Why did colonialism set Africans back so much? Would they have

whites created institutions deliberately intended to weaken the countries they ruled. It's not unlike what happened to the American Natives- do you see them living well due to western colonization?

>>2486103

What do you think of African nations that have had no colonial rulers and are essentially a mix of stone age and modern technology with dysfunctional governments?

>>2486092
I understand that the European powers that ruled Africa for a while were cruel sometimes, but didn't they also provide infrastructure and things that also helped African countries? Didn't the Europeans bring technological advancements to the countries they conquered?

>>2486103
What are some good sources on the ways in which colonists did this?

>>2486103
The opposite is true. Whites specifically created environments where economic prosperity was viable. They even educated thousands of nignogs in European universities.

File: IMG_2707.jpg (4MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4032x3024px

have you ever asked ya know an african who lives in africa this question?
I have gone to east africa a couple times, and they will say yes the british were cruel at times, but they really dragged us out of the stone age and gave us the tools necessary to function in the modern world.
also mentioned were given a "real" religion, and now being taught english in the primary schools.

It's bait you fucking retards

>>2486103
I would not say that it were institutions, I would say that it was more an exploitation of pre-existing rivalries that kept the africans at each other's throats. Divide and Conquer

>>2486092
Literally no African believes this, Anon. This is a myth spread by Afro-Americans to feel good about themselves

>>2486276
>people who would have violently opposed each other regardless of European presence
>ITS WHITEYS FAULT
Also if you think borders were drawn "deliberately to foster ethnic tension" you're retarded. Even the tinest nation states like Slovakia or Estonia differ from ethnic tension. No border is the result of perfectly homogenous people getting together. Even the Japanese are a composite race which had winners and losers.

>>2486280
this
ask an actual african living in african what they think about blacks in america.
the best response i ever got was "their ancestors were too slow or too stupid, and got caught, now they are the descendants of slaves"

>>2486325

Ya, I've dealt with lots of Nigerian immigrants and they fucking HATE black Americans. Like it's straight hatred.

>>2486343
i deal with alot of east africans, they hate nigerians in all fairness though the whole culture is divided along tribal lines, I dont think people in the West realize how tribal Africa was/is to this day.
Also have you ever asked them about the We Wuz Kangz meme?

>>2486092
Because it destroyed trust in the government, upper class, and other tribes in that would willingly sell their own population to Europeans. You can still see this today, African countries tear themselves apart over tribal rivalries that were formed centuries ago.

>>2486355
>"did you ask them about an internet meme"

lel

>>2486092
I think this is bait. Colonialism did not leave Africans with less technology or institutions. Quite the opposite, actually. However, colonialism established conditions directly counter to the development of nation states. Had colonialism not happened, western technology and political theory would have likely entered these societies more slowly and fairly.

By pulling out of African countries so quickly, without making much effort to develop these countries (as opposed to British holdings in India or French holdings in North Africa), Western powers created some dangerous conditions:

1. A power vacuum in which religious, tribal, and international corporate authorities would compete for power and impede the democratic process.
2. Eradication of native government institutions, to a greater degree than in the Middle East or Asia.
3. Economies largely managed by foreign corporations.
4. Borders drawn upon roughly arbitrary colonial lines, bringing under new national identities neighboring groups whose only common identity is shared colonization under the rule of a certain country.
5. Incredibly low literacy rate and poor education, preventing the development of a professional domestic class.
6. History of social inequality in which certain ethnic groups were favored by colonizers over others.

The closest analogue to the conditions established in post-colonial Africa existed in Southeast Asia after the French withdrawal. Most of the problems associated with African development were and can be found in Cambodia or Laos today, which actually lag behind many Sub Saharan African countries in their HDI and GDP per capita.

>>2486234
Not him but: http://exhibitions.nypl.org/africanaage/essay-colonization-of-africa.html

>In general, indirect rule worked fairly well in areas that had long-established centralized state systems such as chiefdoms, city-states, kingdoms, and empires, with their functional administrative and judicial systems of government. But even here the fact that the ultimate authority was the British officials meant that the African leaders had been vassalized and exercised "authority" at the mercy of European colonial officials. Thus the political and social umbilical cords that tied them to their people in the old system had been broken. Some astute African leaders maneuvered and ruled as best they could, while others used the new colonial setting to become tyrants and oppressors, as they were responsible to British officials ultimately.

>In the decentralized societies, the system of indirect rule worked less well, as they did not have single rulers. The British colonizers, unfamiliar with these novel and unique political systems and insisting that African "natives" must have chiefs, often appointed licensed leaders called warrant chiefs, as in Igboland, for example.

Essentially, it was the way that colonizers treated all African societies the exact same which severely hampered their ability to work with or gain a clear understanding of individual African societies. To be fair, this is probably too much to ask of almost any colonial power, but is also a reason why colonialism is so often a failure.

>>2486416
/his/ stop being reasonable
where are your memes

>>2486255
that fucking goat

File: IMG_2234.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

>>2486410
>>2486542
ok here was my question, american blacks take credit for their ancestors building the pyramids...
and i dont get any farther before the laughs start
lol never even saw the goat
also everyone walks fucking everywhere

>>2486416
The problem with your theory is that India and Africa were far different historically, culturally, and socially. Don't let the fact that they were both dark skinned subjects of the U.K. fool you. India had many grand empires and a high civilization comparable to the best of them. Meanwhile Africa was far more primitive.

Normal course of history
>Empire BTFO civilization X
>civilization X picks itself back up by itself
Africa
>Empire BTFO African nations
>feels bad about it, tries to help, and creates learned helplessness.

>>2486229
I know that the germans were investing into infrastructure and building their colonies up to a point where they would be profitable but their reign ended before that became the case.

>>2486092
The issue is two fold the first is that until the end Europeans for obvious reasons tried to keep any sort of state building among the Africans to a minimum. The second is that for the most parts these economies were used for extraction of resources so all the development went to roads and infrastructure that made extracting resources easier. Having an economy based on resource extraction such as mining can be very destabilizing since it only requires relatively few educated people to run properly. So this means that a small elite is able to rapidly control the main means of producing wealth and in turn use that we lath to control the masses.

I seriously doubt that even the most unstable and violent sub-saharan african nations are somehow worse off today than they were pre-colonization.

>>2486566
It's funny because you think you are smart but you are actually just regurgitating the line that colonizers want you to believe

>>2486092
No. It would have been worse.

Most parts of Africa were completely isolated from the emerging globalization. Western political thought and technology wouldn't have filtered in, Africa simply wouldn't have developed.

Sure white rule was terrible often times but it at least enabled most regions to participate in a global economy. Infrastructure and some centralized authority for example.

The things causing the very retarded african development are genuine to africa. Tribalism as the most important one for example.

The ethnic conlicts weren't imported by the colonizers,they were present for millenia. Due to modern weaponry they claim more lives but are less intense due to the higher population. The 20th century was far less violent than the 15th century despite two world wars due to this.

>>2486614
He's not wrong though. The mass amount of aid going into Africa has completely destroyed most of the economies and has only furthered the problems that the aid was trying to solve.

>>2486620
True. Especially because it only enables a corrupt elite that controls the distribution and the ressources of the country even further.

Whoever controls the help coming in and the ressources going out has everything he needs to surpress anything that could cause real economic development endangering the tyrant and his cronies.

>>2486620
>>2486645
Lesson of the 20th century is that you don't give food aid to countries that don't have semi-maintained road systems and granaries.

If you can't keep your country stable enough or muster the engineering prowess to grade a gravel road, giving you food for free will fuck you for ever.

Colonialism didn't "set them back" at all. Colonialism was so exceedingly easy for even the smallest European country to accomplish because Africa was one huge mess of tribal lines and disorganization. When Europe was arbitrarily cutting up the country on a map like a game of Risk the idea of organized African resistance didn't even register as an impediment, they were only worried about each other.

