Like Nigeria, other African societies where given 'extended histories,' where one African society associates their experiences through the years through the European experience. The author shared the fact that nation-statism is not applicable because Africa has a collective social structure, wherein affinities are created not through geographic location, but rather, through family and kinship (206). This characteristic led to a disastrous establishment of nation-statism. This political framework is aimed at creating a political system ran by individuals and leaders who are objective -- that is, they work towards achieving the common good of their society. However, in Africa, politics does not work this way. What happens is that subjectivity is always present in governance, where one's interest is for his clan or tribe only bad intentions targeted towards an enemy clan or tribe. This set-up hardly characterizes an objective political organization. Because of this, according to the author, one can hardly think why nation-statism was even tried out to become as a political structure in most African societies.

At the second-level, Davidson argued that apart from the inappropriateness of the social and political structures of African societies to nation-statism, there was also the dilemma that inevitably, societies establishing their independent governments are actually establishing a government under 'indirect' European control. And why not? The political framework used was primarily European and the supporters of this political exercise were, of course,...

The internal structures (i.e., socio-political structures) of African societies are inherently created to promote collectivism and a different brand or kind of leadership -- definitely not representative in kind. Furthermore, political governance is externally created because the political framework in which most independent African societies used for years were created and developed for peoples that have an altogether different kind of history than they have.
Ultimately, all of the arguments presented in the book all boil down to one vital concept: history. The book brings out the argument that through the years, the Africans have failed to re-capture their once free societies and selves mainly because they have lost their own identity as a nation and society. In the process of nation-building, history is inevitably tied to it. Without a sense of unity among its people, a society or country would cease and not become a nation. African societies have not only failed to identify who they really are, but they have also failed to recognize their ability create new political and social structures that are uniquely theirs. They need not model their new nation under the 'colonizer's model; rather, they will make their own political framework, in the same manner that they create their own history and nation.

In sum, "The Black Man's Burden" enlightens the reader to the realities surrounding the continued oppression against the black race, and their continued failure to establish their independence from colonial and foreign rule. They are a race not doomed towards bondage but enslavement. They are a race that has failed to recognize their own history, which kept them blind and had resulted to failed attempts at self-governance.

Works Cited

Davidson, B. (1992). The Black Man's Burden: African and the curse of the nation-state. NY: Times Books.