Log in

View Full Version : Africa + European Imperialism


23
2008-06-19, 03:36
How long can we continue to blame Africa's (Third World Status) shitholeness on Europe's imperial doings of the late 1800s and early 1900s?

Although Europeans did create chaos by drawing their own borders, putting rival tribes together, Africa continues to suffer because of the tribes themselves, not because they are occupied.

So, who is to blame for Africa's state?

MR.Kitty55
2008-06-19, 14:50
No history of any stable government creates perpetual civil unrest (i.e. revolution, genocide) and due to the constant chaos no one has been able to form a lasting political system, so regimes come and go.

That simple. Blame? Imperialism.

*Awaits ignorant comment about black genetic inferiority as blame that has been scientifically proven false*

23
2008-06-19, 15:26
No history of any stable government creates perpetual civil unrest (i.e. revolution, genocide)

So how could government ever be created in the first place?

Slave of the Beast
2008-06-19, 16:41
So, who is to blame for Africa's state?

Well, as far as the state of the AIDS situation goes, you can blame them and not Europeans. Just read some of the statements made by the S.A. health minister if you don't believe me.

As for those who would attribute blame to Imperialism, that's all very good under certain circumstances. But my question would be at what point do Africans start taking responsiblity for the shit they create?

MR.Kitty55
2008-06-19, 22:59
So how could government ever be created in the first place?

You gain control with a charismatic leader who can unite the country....Some places have been able to do it (South Africa). You need someone the people can rally around and truly support we had Washington they had Mandela.

Just look at what Napoleon did...The people need someone to look up to in unstable countries

23
2008-06-20, 00:12
You gain control with a charismatic leader who can unite the country....Some places have been able to do it (South Africa). You need someone the people can rally around and truly support we had Washington they had Mandela.

Just look at what Napoleon did...The people need someone to look up to in unstable countries

So that can only lead someone to conclude that no African has risen up to stabilize the region.

And that means you have to blame Africans for the state of Africa, not imperialists.

MR.Kitty55
2008-06-20, 02:23
So that can only lead someone to conclude that no African has risen up to stabilize the region.

And that means you have to blame Africans for the state of Africa, not imperialists.

Well it can take hundreds of years for such an event to occur, look at Vietnam, they had Ho-Chi-Mihn and today Vietnam still remains seperated...Of course this wouldn't need to happen if it wasn't for tens of millions of the labor force being extracted, exploitation of the natural resources and the division of the land by Imperialism...

Its like blaming a drug addict on not being able to go sober after you got them hooked on drugs against their will...It doesn't really make sense to pin the blame on the victim here

ThePrince
2008-06-20, 03:58
Well it can take hundreds of years for such an event to occur, look at Vietnam, they had Ho-Chi-Mihn and today Vietnam still remains seperated...Of course this wouldn't need to happen if it wasn't for tens of millions of the labor force being extracted, exploitation of the natural resources and the division of the land by Imperialism...

Its like blaming a drug addict on not being able to go sober after you got them hooked on drugs against their will...It doesn't really make sense to pin the blame on the victim here

What are you trying to say about 'Nam? They've pretty much adopted Capitalism and now they're thriving...

Africa has always been one of the most backwards places in the world, long before the Europeans came. In fact that's precisely why the Europeans were able to gobble it up so easily. So don't blame Europe, blame Africa for being so backwards that it couldn't resist Europe. Because the world isn't a nice place and if your civilization sucks, you get conquered and that's life.

Furthermore, I think the backwards, anti-intellectual, tribal-based culture is mainly responsible for Africa's present state, with a little bit of race thrown in. After we solve the whole energy independence thing, I say the USA goes to Africa and Americanizes the place, because their current culture has shown itself to be incapable.

Star Wars Fan
2008-06-20, 07:50
But my question would be at what point do Africans start taking responsiblity for the shit they create?

When Europe fixes the Shit they put Africa in the first place.

Star Wars Fan
2008-06-20, 07:54
And that means you have to blame Africans for the state of Africa, not imperialists.

No, what if Europe actually had a plan for sustaining and actually making sure its' former colonies weren't debted to various organization...err; no, we still need those slaves...hehehe

so yes; Imperialism is still there. It's called the WTO and IMF now.

Slave of the Beast
2008-06-20, 08:19
When Europe fixes the Shit they put Africa in the first place.

Are you admitting that Africans can't run shit, and that Europeans need to go back and wipe their bottoms for them?

No, what if Europe actually had a plan for sustaining and actually making sure its' former colonies weren't debted to various organization...err; no, we still need those slaves...hehehe

so yes; Imperialism is still there. It's called the WTO and IMF now.

No one forced them to take out loans they can't afford to repay.

rabbitweed
2008-06-20, 11:26
You can't generalise about a whole fucking continent, honestly.

The history and relations between Europeans and Natives is radically different depending on which country you're talking about. Colonialism in Zimbabwe was not the same as in South Africa, nor Angola, Namibia, Botswana, Nigeria...

Slave of the Beast
2008-06-20, 11:41
You can't generalise about a whole fucking continent, honestly.