>>2486564
Doesn't negate what he said at all

>>2486092
>introducing them to modern technology after effectivly living in the stone age
>sets them back

>>2486092
colonialism didn't set africans back, it was hostile environment, isolated location and poor diet which made them so rudimentary.

>>2486620
>>2486645
Anon it was the cold War you idiots not aid
Aid is such a crutch for people to Blame Africa's woes on to simply avoiding the REAL issues because it clashes with their ahistorical views. And general poor knowledge if the place.

>>2487203
>it was the cold War you idiots
Blaming the Cold War for Africa is like blaming all of Latin America's problems on the CIA. Not only is it wrong, it's simply a handwaving of the actual problems. Tell me exactly how all that free food is fixing the issue of Africa not producing enough food rather than incentivizing farmers to grow less food?

>>2486092
>set back
You mean push forward?

>Why did colonialism set Africans back so much?

it didn't

>>2487214
Because farmers are still trucking farm food idiot it's just that issues like poor crop yields due to environmental disasters, cliamte shifts, soil degradation, lack of government support (because said government has money issues) that make the food source trucking unreliable alongside the farm to market transportation, storage process being so haphazard.

You know how much disasters would have happened if that food aid didn't come in or a country didn't get helped by health aid because it's health budget was too small?

>>2487243
>it's just that issues like poor crop yields due to environmental disasters, climate shifts, soil degradation
And absolutely nothing to do with farmers shifting to cash crops as food prices get gutted from FREE food. Seriously, fuck off.

>>2487243
Blaming aid for food issues is pleb as fuck because it ignores said food issues the continent has always had and geological constraints in many areas.

>>2486620
>The mass amount of aid going into Africa has completely destroyed most of the economies

How so? What industry did Africa have? None at all. No notable industry was developed on the continent at all barring South Africa and Rhodesia at best and even then it was limited to the Euro-descent group who ran owned and operated them alongside working the good paying jobs in them both blue and white collar. All they have are resources to give out and that heavily fluctuates based on the prices of said goods which means your budget to develop is very unstable on yearly basis, look at oil iris in the 70's, oil glut and what Saudi Arabia did recently.

The economy for a colony CANNOT support a nation trying to enact colonial institutions then translating them to nation based ones is recipe for disaster since the only Spencerian many folk in those countries have is a colonial system (let alone a egalitarian one). Especially how shitty the colonial education system was the population is uneducated as fuck and super limited and never had any exposure to REAL modern 20th century world because those colonies were barely connected to the global market directly or to other parts of Africa.

They never had a fucking nation supporting economy in the first place and said colony polices and developments alongside the shit that happened in the cold war led to many destabilizing forces in play such as the two powers supporting their special guy in power OR supporting one set of rebels.

>>2487254
They only deploy food in famine/conflict prone regions anon it's not willy-nilly.

On top of that it's the peoples CHOICE to grow cash crops because it gives them more money that they can spend for their family for school and for social mobility. People go for cash crops because it's the only thing that GETS MONEY. The prices for food are utter shit because on the global market their exports have to compete against nations that can spend billions on food subsidies to baby their farmers which many countries can't afford to do. It's a catch-22

>>2486092
>colonialism
No niggers are just subhuman savages, they will create despotic hellholes wherever they exist, the evidence is every single nigger infested place in America since the ending of slavery.

>>2487349
I'll use an example in places in colonial Africa where the colonial government didn't care what the people grew the people chose to grow cash crops or to grow food crops which led to a better path so to say because the cash crop folk have the money to buy the food crops growers stuff instead of everyone just growing food for themselves.

In places where the colonial government needed money it forced everyone to grow cash crops which led to famine and food issues down the line and soil degradations

In places where the governed had an autistic "REE YOU CAN'T GROW CASH CROPS THAT ONLY WHITES CAN" or for some other reason Blacks were barred from growing cash crops and could not choose food or cash crops since in Kenya's case white settlers felt it was entitled that only they could grow it and face no local competition (in Kenya they threw a bitch fit because the railroad from Uganda to Kenya's port meant that they had to compete against Ugandan cash crop growers since Uganda didn't have that restriction on what Blacks can grow) .

>>2486564
What the fuck does that have to do with his post at all? He never implied that India and Africa were similar at all alongside the fact that India like Africa itself isn't a monolithic entity.

>>2486255
>I have gone to east africa a couple times, and they will say yes the british were cruel at times, but they really dragged us out of the stone age and gave us the tools necessary to function in the modern world.
>also mentioned were given a "real" religion, and now being taught english in the primary schools.

Which part of East Africa?
What kind of dumb spineless cuck thinks that?

Their land is shit because bugs eat crops and game. The disease doesn't die in the winter. They also don't have amazing amounts of coal/steel n shit nigga.

In spite of this, jungles allow their populations to remain modestly high, albeit with short lives.

It's the worst possible leadup to modern times in terms of stats, where your gdp per capita is not repairable.

>>2487486
>Being honest is being a cuck now
If American Blacks weren't being force fed anti-White propaganda 24 hours a day since birth they'd come to the same logical conclusion.

Unless you're a major reactionary or anarcho-primitiviest I don't see what's cucked about that statement.

>>2487793
Because assuming that person anon said is really must be a huge historical retard (specifically so if he's ignorant of he's region)to not know that East Africa passed the stone age long ago and they must be so ignorant to not notice the iron in various pieces of East Africa cultural works and weapons.

The whole British were cruel at times which is funny because they were really oppressive as fuck to the locals constantly so saying at times is an understatement especially with the Mau Mau conflict and the Hola Massacre which disgusted many Brits back home. Lets not mention the concentration camps, ,prisoner abuse and land dispossession and forced relocation as well.

What makes native religions any less "real" then Christianity.

It's like trying to rationalizing being beaten by your drunk father.

>>2487849
"stone age" is an expression. Your autism to take it literal is laughable. Colonialism wasn't a zero sum game. A lot was gained. Only stubborn ideologues refuse to acknowledge it, instead opting to life in a fantasy where the British were totalitarian 100% of the time.

Christianity isn't less real than animism, but unlike animism it has a set of written doctrines, theology, philosophy and metaphysics which make it a high religion compared to random cults and tribalism which existed in East Africa.

>>2487849
Hell lets bring up the tools to to function in the modern world part.

>East Africa had no public school system at all by independence let alone a functioning school system.
>Population uneducated as fuck. No national identity at all
>land dispossession.
>Barely modern tech in the colonies.
>Infrastructure super limited in select places.
>No real economy that is self-sufficient let aloen suitable for a nation at all.
>Africans disenfranchised from the political system completely until independence.
>little to No contact with the outside world and other countries.
>Barely any modern institutions were set up. They basically had ot make eons from scratch with no experience in running them or copy+pasting colonial ones that are inefficient in a nation or to use another example a public colonial company that is basically broke as fuck because it only survived being babied by the metro pole.

That sure is being prepared at all prepared for modern times lol

>>2486343
>>2486355
Nearly every black ethnicity hates the guts of every other black ethnicity.
Prime example of this is how the Zulus impi up and chase Nigerians, Somalis and Congolese around Johannesburg with pangas and rubber car tires soaked in petrol at the slightest local economic disturbance.

>>2486250
>They even educated thousands of nignogs in European universities.

When Colonialism ended in africa there were about a hundred black men there with a University level education.

Try running a modern city on a hundred college educated people, you cant.

>>2488014
You can run it easily if most of your population arent sociopathic savages.

>>2486562
Those old okes are still dressing smartly like it's the 50s.

