I have four question and you can choose one and answer it in Academic essay format. and i want to atteche paprs that have the details. Example



There will never be equality in the world; there will always be very rich and very poor people.” To what extent is this statement true? Focus your response on one first world country and one, third world country.


It is surprising to note that while Africa is believed to be the cradle of man it still is the poorest continent in the world. Africa has almost all natural resources known to man but African governments have failed to harness these resources for development purposes. There are many reasons why this is so and many scholars have given divergent views on the situation. However, one thing is clear that is in the world today much inequality exists between the poor and the rich in terms of GDP, health, education, and many other factors. In this paper, I will take the case example of France and Zimbabwe for analysis. France is a first world country while Zimbabwe is a third world country. This analysis will consider effects of colonization, aspects of duality and inequality in terms of access to resources, health, and education.


Colonization and its effects on Zimbabwe

There has been great debate on the negative and positive effects of colonialism. It is true that colonialism had its positive effects but the negative effects have had great impact not only in the academic world but also in terms of national development. The major impacts of colonization were change in economic status and performance, change in culture, and change in religion of the colonized.

In Zimbabwe just like in many other colonized countries, the colonialists took over the most fertile soils, controlled the private sector, and marginalized the indigenous communities. As a result national development and creation of a sustaining infrastructure was initiated, but to the benefit of the colonialists not the colonized. Many Zimbabweans lost their lands to white settlers and were marginalized in to communal lands (Alexander et al., 2000).

Commercial land farming by white settlers in areas where the indigenous populations were evicted raised harsh emotions from the local people. This eviction and marginalization led to destruction of native lands due to over exploitation (Vudzijena, 1998). The national output of Zimbabwe improved during the colonial period, although the real beneficiaries were the white settlers and a few African elites. The private sector was heavily dominated by the minorities and many government tenders for exploitation and mining of precious metals were given to international companies. The local population did not benefit from exploitation of these resources (Brandly and Dewees 1993).

Many Zimbabweans were converted in to Christians during the colonial period. This was also a motive for the British colonialists although many scholars question the validity of this claim. Christianity according to some scholars was a way of preventing the rural peasantry from concentrating on the ill effects of colonialism as they were being promised eternal peace in heaven but not here on earth. This meant that the problem of resource allocation would continue to face the Zimbabwean people for decades (Katerere et al., 1999).

Apart from economic and religious changes, Zimbabwe also experienced a cultural change. The African traditional culture was quickly changed to a more western European culture. While many Africans considered the extended family to be of critical importance, the European culture emphasized more on the need for nuclear families. Thus, many extended families disintegrated, in to multiple nuclear families. Eating traditions were also affected as the indigenous populations reverted to consumption of processed food products a deviation from the African tradition of eating natural foods. This increased their dependence on processed food from white settler farms. As a result, the reliance on money-based transactions increased with traditional barter trade being sidelined.

Comparison with respect to duality between France and Zimbabwe

According to CIA-the world fact book, France had a GDP of $2.145 trillion while Zimbabwe had $5.457 billion (cia.gov). Given this information, it is clear there is a huge inequality between the two countries with reference to GDP. This is surprising given the fact that France has a population of slightly over 65 million while the population of Zimbabwe is slightly over 12 million. Due to economic hardships, many people are moving out of Zimbabwe while the case is vice-versa for France. Zimbabwe is one of the poorest countries in Africa because of the crisis while France is among the richest countries in the world. France is a fully developed and modern society while Zimbabwe is still ranked as a poor or least developed country. These among many other economic indices make us assume that equality will never arise.

While a majority of French, people work in the services and industrial sector (79% and 18% respectively), a majority of Zimbabweans work in the agriculture sector (66%). This gives an indication on how technologically back Zimbabwe is when compared to France. In addition, the GDP per capita is around $500 in Zimbabwe while it is a staggering $33,000 in France. Additionally it is estimated that 95% of Zimbabweans are unemployed while only around 9.3% of French are unemployed. This means that the bulk of Zimbabweans draw excess resources from the state.

