Your Synthetic Superior wrote...
Inarai wrote...
Your Synthetic Superior wrote...
The problem with Africa is africans. African countries ran just fine under non-african rule. As much as people like to cry racism they had it much better. Left to their own devices they are still living in mud huts while on the other side of the world there are people landing ships on the moon. You can't just hand people a technology and a way of living that they haven't progressed to and expect things to run smoothly. They've had thousands of years to get their act together. I don't think 200 years is going to make a difference at this point. It is not hatred, it's simply commenting on the reality of the situation. Objective reality does not bend because the truth might hurt somebody's feelings.
I see some issues with your thinking:
1: You fail to account for differences in resources. The US, for example, is fairly well off for resources and WW2 was actually a significant boost for their economy.
2: You assume history is some sort of route to a destination, which is utterly moronic.
3: The issues Africa has are mostly a direct result of colonial action, and they've had a VERY short time to deal with the consequences - few decades. Learn some history, you might get something right.
As is, what you end up with is a little bit racist and utterly misinformed, for a nice big package of stupid.
1. When Europeans ran South Africa they had plentiful resources. Why is it when Africans take over and things go to hell that the resources suddenly disappear? Africa has PLENTIFUL resources.
2. Insults aren't going to prove your point.
3. Coddling a people, making excuses for them and blaming all their problems on evil foreigners doesn't stripe them of responsibility for their situation.
Yes, telling the truth is "racist". You have no real points so you sink to name calling and ad hominems. Typical.
But maybe there is something I'm missing. Perhaps you can help me out. Name one country run by sub-Saharan Africans that isn't a complete mess. Just one.
1: When I say resources, I mean money and major commodities of trade - oil being the key example. Since we're talkiing about having enough surplus cash to run a space program, we need to think in terms of major resources. You have some significant resources, but the level of external exploitation is disgusting,
2: No, and I don't need them to. What I said is a valid point. I may have tacked on a description of the nature of the act described therein, but the substance of the argument remains unchanged. How's about actually responding to it, instead of falsely claiming it's an ad hominem?
3: Strip them of responsibility? No. But they also aren't exclsuively responsible, and it 100% diproves your statement about having 1000's of years. We can't know, but it's entirely possible that Africa could have been fine if they had truly been left to their own devices - which is the situation that your statements imply.
Habelo: Societal development and geography are intrinsically tied. Africa is a much more open landscape, and allows for a lot more population growth before groups are forced to come together, which in turn causes organization, and in areas of Europe, the Middle East, and other regions of Asia this resulted in the development of, eventually resulting in the use of agriculture, sedentarism, and urbanization - which is essential to civilization the way we think about it.
The question becaomes: Is that a path Africa was on before coloial influence? If not, was humanity in Africa on a different path more suited to their environment? It does seem clear that the climate of much of africa makes such things highly difficult, fortunately, we now have a standardized system of converting other quanitities to food and similar. So, if various tensions could be put aside, you might expect to see some significant improvements in their situation. But unfortunately, it's not that simple. When the colonial powers held Africa, they drew boundaries that were more about resources then people. The result is that groups which should have been alowed to remain seperate are simply jammed together - resulting in things like the Rwandan and Darfurian genocides.
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