>>2488014
>>2488024

Both of you have a point. But as good gardeners, we should pay more attention to particular specimens and tribes. Igbo nigerans are pretty smart.

And then there's strains of Igbo which have disproportionate "smartness".

Same principle applies to all human societies.

>>2487996
This isn't really a black thing though why are you trying to make it out as such? It's just xenophobia like every other human group on Earth.

>>2488035

Igbo's aren't really that exceptionally smart specialty compared to Yoruba or other well performing groups anon. Stop trying to make "Igbo's are special". Those "Strains" are just trucking rich Igbo's tired of people trying to jack off one African group to shit on others.

>>2488056
I mean that really isn't a black only thing

>>2488024
What?

>>2488024
No you really can't. You need educated people to run the faculties and institutes well, run the occupations that required a degree or diploma and educated people to teach the next generation of educated people.

File: 1459288040058.png (80KB, 500x279px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 500x279px

This is relevant:
https://youtu.be/A0C4_88ub_M?t=651

>>2488114
Not at all.

>>2488056
It's not only a black thing. It's just an example of how fractured the continent remains to be even in it's most developed parts. Most other populations in the world are above machining their neighbours into small pieces in xenophobic mob riots, we hope at least.

>>2488271
>It's just an example of how fractured the continent remains to be even in it's most developed parts

No continent is really united at all to be honest.

>Most other populations in the world are above machining their neighbours into small pieces in xenophobic mob riots, we hope at least.

Not at all. People have killed for less.

>>2486092
I'm so sick of this, In what way did colonialism set Africa back?
Of-course they wouldn't have been more advanced than western civilisations. Do you think any region of Africa was on some trajectory whereby they were even approaching parity with England or France or any other European power?

Napoleon and the learned men he brings with him on his expedition to Egypt are bought to incredulity when they see how barbaric, parochial, and uncivilised the inhabitants are. One writes of being stunned after an interaction with a farmer who lived less than a day from the capital who did not even know what scissors were... THIS IS EGYPT! There is a reason there is such a dearth of reliable sources on what life was actually like in west and central Africa before the Euros showed up. It was pre-historic, the overwhelming majority of the population seldom using technology passed neolithic staples, mud and wood tools and accommodation.

I just watched the first episode of the roots reboot, jesus christ, people really accept this narrative where west africa was some civilised eden before the English showed up. They speak of a university in Timbuktu as though it was Oxford, not an interesting but broadly irrelevant vestige of Arabs/Islams ruthless penetration into the sahara.

>whites hadn't been so cruel

"whites", certainly the British were some of the most benevolent rulers Africa ever had, take slavery, a normalised and ubiquitous practice legitimised by whoever has hegemony, a fact of African life since the literal dawn of humanity a quarter of a million years ago -- until British abolition efforts start to being the excruciating termination of the practice. Not to mention the medicine distributed, education provided, and infrastructure built.

File: CVw5Q27UEAAjOPG.jpg (109KB, 600x682px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 600x682px

>>2488850
Post-colonialism has been Africa's worst period because it's built of the demonstrably farcical premise that pre-colonial Africa was better than colonial Africa. Modern India has the same problem, and it is why the two host the lion's share of the worlds problems and poverty.

http://www.thesouthafrican.com/zulu-king-praises-apartheid-government-lashes-out-at-anc/

File: 2ffdb8ebec19e95eca9c3b5b7f28c4d9.jpg (15KB, 236x330px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 236x330px

Dont want to be that guy but READ GUNS GERMS AND STEEL

>>2488850
Why would Blacks be supportive of abolishing slavery? They created it and practiced since the dawn of humanity, as you said. They obvious had no problems with it.

Likewise from a Luddite perspective, having technology isn't necessarily a good thing. This being said, I agree with you. Those who criticize colonialism seem like the type who should be most supportive of it.

File: Ilya Repin.jpg (2MB, 2929x3722px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2929x3722px

>>2488865
Don't
To say that book is worthless is to ascribe it to high a value. It's to your intellectual detriment to read that book.
>White people just got lucky with their spawn.
>All races are actually equal
>Oh no wait, whites are evil, and the people of PNG are superior in ever conceivable way.
>Here are some lists I found on wikipedia.
>RACISTS BTFO.

The book is an embarrassment and it surprises no one that it was written by a Jew who knows nothing about his subject matter.

I to this day maintain that the Spaniards civilized the Netherlands.

>>2486092
Let's put it this way; Japan was able to modernize in 50 years. If race isn't real, why can't Africa or South America can't do this

>>2488872
>hey created it and practiced since the dawn of humanity, as you said.

No one created slavery idiot.

>>2489233
Because Japan had Uncle Sam to babysit them.

>>2488850
>>2488855

This truly is /his/.

>>2487849
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LhSjLNyM-s
https://youtu.be/7Rh6gDEO4JA

but no let's just spend the next eight decades bitching about reparations and "media representation" because that's what makes society grow.
the irony is that if every abused minority adopted your mentality anglo-saxon whites would undoubtedly be the supreme rulers of the earth right now.

>>2489233

that isn't race you pleb why are you trying to demolish the concept of work ethic like some kind of pansy-ass beta cuck

>>2489370
It's not really work-ethic though (not saying it's race either).

>>2489365
Why is it that the people post the exact same two clips when trying to make the point that you are making. The EXACT same links and many times as a non-sequitar. Hell for the latter it was a Spanish guy on /int/ who posted it and he was not being serious.

>>2486092
Wut?

Imagine if we were living in the stone age and guys who were already in the steel age came over and gave us all kinds of inventions and ideas? It advanced them greatly overall. I don't think they would have advanced otherwise, they still fail to civilized to this day no matter where they go in the world, no matter how many examples or opportunities they have.

>>2487474
He's saying that using colonialism as a reason why Africa's shit is a flawed argument, because other countries that were colonized managed NOT to be complete shit after gaining independence. Furthermore, India was a colony of Britain FAR longer than Nigeria was

>>2486614
And you just regurgitate lines that Modern Liberals want you to believe

>>2486122
no african nations have escaped some form of colonial rule.

>>2488269
Yes it is. First off, it shows someone whose OWN ancestors had bad run-ins with Whites, and yet his people still picked themselves up after it. Furthermore, it shows the disdain for Black laziness is not only unique to Whites, as we all were led to believe in out public schooling.

>>2489273
I assume you're butthurt, so why are you getting butthurt over people having different opinions than you?

>>2489492
No, I just believe that the people who run nations tend to act out of there self interest. Europeans didn't leave Africa cause they felt bad they left cause it was too expensive to stay. Furthermore the Africans didn't learn helplessness as much as they never learned what it means to build a modern state. Also I would say alot of Africa's come this lack of state development. When no one cares about the nation it is extremely easy for small cabal to take the reigns of government.

>>2486600
Railroads and postal offices aren't particularly useful without trained bureaucrats to administer them. "Infrastructure" is well and fine, but no ones getting any proper self rule without universities and polytechnics churning out folks who are educated enough to build on what's left. Some african countries entered the decolonial era with single digit university graduates for countries with populations in the millions.

>>2489233
The japanese weren't exactly hunter-gathers, bruv. They could forge cannons, guns, build ships, read and speak portuguese, and had existing institutions of higher learning that could be repurposed towards western methods and ideas. It's not as huge a leap.

>>2486103
>all natives are the mouthwash addicts living in some shithole in manitoba
quite ebin

>>2489520
Europeans arguably did nothing wrong.

>>2488014
>When Colonialism ended in africa there were about a hundred black men there with a University level education.
I seriously doubt this.

>>2489262
Blacks created it. They weren't the only ones but the obviously originated their own version and practiced it

>>2488070
yoruboos leave this board, this igbo turf

>>2486103
>be colonised african
>get btfo to the stone age for the next 100 years
>be colonised Hong kong
>???
Hmmmm....