This is true, each African country sucks in its own unique way.

rabbitweed
2008-06-20, 11:48
This is true, each African country sucks in its own unique way.

Are you a dawkins fan?

From the point of view of the gene, Africa is more successful than it has ever been.

Slave of the Beast
2008-06-20, 12:59
Are you a dawkins fan?

From the point of view of the gene, Africa is more successful than it has ever been.

Why, is the rampant spread of AIDS resulting in tougher Africans?

Star Wars Fan
2008-06-20, 19:55
Are you admitting that Africans can't run shit, and that Europeans need to go back and wipe their bottoms for them?


No, Europe should fix what they fucked up in Africa


No one forced them to take out loans they can't afford to repay.

O RLY?

" It is good to recall that a number of countries that have refused SAP have been attacked (e.g., Serbia) and/or destabilized (e.g., Belarus)."

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/usinterventionism.html

the_coup_d'etat
2008-06-20, 23:21
Everything that is there know is their own doing.

Consider this:

When someone attempts to blame problems on white mercenaries, remeber that the overwhelming majority of mercenaries that operated in Africa were Africans themselves.

Mercenaries actualy helped to Stabilize African countries until certain leaders decided to force them out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_United_Front

You can not blame that on imperialism.

Every other country has had a point of instability, yet they always thrive. The key to getting Africa back on its feet is to educate people.

kurdt318
2008-06-21, 01:41
No one forced them to take out loans they can't afford to repay.

What is it, the 8 richest countries in the world that have the most money lended to Africa? And yet they continue to request money. Repaying kills what little infrastructure these countries have, not to mention an estimated 9 million children.

the_coup_d'etat
2008-06-21, 02:37
What is it, the 8 richest countries in the world that have the most money lended to Africa? And yet they continue to request money. Repaying kills what little infrastructure these countries have, not to mention an estimated 9 million children.

Guess what, they asked for a loan, they got it. Just like the united states has borrowed money from china. You reap what you sow.

Slave of the Beast
2008-06-21, 08:18
No one forced them to take out loans they can't afford to repay.

What is it, the 8 richest countries in the world that have the most money lended to Africa? And yet they continue to request money. Repaying kills what little infrastructure these countries have, not to mention an estimated 9 million children.

You can appeal to empathy all you like, but that won't help you refute my point.

If President Bunga-Bunga wants to take out a loan to pay for the acres of marble flooring in the Presidential palace, and generally pretend-and-spend that his flea bitten and dusty shithole of a country is in fact a thriving faux-British Empire, well... tough shit.

The West is not here to write blank cheques to the corrupt and incompetent.

Splam
2008-06-21, 12:25
Guess what, they asked for a loan, they got it. Just like the united states has borrowed money from china. You reap what you sow.

The people weren't educated on the dangers of loans and blindly accepted them.

If it wasn't for European colonization, they'd still be living in caves. You'd still call it a shithole.

Among the reasons they're a shithole is modern economic imperialism (loans). Another reason is the lack of organization. All throughout history, the countries that prosper are the ones that can organize their people. How rich a country is, if you do include banking, relies solely on how much they produce and what they produce. That is a combination of work and science. With the tribes fighting in Africa, they simply cannot produce much. But the tribes have always been fighting, its nothing new. So to think their current shit state of Africa is based on the imaginary borders drawn up by the imperialists that caused conflict is ignorant. With or without these borders they'd be fighting and thus producing little. Just now they're fighting with kalashnikovs instead of spears.

These regions in the world are extremely farmable. The imperialists taught them farming which increased populations and also increased the value of certain places. So now the conflicts have increased of course. Are you going to blame Europe for teaching them farming? Of course the Europeans couldn't predict the conflicts that would follow the decline of the nomadic tribes. If anything the Europeans had the best intentions in mind when they taught them farming. So the blame really relies on circumstance. If the land in Europe was of such value and could sustain higher populations, conflict would be imminent here to.

http://www.totse.com/en/ego/making_money/thewellhiddent191884.html

the_coup_d'etat
2008-06-22, 04:08
The people weren't educated on the dangers of loans and blindly accepted them.

If it wasn't for European colonization, they'd still be living in caves. You'd still call it a shithole.

Among the reasons they're a shithole is modern economic imperialism (loans). Another reason is the lack of organization. All throughout history, the countries that prosper are the ones that can organize their people. How rich a country is, if you do include banking, relies solely on how much they produce and what they produce. That is a combination of work and science. With the tribes fighting in Africa, they simply cannot produce much. But the tribes have always been fighting, its nothing new. So to think their current shit state of Africa is based on the imaginary borders drawn up by the imperialists that caused conflict is ignorant. With or without these borders they'd be fighting and thus producing little. Just now they're fighting with kalashnikovs instead of spears.

These regions in the world are extremely farmable. The imperialists taught them farming which increased populations and also increased the value of certain places. So now the conflicts have increased of course. Are you going to blame Europe for teaching them farming? Of course the Europeans couldn't predict the conflicts that would follow the decline of the nomadic tribes. If anything the Europeans had the best intentions in mind when they taught them farming. So the blame really relies on circumstance. If the land in Europe was of such value and could sustain higher populations, conflict would be imminent here to.

http://www.totse.com/en/ego/making_money/thewellhiddent191884.html

Amazingly even when Europe is thrown in to chaos, they still advance themselves.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attila_the_Hun

As I stated in my first post, education is they key, but you have to want to learn.

