Mato vs Rural

After being in Mozambique for a while, I’ve noticed a big difference between non-urban areas here and non-urban areas in the states.  Mostly in that, when we say ‘rural’ in the states, we mean there is absolutely nothing.  No people, no buildings, maybe a railroad, cow, or oil well, but really not much else.  Mozambique is a bit different.  When you’re in ‘rural’ Mozambique (aka, the mato), there are people, maybe a lower density than in urban areas, but definitely people and the obligatory mud/cement/grass huts and machambas (farms) scattered across the countryside.  But that’s it.  No stores, no running water, no electricity, maybe cell service or something that could be considered a road.

Rural areas in the two countries have opposite characteristics: in the states, rural means no people, but there’s still infrastructure (roads, electricity, phone lines) while in Mozambique there’s people without the infrastructure.

Not sure what this says about the route and rate of development of the two countries, though it probably says something, I just found it to be interesting. 

It also means that when you try to go hiking into the mato, you get a lot of confused looks from locals who then shout after you in ciyao (one of the local languages), the only word you can usual understand being ‘mazungo’ (meaning ‘white person!’).