>>2489696
Hong Kong was a trade port.
When it comes to decolonization, one of the best things to have been is a trade port.

>>2489709
>Be nigger African colony
>get btfoed to the stone age for the next 100 year
>be African colony with white leadership
>????
Hmmmm mm....

>>2489577
Right and wrong are useless terms when dealing with interstate interactions. Very rarely are things done simply because they are right or wrong. Often people act right or wrong for reasons completely unrelated to morality

>>2489725
The ones with persistent white leadership through the decolonial era (you know the ones) also had their own universities and schools to pump out bureaucrats and professionals before and after decolonisation, which goes a long way when it comes to preserving and building on inherited colonial infrastructure.

>>2489740
>It's unfair because white people built schools and infrastructure. When blacks eventually took control of these countries, evil whitey took all the schools and shit with him and that's why Rhodesia and SA are now shitholes.

>>2489762
In most countries formed during the period of decolonisation, there were usually no universities, and the ones available only open to whites. As a result, there weren't exactly that many educated blacks capable of filling the void.
Zimbabwe was a disaster, mostly because the white population were the only ones with the training to actually maintain infrastructure, kind of like Haiti a century previous. But, well, the problem could have been avoided if any effort was put into. y'know, preparing the native populations for self-government, which did not occur.

>>2489791
>it's whites fault for not giving free education

>>2489802
Education is one of the major means by which we maintain our current standard of living. If one wants a place to do well, it's generally a good idea to put some investment into education.
I shouldn't have to explain this.

>>2489812
Do you think that the motherlands went out of their way to educate their white colonials? These were economies driven by farmers, not scholars.

>>2489824
Given that there were schools and campus's built, both in and outside the colonies, built for the purpose of training colonial administrators and other important functionaries, I'd say they valued it quite a bit more than you seem to be implying. Rhodesia was certainly late to the party in getting their own university, but it's not as if the folks there weren't getting their kids off to SOAS and oxbridge and so on. As for South Africa, they started building up universities in the mid 19th century. They certainly weren't late.

Apart from all that, I don't know if you know, but universities produce more than "scholars". they also produce engineers, clerks, human resources managers, and so on. You know, really useful stuff when it comes to, say, managing an efficient rail line.

>>2489824
>Do you think that the motherlands went out of their way to educate their white colonials?

Yeah they did so they don't have to constantly rely on importing bureaucrats form the home and instead got the in the colony.

>These were economies driven by farmers, not scholars.

Later on those early white families got enough money and fortune from their farming or money back home (since farming isn't that great to be honest in the long term) and educate their sons and daughters education in universities outside the colony if it didn't have any. White in general did not come just for farming they had a ton of reason to immigrate to the colonies. Also only whites in Kenya/E Astern Africa had a hard on (to an autistic degree, it's how they ended up getting beaten by Indians hardcore) in for farming. Rhodesia is mining (and the land was gotten because it was originally a mine concession form a local ruler) and farming was the back up just in case and Rhodesia has lot of minerals.

>>2489591
No they didn't. Their version of slavery carried widely from place to place that you simply can't call it a specific type and there isn't any really unique to Africa itself at all.

>>2489851
>>2489856
Oh, you mean that the whites made sure that their kids got an education?

>>2489532
or the fact that said railroads and post offices that were okay for the few people that could make use of them now have to deal with burden on much more people having to use them. The Railroads routes of back then are solely lacking many nations needs now and post offices have to deal with much more people and demographic/density shifts that may effect their performance such as a current location that is unideal. Having to now expand minimal infrastructure meant for the bare minimum to an entire nations needs is very straining for those things.

>>2489871
If by "whites" you mean both inside and outside the colony, instead of excluding one in particular, yes.

Men like Theodore Roosevelt or Rudyard Kipling saw it as a benefit to Africa.

>>2489884
So how is it whitey fault that the blacks failed to gain an education? The Asians didn't seem to have this issue.

>>2486416
>The best answer in the thread gets ignored for memes and /pol/posting

>>2489506
>China
>Fucked over by Europe

China was the most powerful country on Earth until the mid 19th century, and never actually conquered or colonized by western powers.

>>2489506
>yet his people still picked themselves up after it.

China is a complete shithole. The entire strategy of China to compete vs the world is to fuck upitself to ahve low costs of everything and to have a massive peasant underclass that they can use to easily replace any labourer because they will work for pennies. China has an endless pool of poor ass dumb as fuck yokels who can't do shit.

China is still a basically feudal society for most of it's population.
Because that Chinese guy is speaking out of ignorance of Congo's history and complete amnesia over China's.

>>2489896
Because whitey ruled an area but failed to put up any education institutions that weren't basically equipped to function properly or the fact that many colonies it was the missionaries responsibility to do education an they were slapped with the burden with no assistance from the local colonial entity.

Many Africans tried to make the best out of it as student and teachers on top of many locals trying to improve it and invest in it with what little they had but with little help in funding, experience and no money very little could be accomplished.

>>2489896
In Asia, there was already a presence of strong kingdoms and semi-states.

In Africa, there was a presence of the upper states of tribal states, but not much beyond it. There was not really any presence of strong government, anywhere.


The European empires could barter and preform diplomacy with the Asiatic kingdoms. Often times, despite having superior numbers, the Asiatic kingdoms were forced into trade deals dominated by the Europeans. Or, in India's case, the Europeans took advantage of a semi-states kingdom for one another.

In Africa, the land was grabbed up, because there was no semi-state stopping the European powers. So, the people were grabbed up as well

>>2489927
>we wuz tryna get muh edukashunz n get my life on trak n shit.

>>2489896
Well, it's a bit difficult to get education when you can't exactly afford to sent your kids to european schools overseas, or even the local universities, if any exist.
Depends on the asians, the big ones, China and Japan and those sorts, they had education systems in place already, wasn't a huge leap for them to set up universities. The rest, well, colleges and other training facilities were set up throughout the period for the purpose of training folks for useful tasks in the colonies, and gradually become more and more open to indigenous entry. Like shit, the first asian university was in 1611, with the rest being officially founded from disparate schools throughout the 19th and early 20th century. Folks had access and a lot of time to access it.

>>2489939
Do you have anything of more substance
really now, if you do not know the value of education, I suggest you obtain one.

>>2489929
So Africans were too primitive to take advantage of the boons of colonisation
>>2489943

File: 12986934_1663830857226452_7910073565375397333_n.jpg (103KB, 623x960px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 623x960px

>>2489902
>The entire strategy of China to compete vs the world is to fuck upitself to ahve low costs of everything and to have a massive peasant underclass that they can use to easily replace any labourer because they will work for pennies.

This is usually what happens to the most successful 3rd world countries. One of the largest reasons colonialism still fucks over the third world is that poor countries are taken advantage of by foreign capital, and anyone country that tries to stand up to corporate influence or build a protectionist economy gets invaded, sanctioned, or made an example of.

>>2489957
An uneducated population will not be able to use that which is provided for an educated population. If education is given, the problem disappears.

>>2489972
>gib education

>>2489984
What is the problem with such

>>2489957
Africans did take advantage of it. they had nothing to begin with.

Africans before British colonialism were "living in the Pleistocene Era" as Theodore Roosevelt puts it

Roosevelt goes on to say that British colonialism, in a few decades, has thrusted into technologies and knowledge into Africa, which otherwise would have taken a thousand years or more to acquire

>>2489986
Because white colonies didn't receive free education but manage to not devolve to 3rd world shitholes
>>2489989
I know but I'm comparing to other peoples post colonisation

>>2489989
This is true. What's being disputed here now is not colonisation itself, but how it was done and how it ended.

>>2489999
Rhodesia, as an example, did have public money going towards education. You can, of course, probably guess the distribution of this public funding between white and non-white school populations.

