As when looking at anthropological studies about Africa’s history the same evidence appears. But I believe the main takeaway of this is that understand any concept fully, is to understand this concept works within its own context. Lonsdale explains globalization in the African context, how it was affected how it was demonstrated in Africa. Beyond the thematic critique of the piece, I believed the structure to be lacking. Firstly, the way he presented his argument was quite confusing. So much so that he even had to reiterate what the focus of the chapter would be before he started to discuss the phases of globalization. He provided too much in background and examples that made it hard to focus on the main arguments of the