Whatever the problems are, it’s the fault of the white men. Right folks? We can’t even assert that some of the problems in Africa might lie with the Africans themselves. Man…
Thank you for the heartiest laugh I’ve had this week.
The point is that the “100% partnership” was not, actually, any such thing. That Africans participated in the trade is a historical fact. However, the claim that it was a “100% partnership” implies that a bunch of Africans got together with some Europeans and Arabs and created a slave cartel. The reality is that those Africans who joined in the slave trade were taking advantage of a new situation that they had never encountered. I do not exonerate the Africans who participated. However, the fact that Africans participated does not change the fact that chattel slavery was created outside Africa and imposed on Africa (and pretty much nowhere else). Without the European/American and Arab markets, there would have been no chattel slavery to deplete the African populations. Given that Asian, European, or American peoples were never imported to Africa as slaves, we have a situation of outside forces creating an imbalance on that continent.
You may wish to avoid the word “oppression” in that context. However, you will need to provide a rational explanation as to why you avoid that word if you wish to persuade me that you understand the situation. Various North American indian nations allied themselves with the white invaders between the seventeenth and nineteenth centuries. Does that mean that whites did not oppress the indians? There were Jews who joined the Judischer Ordnungsdienst (or Jüdische Ghetto-Polizei) in various places occupied by the Germans during WWII. Does this mean that the Jews were not oppressed by the Nazis?
You can cite historical reasons as much as you want. At some point, people have to start taking responsibility for themselves. Africans as a whole have not done this. That’s why their continent is such a mess.
Now why would you make this silly attempt at sarcasm? I seem to recall references to Mugabe in Zimbabwe, the African choice of Socialism in several instances, and a couple of other points. Why don’t you wait until it appears that anyone is actually claiming that only the white devils are to blame, before getting upset that there are not enough posters bashing the Africans?
Do you have an actual citation for specific causes and effects? Or do you simply believe that events occur outside history?
First of all, of course “half a millenium” is an exageration. Most regions of Africa were only colonies for at most 100 years, many for even shorter times, and Ethiopia was never colonized.
The other point about the artificiality of African borders is interesting, but we can remember that European borders were also completely artificial at one time. Various kings and emperors conquered various provinces with various vernaculars and cultures. Eventually political unification created cultural unification. This is why the language “French” is really the language of Paris. The rulers of the Parisian area conquered the rest of France, and so the dialect of Paris became the official language of the country. Although some people in France still have another vernacular as their first language, most grow up speaking “French” as their first language. The same thing happened in Britain…almost all people in Scotland speak English, only a few speak Gaelic. 200 years ago the reverse was true.
The point is that national identity is an artificial construct. In Africa it has not yet taken hold, and most Africans consider themselves members of their family, clan or tribe before they consider themselves citizens of the country they happen to live in. If African countries survive they will eventually command the loyalty of their citizens. Or perhaps the concept of the Nation State will be obsolete before that happens.
And I am always puzzled by those people who claim that Africa has had enough time to sort out their affairs (after 40 years) when it only took most of Europe several hundred. Even today, the states of the former Yugoslavia (not to mention the Czech Republic and Slovakia, Belarus, Ukraine, Georgia, and a few others) demonstrate that such efforts are hardly resolved.
Having recently spent some time in Zimbabwe and Botswana, my thoughts continue to go back to the horrific famine in Zimbabwe, even though there is farm land and apparently at one time, Zimbabwe was the bread basket of sub-Saharan Africa.
One person while I was there, spoke against Mugabe and it was just to me, in a very low voice, while we were alone in a range rover as I was headed to the hotel I was staying at. He told me how his sister was working for the opposition but that he didn’t really believe he would see fair elections in his lifetime. He is in his mid thirties.
I don’t think there is one answer as to why Africa is having problems shrugging the yoke of colonialism, I believe the reasons are many and that they are regional.
The disparity of interests of each country is as good a starting point as any. The racism, which does exist no matter what people tell themselves or want the world to believe. The violence and corruption which is rampant throught many countries. Also, the vast gulf between wealthy nations and poor nations all contribute to the continuing problems in the area.
Education is minimal and not really feasable when you need money on the table to feed the family.
The one thing however, that I saw again and again was how small villages really lived and worked as a single unit. I believe that this stucture lends itself quite well to a kind of loose socialism, all succeed or fail together. Is it possible that it is just too big a leap from colonialism to villagism for the model to really work successfully?
