How long does it take for a people to become tired of central leadership? In this day and age, total anarchy is not possible. People desire leadership – for once we've tasted the benefits that can be given by a government, then it is not a question of whether we'll have one or not, but who it shall be. Benefits include protection from hostile forces, enforcement of law and public facilities (education, health care, transportation...etc.) However, in a state of constant flux where leaders persistently disappoint the people, it would be inevitable that people give up on the idea of a central government all together. You cannot trust a leader who is far away, you can only trust one who is close at hand. Thus, countries become fragmented as tribal leaders take over the role of the central government. This weakens the country and makes it more susceptible to attacks from outside. The ensuing chaos further discredits the government and spells disaster. In a way, the optimism in the people of these African countries is somewhat naïve. They trust simple messages that promise change without realizing how difficult it would be for these changes to come about even if the leadership does not become corrupt. They seem to expect miracles. This shows a lack of adequate understanding of their own country. Being left with a colonial legacy means that the economical and administrative structures of these countries are shaped to strip the country of resources and benefit a third party. It is difficult for a new government to completely overhaul this system. With the lack of adequate education for the majority of the people, especially in higher education, candidates for government are rarely top notch. Also, charisma in no way denotes morality or capability. Thus, unschooled constituents vote for untested but charming new figures. This lack of talent also limits a leadership's choices. Without a steady parliament to create a constitution of checks to limit a president's power, the choosing of officials is arbitrary. If a president chooses able candidates, he runs the risk of splintering his power. If he chooses inept candidates, he runs the risk of losing the country. A selfless president would not remain in power long, as he would either hand over his power to one who seems more eager*, for the greater good (as China's Sun Yat-Sen did), or be gradually marginalized until he's pushed off the stage for lack of personal ambition. A president's choice would then often be intelligent candidates with no connections – thus no real power over the president – and people close to the president (friends, relatives) who are not necessarily qualified but who eat of his pocket. Neither of these choices bode well for the health of the government, and both result in de facto dictatorship. I would also like to ask the question of whether a people's initial attitude towards a new leader might affect his later behavior? For example, if people appear to worship someone, then that person is apt to believe in his/her omnipotency. Likewise, a president might start to believe that whatever he does is righteous. The only solution I have for this situation so far is to go to the roots. Education builds up a nation. Generalized education should include an impartial civics class and readings of such important works as Machiavelli's 'The Prince' and other works concerning government structure. This would prevent constituents in blindly worshiping one figure if they have a comprehensive view of the entire government and its responsibilities towards its people. Having higher education available not only for the rich would also provide the country with much needed talent. *(After Sun became provisional president) The major issue before the provisional government was gaining the support of Yuan Shikai, the man in charge of the Beiyang Army, the military of northern China. After Sun promised Yuan the presidency of the new Republic, Yuan sided with the revolution and forced the emperor to abdicate. (Eventually, Yuan proclaimed himself emperor and afterwards opposition snowballed against Yuan's dictatorial methods, leading him to renounce the throne shortly before his death in 1916.) - from wikipedia ps: 'The Prince' should be read after many other works are read. related links: Nigeria: The good, the bad, and the president – a doughy fighter of corruption is sent away for re-education http://www.economist.com/world/africa/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10443153 Child victims of 419 preachers in Nigera http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=mZVVbGEOoCM