When we look at the national budget, you will find that France is a net donor while Zimbabwe is a net recipient of foreign aid. With all these parallels, it is clear that achieving equality between the two countries will require nothing more than a miracle. Although Zimbabwe has vast mineral reserves including platinum, gold, and diamonds, these resources are mined and processed by multinational corporations. This means that the government of Zimbabwe receives a small share of the profits while the rest is expatriated to the developed countries like gold. To add insult to the injury you will note that Zimbabwe is one of the most corrupt countries in the world while France is one of the least corrupt. As a result, a few individuals have managed to misappropriate national resources in to their own business empires. As a result, the people of Zimbabwe continue to suffer because of corrupt activities of a few people in public offices.

Comparison of France and Zimbabwe with respect to education, health, access to resources and other social services

In terms of social, political, environmental, and political sectors, there are widespread inequalities in the two countries. When it comes to the educational sector, it is surprising to note that the average French citizen has a school life expectancy of 16 years the average Zimbabwean has a school life expectancy of nine years. This means that a French national is more qualified in both theoretical and technical aspects while compared to a Zimbabwean. Given the disparity in economic development then it means the education system in France is more efficient and marketable while compared to that of Zimbabwe.

Both the French and Zimbabwean governments have a large public based primary school programs. However, the Zimbabwean situation has been affected by brain drain as teachers leave the country to look for better salaries in foreign countries. In addition, increased inflation and subsequent cost of living has left many Zimbabwean children to drop out of school unlike the French case, which runs smoothly. While many government officials in France studied locally, it is the entire opposite in Zimbabwe where most of the government officials studied abroad. This is an indication that the Zimbabweans have little or no confidence in the country’s education system.

The healthcare sector in any economy is very critical. This is because it determines how well the labor force is protected and how an economy is prepared to replace its ageing population. The French healthcare system is one of the best in the world. The system offers free medical services to people with chronic diseases including AIDS, and cancer. On the other hand, the case is not that bright for Zimbabwe especially after the 1990s with the introduction of IMF-backed structural adjustment programs that advocated for among many other things the abolition of government subsidies and incentives in the health sector. The life expectancy in Zimbabwe is 43 while that of France is 80. This is mainly as a result of worsening economic situation and increased prevalence of HIV-AIDS in Zimbabwe.

Recent disease outbreaks and massive migration of doctors has worsened the situation in Zimbabwe. While the estimated number of people living with HIV-AIDS in France is around 150,000 the number is almost ten times in Zimbabwe. Given the economic hardships, the country currently faces the HIV burden has worsened and stretched the available resources beyond manageable levels. The general infrastructure in Zimbabwe is very poor while compared to that in France. This means that access to different resources is limited and this contributes to declining living standards. On the other hand, most of the people with access to a variety of resources are the minority white settlers and a handful of African elites. The rest live in abject poverty with little access to clean water, well-maintained roads, clean air, and sanitation services. On the other hand, the case is not the same in France since there is equitable distribution of resources between all social classes.


Despite the differences and inequalities, I believe that if the governments of third world countries could take a paradigm shift and restructure their economies they can develop their economies. Most newly industrialized countries were third world or least developed countries a few years back. It only took great leadership sacrifice and hard work for them to achieve their status. Thus, there is still hope that a country like Zimbabwe will one day be a developed country as long as the country’s leaders take charge and lead the country in the right path.

List of references

Alexander, J., McGregor, J., and T. Ranger. (2000). Violence and Memory: One Hundred Years in the Dark Forests of Matabeleland. Harare. Weaver Press.

Bradley, P. and Dewees, P. (1993). “Indigenous woodlands, agricultural production and household economy in the communal areas.” In Bradley, P.N. and P.A. Dewees (eds.). Living With Trees: Policies For Forestry Management in Zimbabwe. World Bank Technical Paper No. 210, Washington D.C.

CIA-the world fact book. Retrieved on 1 September 2011. Available at: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/

Katerere, Y., E. Guveya, and K. Muir. (1999). “Community forest management: lessons from Zimbabwe.” International Institute for Environmentand Development, Drylands Programme, Issue paper no. 89.

Moyo, S. (1998). The Land Question in Zimbabwe. Harare. UNDP Resource Center.

Vudzijena, V. (1998). “Land reform and community based natural resource management in Zimbabwe.” In Mutefpa, F., E. et al. (Eds.). Enhancing Land Reforms in Southern Africa: Reviews on Land Reform Strategies and Community Based Natural Resources Management. ZERO- Regional Environment Organization: 76-103.