Governments in Africa come and go, and most share one common ideology, they are all corrupt states. Some have argued some African nations like Sudan, Somalia, and the Congo, would be better without the current corrupt governments. Although I don't agree with this assessment, I think stateless is never the answer or optionto Africa's problems.

So, is bad government better than no government, where people could live as they wish? Or do you prefer no government rather a corrupt gangs who loot you andthose they rule over?

Facts: Before colonial powers came to Africa's soil, one sure thing that existed is the need for organized nations, and builging old kingdoms into newer nation states. With this came, tribal rulers who saw their tribe's side of ruling over others. Then came the evil colonizers who destroyed all they could find. Now some argue some African nations could live without governing body.

Fewer nations in Africahave stayed little stable, withoutruling governments. Somalia is an example, which still is, without effective ruling government, buty have seen large growth of all aspects of life. Some in the west have argued that, specially those with Anarchy tendencies, this shows things could work without ruling gangs that keep African nations in check.

Doesany one agree with this assessment, or as me, will not agree with this insane idea.