>>2489989
Not putting this against Roosevelt since he didn't know any better but do you know what the Pleistocene Era is?

>>2490015
Proof?

>>2489999
white colonies had well-off or educated folk from the homeland to bring in. Once the colony got big enough they using the skills of those people and copying the homelands education system set up schooling systems to service the needs of local settler or descendant of settlers.

File: image.jpg (99KB, 479x791px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 479x791px

>>2490023
>Roosevelt didn't know any better
It's called a figure of speech, and not being able to detect one is a sign of autism.

It's from the chapter, "A Railroad Through the Pleistocene" from his African Game Trails book

Roosevelt was a Harvard graduate and is considered America's most well read President, and an author of numerous scientific manuscripts...so I hope you don't actually think that you know better than him

>>2490032
Do you have JSTOR access?

>>2490048
I know that but he said there was nothing and I'm contesting that back then archeology and studied on African history and peoples wasn't really a thing but I'm saying that they did have things and they didn't have nothing.

>>2490059
To the european and american minds, it was about nothing. Mind you, they'd encountered peoples with more things and colonized them all the same, racial denigration and all,

>>2490059
It was a thing.

"Railroad through the Pleistocene" is an allusion to the failed Uganda Railroad.

It's a metaphor for a high technology society (British) and a low technology society (Ugandans) coming into contact

>>2486092
It didn't set Africans back at all. Your premise is flawed.

>>2490215
The gap widened and accelerated between Europe and Africa heavily over time during the colonial era due to intentional and unintentionally policies done by the colonial power.

Post colonial africa basically has to the things developed nation's did years and years back but with none if the advantages they had. Said advantages being the first ones, natural development at their own pace and mostly and not having to deal with a power with such a huge gap in tech dominately.

Hell look at Portugal hey were pretty behind other west Euro nations and had to play catchup in the post Salazar era to match the because of how fucked Portuguese policies were to its people's welfare such as Salazar disdain for literacy. To the point that when Salazar burnt money on the African colonies so much people went abroad because those were the places that got development money. The consequences of those policies still leave a mark.

>>2489501
Ethiopia. It's why the guy is the god of Rastas.

>>2486619
What books are there on 15th century African warfare? Finding anything on precolonial Africa is ungodly hard.

File: e e e.png (297KB, 576x566px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 576x566px

>>2486092
if the europeans didn't show up they would still be drinking the water from cow dung, well, they still are, but atleast now they have the possibility of building a well or improving their lives with western technology

>>2489791
>universities were built in africa for europeans before the europeans showed up

really gets my noggin joggin

>>2489791
Perhaps they didn't have enough diversity quota spots open in the universities like today so they couldn't qualify to enter the universities

>>2490880
Ironic that you'd post the porky meme, being how capitalist exploitation is the biggest factor holding Africa back nowadays.

>>2490908
yeah we should implement socialism in africa so that the last european families will leave as a few hundred thousand can't pay welfare for a billion criminals

>>2489520
Right, they never learned how to create a modern state, which is why it infuriates me when people somehow expect blacks to be able to function as a modern state, or even live in civilized countries without being the savages that they are. Disregarding genetics, people have no idea how much memetics is important in establishing the groundwork to live in modern society; these memes are something blacks (and many other peoples, like Muslims) do not possess.

>>2489897
>never actually conquered or colonized by western powers.
But they were fucked up with Opium and their Empire being forcibly fractured by Euros, and then they were bullied around by the Great Powers multiple times, and THEN they were in a heap of shit in the first half of the 20th century and got massacred by Japan.
And despite all that, China managed to regain some semblance of the power that they enjoyed before.

>>2489902
I'm not really concerned with the wellbeing of the Chinese underclass, that's a very Enlightenment philosophy. The fact of the matter is that China can produce enough and can powerful enough (even if they have 0 force projection) to be taken seriously on the world stage, unlike any place in Africa.

>>2489972
Why is it White People's obligation to educate Blacks? Why can't they figure it out themselves? I would think the idea of White Man's Burden is seen as outdated on this board.

>>2490917
It would still be a step up from not owning their own resources, or lacking the leeway to make their own economic decisions.

>>2490977
>It's a pretty great country if you ignore the fact that everyone is suffering.

Did I wander into some kind of Randian Ancap meme thread?

>>2491026
we should deport all so called refugees in europe then as they're a hinder from our own economic freedom

>>2486229

Some did, others not.

You could say that there were two kind of colonies under british rule(idk about German colonies), the ones based around sucking as much resources off from a region saw the least amount of development since all that was invested was for the infrastructure of the mines, they didn't care that much for the locals unless they started becoming an annoyance.

The second type was based around creating actual colonies for the british that wanted to leave the islands and saw the best development; universities, roads, industry...

So in the end, it just about on where you were born(like always).

A more interesting question, if the decolonization never happened(and instead happened the contrary it saw a revival) would we see liberal policies applied directly over Africa and a faster improvement when all the institutions are controled by educated europeans?

Or Africa would have been a burden for Europe and no advances would be made?

File: 1488944434313.png (1MB, 672x676px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 672x676px

>>2486103
Considering their living on tax payers' money and trash fancy houses on the reserves on the regular, I'd say so.

T. Canadian buttmad about rez injuns

>>2486303

> "deliberately to foster ethnic tension"

That would have implied that they knew about the different groups in Africa and their history and culture.

They did not, they just draw things on the map according to the mineral deposits found.

>>2486421
>so often a failure
>never failed once
>>2486103
>whites created institutions deliberately intended to weaken the countries
What countries? What institutions? And how do you know it was deliberate?

>>2489490
Read again.
>By pulling out of African countries so quickly, without making much effort to develop these countries (as opposed to British holdings in India or French holdings in North Africa).

>>2486103
good post

It's very similar to what's going on in the middle east. There are dozens of very diverse groups doing their own thing, then suddenly a bunch of brits draw on a map and you're living under the rule of some shifty guy you know nothing about.

Meanwhile you're just trying to do your own thing and people start showing up pushing you out of the land you've lived on for generations claiming they have the right to.

>>2491973
>you've lived on for generations claiming they have the right to.

In terms of colonization... migh makes right.

You can't argue with the guy with a well structured goverment and army, either if he turns out to be good or bad you suck it or fight and die.

>>2491952
Colonialism very often failed in its stated goal of bringing "civilization" to non-Europeans. It didn't fail in its ulterior motive, which is wealth creation and resource extraction for the colonizers.

>>2487314
>How so? What industry did Africa have?
Cottage industry, which is an important thing to have when a country is industrializing, otherwise you'll have a surplus of unskilled laborers who are too poor to ever better themselves. Simply taking away someones livelihood rather than slowly phasing it out gives them no time to prepare or build up a safety net against absolute poverty. The same thing is happening in quite a few Industrialized Western countries nowadays.

ITT: Salty Blacks trying to blame their eternal failings on Whites.

>>2491973
>There are dozens of very diverse groups doing their own thing
Are you kidding me? Do you think the Ottoman empire was ethically homogenious? Do you think the Assyrian empire was? The Persian Empire? The caliphates? None of them involved people "just doing they're thing." all of them involved violent conquest of other peoples.

>>2491997
exactly my point, this leads to retaliation whether through war or refusal to assimilate. You can't expect people to just accept the sudden change peacefully, give up their land, and work together.

Now I don't think it was deliberate, more that the colonizers were careless and more interested in the resources the Africans were living on.

File: 14225223412412.png (53KB, 256x256px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 256x256px

>>2492015
>/pol/ rags on and on about muh nation state, muh homogenous society, and how different races should keep to themselves.

