This is utterly untrue.
For example, Botswana: at the end of colonialism one of the poorest British districts one completely landlocked and which only seems to have existed as it was because of a railroad and that the South Africans had withdrawn from the commonwealth, became one of these new nations; however, unlike the socialist loons taking their cues from the French and Russian revolutions who proceeded to drag much of Africa down this place was blessed by a leader said by some to honor the American, and George Washington in particular.
IIRC, the story goes that his nation was held in such low regard by their former colonial masters that at one point a Brit was to have unknowingly joked in the presence of this man that he must live in a tick hill. To give you a further idea of the character of this first president of his country he was to have proceeded to call his residence just that.
During Khama’s time and since a nation with little going for it (only a tiny number of educated people, for example) initially has steadily advanced will it is considered a middle income nation where education and enterprise are valued.
It is not the color of their skin that has failed many black people ... it is the color of their politics.
Of course! That what is wrong with blacks now. They could join our society at any level if they made the right choices.
One obsolete example does not make my statement "utterly untrue". If you can't think of any current black governed nation where you'd like to live, then I'd say that I'm accurate. Only if there were several examples of successful black nations could my statement be "utterly untrue".