Toxic
2008-06-22, 04:56
Amazingly even when Europe is thrown in to chaos, they still advance themselves.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attila_the_Hun

As I stated in my first post, education is they key, but you have to want to learn.Attila the hun is completely irrelevant. His successors failed to keep the huns together and continue expanding the empire. He hardly threw all of Europe into chaos and the impact he did have was short lived.

The dark ages are a much better example of chaos in Europe. Almost no advancements came during this time, but I guess this would just hurt your first point.

The dark ages were a perfect example of your second point, but like Africa there was religion and traditions that took away their willingness to learn. It wasn't just "I don't want to learn", most poor Africans won't get that opportunity.

FunkyZombie
2008-06-22, 16:32
Personally I don't blame imperialism for the poor state of Africa. While the colonial period was bad the problems created by it were not insurmountable. In fact the colonial period actually could have formed the seeds from which a thriving African continent could have bloomed if left unmolested. The colonial occupiers needed to create a westernized native class to serve as intermediaries between the men with guns wearing khaki and the men with spears wearing kente. This intellectual class could have led Africa into it's rightful place in the 21st century.

I blame the Cold War.

It's hard to build a nation when all your intellectuals get killed off for being communists and all your business people get killed off for being bourgeois pigs. Proxy wars tend to stifle national growth and encourage chaos.

the_coup_d'etat
2008-06-22, 20:28
Attila the hun is completely irrelevant. His successors failed to keep the huns together and continue expanding the empire. He hardly threw all of Europe into chaos and the impact he did have was short lived.

The dark ages are a much better example of chaos in Europe. Almost no advancements came during this time, but I guess this would just hurt your first point.

The dark ages were a perfect example of your second point, but like Africa there was religion and traditions that took away their willingness to learn. It wasn't just "I don't want to learn", most poor Africans won't get that opportunity.

Actually I was making a reference to Rome and how it fell in relation to lack of food caused by the Huns raids, etc.

Africa's poverty goes hand in hand with their poor decisions.

Toxic
2008-06-22, 22:54
Actually I was making a reference to Rome and how it fell in relation to lack of food caused by the Huff raid, etc.

Africa's poverty goes hand in hand with their poor decisions.Actually you were making a reference to Europe being thrown into chaos and making a comparison between Africa and Europe. It doesn't apply or relate to Africa's current or past situations in any way.

the_coup_d'etat
2008-06-22, 23:55
Actually you were making a reference to Europe being thrown into chaos and making a comparison between Africa and Europe. It doesn't apply or relate to Africa's current or past situations in any way.


Sure thing buddy, that's why when rome disolved people found the best education at monasteries which essentialy started the re-education of Europe. Roman Empire was practically Europe also, so sure you could say I was refering to Europe. :cool:

It applies to Africa in everyway.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0502/p04s01-woaf.html

Remember what I said about bad decisions? There goes your food source and some of your economy....

Only difference here is that you don't have external forces destroying anything.

Toxic
2008-06-23, 00:33
Sure thing buddy, that's why when rome disolved people found the best education at monasteries which essentialy started the re-education of Europe. Roman Empire was practically Europe also, so sure you could say I was refering to Europe. :cool:

It applies to Africa in everyway.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0502/p04s01-woaf.html

Remember what I said about bad decisions? There goes your food source and some of your economy....

Only difference here is that you don't have external forces destroying anything.Christianity in Rome was already well established as the Roman religion when Rome fell. The downfall of Rome lead to the dark ages, after the dark ages many advancements were made, but peasants still got their education from religion and superstition.

The downfall of Rome was mostly due to bad decisions made by Roman leaders. Just like poor Africans don't get a proper education, neither did the peasants of the dark ages. The poor uneducated Africans didn't make these decisions and if given the opportunity wouldn't know what decision to make.

Just saying "bad decisions" is bullshit. I could say that for every bad thing thats ever happened.

Actually with Europe you mostly had internal forces that brought the dark ages and the downfall of Rome. Europe has never experienced imperialism the way Africa has.

So I guess your entire point is that bad internal decisions are the cause of the problems in Africa?

Fza
2008-06-24, 08:56
You gain control with a charismatic leader who can unite the country....Some places have been able to do it (South Africa). You need someone the people can rally around and truly support we had Washington they had Mandela.

Just look at what Napoleon did...The people need someone to look up to in unstable countries

Mugabe was a charismatic pro-western leader back in the day, he turned just as batshit insane as the rest of the dictators.

Also, conialism can't be blamed because most ex-colonies turned out fine, it's basically mostly the sub-sahara ex-colonies that are perpetual shitholes.

your enemy
2008-06-26, 23:01
http://h1.ripway.com/SriBaba/gifs/4osh37c.gif

Chimro
2008-06-28, 06:17
European Imperialism will continue to be blamed as long as Africans remain inferior (in other words forever) and Europeans remain ignorant to their superiority due to Edomite brainwashing (probably quite a while again).