>Except if they're niggers tho, lol. They can't govern themselves, we need to invade their countries and "civilize" them :^)

>>2492021
We're not talking about what happened while the colonizers were there, we're talking about what happened after they left. Things go a lot differently when there's 200 guys with spears in your village that will gut you if you try to revolt

>>2486092
Post-colonial technological and economic disparity between USA/Europe and sub-saharan Africa is probably the greater factor today than the social and institutional shock caused by colonisation. African states aren't allowed to employ the same degree of protectionism that western states used to build their own economies in the 19th and 20th century, which means domestic efforts are always crushed or exploited by foreign competition. Shit ain't gonna change in the foreseeable future either, it's difficult to develop necessary measures for weeding out corruption and incompetence since foreign investors have zero interest in that and you don't have any of the infrastructure or dependable institutions.

>>2492054
My point was, the idea the borders of European empires are any worse than they ever had in the middle east is a lie. Whats the differences Iraq's borders and a Babylonian empire? Between Turkys borders and ottoman borders? Between Syria's borders and an Assyrian kingdom?

>>2492034
>Now I don't think it was deliberate

Me neither, the maps are drawn around lands, resources and sometimes topography not the people inhabiting those lands, and why should they care? They were inferior under every sense, even if they managed to mount a sucessfull rebelion it would require a bit more effort to destroy it before it catches force.

Even though Afganistan happened, it was more the exception than the rule.

In fact, if Europe kept its cold and stayed united I really wonder what could locals really do before China and the URSS started pouring equipment there. Just see how a country like Italy took Abyssinia in 1935.

It would seem like the real problems of colonization didn't happen at all in Africa but rather in Europe.

>>2492057
this
the governments may have left, but the businesses stayed and the world lives off the back of exploited African resources. (See blood diamonds)

>>2492048
>Except if they're niggers tho, lol. They can't govern themselves, we need to invade their countries and "civilize" them :^)

Thats because its "ideology" is a mix of US and UK history and culture.

>>2492066
ok I think I'm missing your point. Are you implying that Iraq should be ok because it's borders are similar to Babylon?

>>2492012
That's useless if they can't go big from it and market access is limited as fuck. It's commonly seen a lot in places were there say hundreds of farmers working their small ass plot of land inefficiently rather then banding together to form a business entity to better poll resources and workforce.

It doesn't matter if you make the best African black soap in ghana if you can't scale up or make real business from it and have to resort on some foreign company to peddle your goods and they get most of cut you ate going nowhere.

>>2486619
>Sure white rule was terrible often times but it at least enabled most regions to participate in a global economy


Actually they didn't though. African colonies could only trade with the motherland and the prices they set and control for many resources not all. That's not even being part of the global economy in any way at all because those colonies had NO control over how they could trade.

>Infrastructure and some centralized authority for example.

Which was super superl itmed due to shoetring budget is in many places and for the centralist authority many places in Africa had those already but that's besides the point. The real point if that many colony authorities had very little reach over the land they are said to rule for very long periods. Portugal only JUST reached the inner non-coastal part influence wise to be able to exert it's will in a manner worth a shit and that'
s not shitting on Portugal. Just the reality of how milted the colony were in their own lands and the sheer frustration of the environ.

>The ethnic conlicts weren't imported by the colonizers,they were present for millenia.

Africa ethnic groups weren't timeless in any way that's big myth people still like to spread. Just like every other group African peoples have merged, split, deviated and changed over the years. ON top of that African conflicts are always painted in the west as soley an ethnic conflict thing despite the fact that many of them are not and the ethnic dimension is the easiest to see because some basic bitch journalist just discovered what x people are.

Also why call it tribalism it's ethnic conflict many of these "tribes" are in the millions and many, many are predominately city based. Just because stuff takes place in Africa doesn't mean words used to describe issues and conflicts in other parts of the world cease to function in Africa.

>>2486092
fuck off/

>>2492048
they can't govern themselves without widespread corruption, crime and poverty

colonization without replacing the native peoples with europeans was a mistake

>>2491026
>their

Uhm, White Africans are still Africans? Are you implying races OWN '''''their''''' '''''indigenous''''' resources, goy? We're all one big world, race is and tribalism is a spook constructed in a grand conspiracy by the capitalists!

>>2486092

I'd argue that it didn't set africans back, that it actually advanced them. They would never have reached even their current (crumbling) level if it wasn't for Europe trying to civilize them, and they would never keep even their current level if it wasn't for the western countries massive aid to Africa.

Let's just say what we are all thinking. It's all about average IQ.

Black populations have a low average IQ and can thus never become a complex modern society on par with white and asian ones.

File: 1409847529159.png (87KB, 869x483px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 869x483px

>>2492472
>African colonies could only trade with the motherland

As opposed to what, do you think they were engaging in far flung international trade, or trade beyond immediate barter trade in their local vicinity, before this?

Also: Daily reminder.

If you actually believe that you dont live in a colonial country

>>2490887
Could you elaborate?
>>2490892
There's no need for "diversity quota's" so long as primary and secondary school education can be given relatively equally, which was not the case.
>>2490980
Well, because whitey took em over. Generally, one expects something out of the government that sets your laws and your tax rate.

>>2492526
>they can't govern themselves without widespread corruption, crime and poverty

Neither could Europe or even America for most of their history (arguably still today).

>>2492867
source?

File: 1484960446680.png (377KB, 498x497px) Image search: [Google]

377KB, 498x497px

>>2486092
Africans were pretty much at their peak under colonial rule. Then they made a bunch of revolts, killed a bunch of french governors and went back to living in mud huts.

>>2492797
They were not, but during their colonial periods they were not given the opportunity.

As for the pic, african nations did not have cultural identities that would render them capable of assimilating disparate tribes under one cohesive national identity. Europe does. It's done quite well with that these past few centuries, and there's no reason right now to suppose that will stop being the case.

File: 488f500a2ff9db657100c19063cddb70.jpg (20KB, 355x532px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 355x532px

>>2492858
>Well, because whitey took em over.

So?

It is not some cosmic law of the universe that if you annex a place, or conquer it or something you need to engage in some sort of relationship of altruistic symbiosis with the people you've conquered. If you just put down revolts with absolute ferocity like the Chinese did (exterminating the Sogdonians to the last man, woman and child), there isn't going to be some black hole that opens up next to earth and swallows everything up because you've violated some sort of fundamental tenet of the laws of physics.

This reminds me of those arguments about mass immigration that go "well it's NATURAL for maghrebis to be taking over France because France colonized them" or whatever. It's bizarre. What is your frame of reference here? What universe are you living in? Why do you extrapolate your ethics to be the equivalent of the laws of motion?

We need to open up leftist throats and make their parents watch them bleed out onto their 47 job applications. We need to eat millennials. Eat them. Boil their bones and eat the marrow.

It is only with absolute and merciless ferocity that you destroy an ideology. It is only through destroying the faith of a people in their God, whether it's Allah or "Equality", that you put an end to the madness it inculcates in its true believers, be they Mudslimes or Libtards.

>>2492932
>but during their colonial periods they were not given the opportunity.

Yes, you're QUITE FUCKING RIGHT there Mr. Libtard, it's almost certain that after several millenia of relative indolence and inactivity they would suddenly have single-handedly created large export industries in the space of about 150 or so years.

Startling alt-history insight from Mr. Libtard.

>>2492789
No they are psychotic savages, sure they are retarded but even white retards are not as violent as the average nigger, there is something in their brains that programs these african apes to be inhumanely sadistic towards any living thing. Most of the tribal nigger culture are basically complicated forms of animal or human sadism showing these creatures cannot function without violence or torture, that is why they have lagged behind the rest of us because blacks are selfish completely evil psychotic apes who would rather torture and destroy eachother then work together to help themselves.

