However, how are these hardships related to the civil strife and militia? It is this point that is unclear. Edgerton provides more of a subjective review of what he feels is going on and provides a few factual details to support this, but provides little in the way of detail and real conjecture, which would help the average person discern what steps the people of Africa should take to liberate themselves from the grasps of the army or militia today.
Edgerton does successfully suggest the wars in Africa today are nothing more than the results of a "maladaptive" culture (p. 230). This suggests that something is inherently wrong with the people of Africa today. Those engaged in war or civic strife are according to Edgerton, people that are part of any society with its blips, ups and downs. The "warrior Tribes" described in the book are inflated to seem like they are something much more than what they really are (p. 100). The author suggests that only a few wars and strife's are important, rather than reviewing the entire history to decide what is and what is not wrong with Africa.
Edgerton would have done far better to "re-title" his work and focus on one or two wars (Shaw, 2005), and provide the reader with an in-depth anthropological analysis of the culture, geography, history and people's so someone could conclude on their own whether the wars of old were any more courageous or meaningful than the wars that are taking place today in Africa. There is very little in fact, in the book that one could ascribe to "anthropological analysis" because the author fails to describe in depth the legitimate armies and combatants; the reader does not have any information about how people are recruited for every war, and whether they are brainwashed to believe false practices are just. A book containing more detail on one or two wars would have left the reader with far more to postulate on than a book that covers an entire expansion of history from 1791 to the present.
1). Then the author according to Shaw, moves on to offer what he calls "a potpourri of African resistance to colonial conquest and rule" suggesting that chapters "sketch various civil wars, military coups, and government corruption" (Shaw, 2005). Shaw does believe however that a very detailed description of the genocide that took place in Burundi and Rwanda are discussed. This however, just lends more credence to the idea that the people of Africa as described in the book are evil in nature or "infamous" at least when compared to the people of Africa that fought in the wars for independence.
The author would also benefit by providing a closer analysis of what is going on in Africa to what is going on in similar nations and regions across the world today. If the reader was provided with a direct comparison between the armies, militia and rebellions of Africa compared with the right or wrong wars of other countries, then the reader would be more apt to decide that yes, Africa's militia currently serves the country ill or no, the army and militias serve the country well or as well as any other. Hopefully if Edgerton provides similar works in the future he will do so with more attention to the implications of the statements made in the work, for not all people and rebels in Africa are to blame for the destruction that is occurring today. They are certainly not all as "evil" as Edgerton would make them out to be.
Bibliography
Shaw, Bryant. "Africa's Armies: From Honor to Infamy," Air and Space Power Journal,
Summer 2005. USAF, Troy University, 17, December 2007: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0NXL/is_2_19/ai_n15345180
Edgerton, Robert B. AFRICA'S ARMIES: From Honor to Infamy - a History From 1791 to the Present; Boulder, (Colorado): Westview Press / Perseus Books Group, 2002; ISBN: 0-8133-3947-2
Africa: Edgerton
