"I would say colonialism is a wonderful thing. It spread civilization to Africa. Before it they had no written language, no wheel as we know it, no schools, no hospitals, not even normal clothing"

Ian Smith’s words reflect a paternalistic and Eurocentric view of colonialism, expressing an attitude that regards European intervention in Africa as inherently positive and civilizing. By claiming that Africa had no written language, wheel, schools, hospitals, or even “normal” clothing prior to colonialism, Smith diminishes the complexity, diversity, and achievements of African societies before European contact. Such statements disregard the rich oral traditions, indigenous scripts such as Ge’ez in Ethiopia, Nsibidi in Nigeria, or the Tifinagh script of the Tuareg, which demonstrate that various forms of literacy and record-keeping existed long before European arrival.

The assertion that Africans lacked the wheel or “as we know it” demonstrates a bias toward Western technological standards, neglecting that different societies develop tools and technologies suited to their environments and needs. Numerous African societies had successful methods of transportation, agriculture, and architecture, some of which did not require the wheel due, for example, to local geography or available resources.

By mentioning schools and hospitals, Smith simplifies education and healthcare to their European forms, ignoring the myriad of indigenous knowledge systems, healing practices, and educational methods utilized across the continent for centuries. For instance, the University of Timbuktu in Mali was a renowned center of learning as early as the 12th century, and traditional healers played, and continue to play, critical roles in community health.

Describing pre-colonial clothing as lacking “normality” centers Western dress as a universal standard, disregarding the cultural significance and practicality of diverse African textiles, patterns, and garments.

Smith’s perspective exemplifies the colonial mindset of superiority and “civilizing mission” often used to justify domination and exploitation. It erases African histories and cultures, overlooks the violence and disruption wrought by colonial rule, and perpetuates harmful stereotypes. Such narratives are increasingly challenged by historians and scholars who emphasize Africa’s agency, resilience, and innovation through the centuries, both before and after colonialism.