>>2492935
>It is not some cosmic law of the universe that if you annex a place, or conquer it or something you need to engage in some sort of relationship of altruistic symbiosis with the people you've conquered.
No, but it's a value we generally expect these days, insofar as we're a lot hotter on the whole consent of the governed and government as representative of concepts like the general will these days than in years previous. If your argument is simply "these are not MY values", then this conversation can't really progress, can it?

And really now, "need"? Why exactly do we need to do such things to leftists and millenials? What's the reason for "destroying an ideology"? It's not something I think I need. Who is "we"?

>>2492945
No has said that they were expecting them to, simply that they were not given the opportunity during the colonial period.
I suppose in casual conversation I'm supposed to point this out as a "strawman", yes?

>>2492874
American society, politics, and culture.

>>2492972
>but it's a value we generally expect these days

Who the fuck is WE?

Who is WE?

Certainly not Muslims, certainly not the bulk of Hindoos, who elected an explicit Hindoo Nationalist, certainly not the overwhelmingly majority of East Asians be they Chinese, Japanese, Koreans et al.

> insofar as we're a lot hotter on the whole consent of the governed and government as representative of concepts like the general will

So you believe in Rousseau eh?

Remember that time Rousseau defined what the general will was, and how it was basically what the public wanted, but it differed to things that Rousseau didn't like that the public also wanted, because those weren't a part of the general will?

It's almost like enlightenment philosophy is complete bloviating bullshit or something...

>"these are not MY values"

My argument is that they are not the values of the vast majority of people on earth (in which case they're bunk as purportedly universal values about interracial interaction require reciprocity as a foundation) and increasingly, they're not the values of the majority of westerners either.

Liberalism was never going to last forever my good Mr. Libtard, it's high time you hubris-inured clowns realized that all paradigms shift, including the ones that include tranny rights.

>>2492980
>they were not given the opportunity during the colonial period.

The very fact you're making mention of phrases like "not given the opportunity to" implies there was some other invariable and positive outcome that European colonialism impeded.

>>2493039
>Who the fuck is WE?
Well, given that you're speaking to me in english, I suppose "we" refers to us of the anglo world and our general values.
As for east asians not believing that government ought to have some responsibility to them, last I checked most of these countries have some forms of social security and publicly funded education and written constitutions that codify their governments responsibilities.
>So you believe in Rousseau eh?
I gave it as one example of a popular enlightenment idea. Say what you will about the enlightenment bruv, but its values seem to have won the day to a greater degree than yours or even mine.

>My argument is that they are not the values of the vast majority of people on earth (in which case they're bunk as purportedly universal values about interracial interaction require reciprocity as a foundation) and increasingly, they're not the values of the majority of westerners either.
And neither are yours, but that doesn't stop either of us from thinking that our values are probably preferable to ourselves. And given your use of imperative language, I'm sure we're both of the opinion that folks would be better off with our respective values, and not each others values.

>The very fact you're making mention of phrases like "not given the opportunity to" implies there was some other invariable and positive outcome that European colonialism impeded.
As I have said earlier, the big point of discussion now is not colonisation itself, merely how it was done and how it ended.

>>2493085
>I suppose "we" refers to us of the anglo world and our general values.

Well firstly. You don't believe in race, so drop the whole "anglosphere" shit. If race is meaningless then the Anglosphere shouldn't have a shared culture as race is arbitrary etc etc.

Secondly,

>As for east asians not believing that government ought to have some responsibility to them

That's not what I said. All people who belong to a tribe believe its tribal elites owe them protection and care. That doesn't mean this extends to how they treat conquered peoples however.

>but its values seem to have won the day to a greater degree than yours or even mine.

Typical hubris. Even now you think you've ended history. Let me guess, you think Japan's sham of a liberal democracy is a real liberal democracy too, right? Take a look at how the world is changing around you. A Europe so inept and impotent it cannot prevent the passage of millions upon millions of random, uneducated vagrant alien males settling wherever they wish. The prophecy of The Camp of the Saints made reality. An America completely at war with itself, resembling more and more a multiracial empire composed of competing tribes every day, with cities that are third-world in terms of their criminality. A situation that everyone accepts, mind you.

>As I have said earlier, the big point of discussion now is not colonisation itself, merely how it was done and how it ended.

Nice backtracking. The original anon's point was correct. Colonial polities could trade further and wider and with larger markets than they were able to before. End of discussion on this point.

>>2493039
>Certainly not Muslims, certainly not the bulk of Hindoos, who elected an explicit Hindoo Nationalist,
For the first time in a long time. Wew. Keep us out of your dumb debates you edgelord.

And that's more because of the anti-muslim sentiment worldwide.

>>2493110
>That doesn't mean this extends to how they treat conquered peoples however.
So most of the Balkans should just let go how the ottomans treated them for most of their history?

>>2493110
Insofar as "anglosphere" refers to users of a cultural and linguistic group, as opposed to an ethnic or racial one, I fail to see what point you're making. Are us brown people incapable of aussie shitposting?

>That's not what I said. All people who belong to a tribe believe its tribal elites owe them protection and care. That doesn't mean this extends to how they treat conquered peoples however.
If it was a matter of "tribal elites owing protection", as you say, you could have simply said so in your post. Otherwise, I must infer from what is given. Now, insofar as ethnic and migrant communities with valid residency or citizenship are entitled to similar benefits in these asian countries, it does not seem to be the case that only the "tribe" gets "tribal protection".

> Let me guess, you think Japan's sham of a liberal democracy is a real liberal democracy too, right?
I think it is preferable to having a hybrid azn-prussian model of monarchy, though I assume you disagree.

>accusations of hubris followed by aggrandising speechwriting
the irony is palpable.

Backtracking? I said it ITT like posts ago. Granted, I shouldn't expect anons dropping in to know the entirety of the contents posted, and that's my fault, sorry bruv.
Anyways, it is true, insofar as a colonial master is a greater market than oneself. But it's not as good as, y'know, getting to trade with the world, and preparing colonies for such would have been swell for the matter of decolonisation.

>>2492124
My point is, blaming Europeans for the current malaise in MENA because of imperfect borders isn't a fair argument. Or even valid from a historical standpoint.

>>2493148
Modi is a Hindoo Nationalist. Explicitly.

>>2493153
Actually yeah, I'm from the Balkans and while I'd not say it's something that should be "let go", the attempts to collectively emotionally blackmail the Turks from say, the Armenians, are ridiculous.

>>2493172
>Insofar as "anglosphere" refers to users of a cultural and linguistic group

Good point. Mo Farah is just as English as Nelson after all, amirite?

>Now, insofar as ethnic and migrant communities with valid residency or citizenship are entitled to similar benefits in these asian countries, it does not seem to be the case that only the "tribe" gets "tribal protection".

These are people who voluntarily came to said Asian countries - we're talking about whether there's some universal code of ethics, accepted by everyone and equivalent to some law of newtonian motion that states you owe a conquered people altruism.

You also made a bad play here as visa and temp residency status in East Asia is nowhere near as straight a shot at citizenship or even PR as it is in the West, and you have vastly less rights than migrant equivalents in the West do. Good attempt though.

>I think it is preferable to having a hybrid azn-prussian model of monarchy, though I assume you disagree.

It's actually distinctively more Asian than you realize. You're falling for the form of a thing rather than what lies behind it. Which makes sense as you're dumb enough to believe "philosophers" like Rousseau were actually profound, but I'd advise you to do some reading on who really pulls the strings in Japan.

De facto one party states are going to be the model moving forward (see: Singapore, Turkey, Japan, Russia etc). Liberalism is dying because it cannot give meaningful answers to people anymore, it just regurgitates itself.

>>2492797
>As opposed to what, do you think they were engaging in far flung international trade, or trade beyond immediate barter trade in their local vicinity, before this?

Yeah many African groups did engage in trade with very far away entities outside the contient. Somali's giving giraffes to Chinese s one minor example, Swahili trade with Indians, The kingdom of Zimbabwe with China, West Africa with the Middle East and North Africa. discovered old trade routes that extend pretty far within the continent. South Africa kingdoms trading minerals.

With colonialism the ability of the people to decide who they can trade to was cut. due to colony borders. I can't trade with an Englishman even if he gives better prices because I am native in a French colony and that type of trade is ILLEGAL or better yet even though I have really good trading partners in the other colony I can't because they are of a different colony ruler trading from Germany-English colonies is prohibited.

>>2493110
>Let me guess, you think Japan's sham of a liberal democracy is a real liberal democracy too, right?

IT is though boy. It's just that the other parties can't win worth a shit barring one time and vs other parts of the world opposing parties are much more willing to cooperate with their coalitions and opponents.

If Republicans win 6 presidencies in a row that's not Liberal democracy being a sham, that's just Democrats losing 6 times in a row.

>>2493282
>Somali's giving giraffes to Chinese s one minor example

Holy shit don't tell me you're citing an example of Somalians giving Zheng He's fleet a giraffe an example of "trade".

That's a gift economy. Not the same thing.

>kingdom of Zimbabwe with China

Bullshit.

Nice try nigger.

>>2493305
It's not so much the LDP's electoral dominance, although the fact a party that is basically National Socialist has nominally been in power for virtually all of the postwar period is important.

It's about the bureaucracy. That's where the real power resides in any East Asian society. The bureaucrats and the corporate elites are the same people. And they put the national interest before everything, unlike in America.

>>2493309
The did engage in trade with the Chinese but the giraffe was an example. I could have used Somali's trading with Arabs or Indians.

Also for Zimbabwe

Archaeological evidence suggests that Great Zimbabwe became a centre for trading, with artefacts suggesting that the city formed part of a trade network linked to Kilwa[30] and extending as far as China. Copper coins found at Kilwa Kisiwani appear to be of the same pure ore found on the Swahili coast.[This international trade was mainly in gold and ivory; some estimates indicate that more than 20 million ounces of gold were extracted from the ground. That international commerce was in addition to the local agricultural trade, in which cattle were especially important.The large cattle herd that supplied the city moved seasonally and was managed by the court.Chinese pottery shards, coins from Arabia, glass beads and other non-local items have been excavated at Zimbabwe. Despite these strong international trade links, there is no evidence to suggest exchange of architectural concepts between Great Zimbabwe and centres such as Kilwa.

>>2493384
>Chinese pottery shards, coins from Arabia, glass beads and other non-local items

You know this isn't enough to demonstrate evidence of a trading relationship right?

Archaeologically you need to demonstrate such things in sufficient quantity, find reciprocal goods at the destination and ideally have primary sources to back it up mentioning these goods and routes.

>>2493197
>Modi is a Hindoo Nationalist. Explicitly.
He is, but you're missing the context. People didn't vote for him enmasse out of a vacuum. A lot of people before would vote for somebody who would put the nation (regardless of ethnicity) first before anything else.

Your points were right about japan, china and korea but Hindu nationalists having a lot of power nowadays is more from how shitty Muslim's are, then some inner tribal thing.

Not saying tribalism doesn't have an effect. But it's not the main reason.

>>2489094
>book says greater resources lead to better culture, smarter people, higher standards, skin color etc.
>book unintentionally says whites are best because of the environment they lived in
>somehow anti-white
Are you retarded or something?

>>2493449
Are you an actual Indian from India? I have no problem with you guys and I like Modi. My point is that the world is moving to the "right", not necessarily economically, but socially and culturally and in terms of ethnic identification.

And of course, tribalism is why Hindoos are tired of Muslims in the first place, since Islam is, like Christianity, an alien and hostile religion to the Indian subcontinent.

>>2493500
>Are you an actual Indian from India?
Yeah.

>My point is that the world is moving to the "right", not necessarily economically, but socially and culturally and in terms of ethnic identification.
Isn't that more due to the refugee influx which has caused turbulence in world wide politics? In a few decades when time has passed we might be as 'liberal' as we were before. It's obvious that people go liberal when times are easy but fall back into conservatism when the life gets harder. You could say it's more natural to be conservative but with human advancements I see the world being much more liberal in the following centuries (if there isn't a world disaster from global warming or anything).

>And of course, tribalism is why Hindoos are tired of Muslims in the first place, since Islam is, like Christianity, an alien and hostile religion to the Indian subcontinent.
It's half half. Christians are treated fine here to the point where you don't even notice them unless you go out of your way (despite them being our third largest religion). I even know few in real life. There was a riot back in 2008 but that's more due to politics and some monk getting assassinated.

But that's mainly because Christians don't bomb train stations or buses when they don't get their way. We "gave an olive branch" a lot of times only to get burned back so people are just tired.

There's also other things like Benglas are like our Mexicans and Muslim birthrates are the highest despite being the lowest educated people and they tend to have backward views so people are worried about where the country is heading to.

>>2493669
>We "gave an olive branch" a lot of times only to get burned back so people are just tired.

Then you understand how our people feel too. We've been in near perpetual war with these savages for over a thousand years.

I'm Greek too, so I know how deep the wounds must go for Indians as well.

>>2486092
Because of the French Revolution
Europeans hated monarchs after that, so when they arrived to Africa and saw an entire continent full of kingz, guess what happened....

>>2493402
The point is that they engaged in trade with other entities within Africa and they got those things outside the continent from and that Africa did engage in trade with outside entities either directly or indirectly just like other places in the world did.

>>2493669
>they tend to have backward views

Like most of India lol.

>>2486416
Good post actually

>>2493719
Things are changing. Even at our worst we never forced women to cover their hair or face among other things.

>>2493471
The book never says whites are more intelligent.
It does however attribute the success of whites to luck, essentially. Which is offensive, and worse ignorant.

Jared Diamond is a jew who loves the savages of PNG, he can not bring himself to appreciate the undeniable superioty of the European people and instead has made a career insulting them.

We're WEIRD too him. Give me a fucking break.

>>2494619
How's it offensive? "Everyone's equal, but white people settled in a better place" doesn't sound offensive to me.

>>2494785

Its offensive because Im a white supremacist and wont except any conclusion other than white people being genetically superior to blacks

>>2495072
Ah, sorry for triggering you.

Reason French attacked Africa , was simply because of slavery and oppression that was being pushed by Muslims, specially against white people. and this is coming from someone that is not completely white , its history.

>>2494785
It's the toothless village idiot telling sir isaac newton that his accomplishments are not due to his hard work and innate genius but because he got lucky. In that is the implication thay the idiot would have become newton or something like him were they transposed at birth - we know this not to be true.

If you don't see why it is offensive to tell the newtons of this world that they're the same as the idiots then perhaps you take your place with the latter.

Human equality does not stand up to scrutiny, it would be astronomically bizarre for humans all to be of the same basal intelligence and capability. The most one can reasonably say is that the differences are subtle. On top of this the way diamond ranks enviroments is ridiculous.

>>2495072
I would though, if those conclusions were arrived at objectivley and well substantiated. They never are though. Diamond exposes his entirely predictable bias when he fetishises the savages of png.

>>2486103
muh shiny beads

>>2486092
In my opinion, the two major factors were that Africa wasn't a major industrial hub (I think colonials tended to exploit local resources and export them back to their industrial centers in the motherland) and so didn't have much of an infrastructure to work with once they were released from Imperial rule, and that Africans weren't educated well enough by the empires in general. Educating more people on how to produce and operate advanced machinery would probably have gone a long way in assisting Africa in catching up with the rest of the world faster than they are today.