Perhaps its the immensely LOW iq of most africans?
Many nations having an avg iq of Below 70 which is considere d mentally retarded in the USA.
Here is a list of Country Avg for low scoring nations.
…
Zambia 77
Congo 73
Uganda 73
Sudan 72
Jamaica 72
Kenya 72
Tanzania 72
Ghana 71
Nigeria 67
Zimbabwe 66
Guinea 66
Congo 65
Sierra Leone 64
Ethiopia 63
Equatorial Guinea 59
So, mesmartyoudumb, which racist anti-scientist provided your list of contrived numbers?
(You will note (or would have noted, had you actually a clue regarding the subject) that several of the countries included in your list have not been unsuccessful by most standards–certainly Ghana, Tanzania, and Kenya have been as “successful” as several Asian countries (where, if you go back to your silly source, you will find that those people are supposed to have very high IQs).
*Originally posted by mesmartyoudumb *
Uh, you’re kidding, right? It might help if you provide a cite for this numbers listed above, because I’m not buying it.
If the numbers are accurate (and I sincerely doubt that they are), they are more than likely the result of several factors: 1) poor nutrition; 2) poor pre-natal/post-natal care; 3) lack of educational opportunities to name just a few. Much of these stem from the poor economic conditions found in the region.
To suggest that most countries of Sub-Saharan Africa are poor because the people are stupid is, well, laughable at best and extremely offensive at worst.
I think that’s what I said. 
I’d like to flame Mesmartyoudumb, but it just doesn’t even seem worth it. He’s (she’s?) either a flat-out Troll, or is a racist. Either one will not be “converted” here.
I really don’t want to get blasted. And I think the reasons that eponymous stated account for a lot of this. But here is a link that posts some of these numbers.
Ahh, Richard Lynn. The J. Philippe Rushton of Northern Ireland. Do we have any evidence from a reputable scholar on the issue?
Do a google search, africans are stupider than the rest of the world. I’m not a troll or a racist, i’m a texan,so lets have it.
They didn’t even have to go to jupiter…to get more…stupider…lol.
ANYWAYS,when i get home from work I will post an article i read called “Racism as an evolutionary tool of survival”.
If youre not a close minded sheep you will find the article interesting. The mark of an educated man is to be able to entertain an idea they do not beleive.
oops…that racism as a tool of survival… is for the racism thread. 
*Originally posted by mesmartyoudumb *
OK - I’ll bite. Help me out here - provide a good definition for “stupid.”
I’ll assume you think that one’s IQ score is a good indicator of one’s innate intelligence. Therefore, what pray tell can we infer from the link provided by Creative_Munster? All we get are correlations between IQ score and GDP/capita. I’ll guess that the author is trying to demonstrate a causal link between intelligence and wealth. That is, low IQ’s (lots of stupid people) is a causal explanation for why they’re poor.
But correlation and causation are two very different things. I can conduct a study showing a strong correlation between income and IQ scores for people living in the 50 states. Would it make you feel better if I were to state that people from Texas are the stupidest people in the USA simply because their low average incomes and low IQs correlate well?
Heck, you COULD do that. By most accounts, average incomes are lowest in the Southern states in the US. I’d just bet my bottom dollar that if you were to conduct IQ tests in all 50 states that the lowest IQs would be found in the south. Therefore, by your logic, the reason the southern states are poor is because there are a lot of stupid people that live there. Since Texas has the largest population of the southern states, then it’s probably safe to assume tha they have the largest percentage of stupid people in the south. And it’s also fair to assume (again using your logic), since YOU live in Texas, then there’s a strong likelihood that you’re poor and stupid as well.
Boy, this is fun! One can make all kinds of neat inferences if one is willing to forego critical thinking :rolleyes:
Originally posted by mesmartyoudumb
Perhaps its the immensely LOW iq of most africans?
Many nations having an avg iq of Below 70 which is considere d mentally retarded in the USA.
Ya got to give the guy credit for balls a brass…Unless his dismal typing skills are contrived as parody…Otherwise he’d do well to list the Dallas average.
I don’t believe all of Africa’s woes remain forever mired because of its white colonial past…but I do believe the vast mineral resources of the continent offer enough of a prize for a few American and European conglomerants to subvert the already shakey systems in current power. Payin off the heads of a few corrupt regimes makes better fiscal sense than dealing with the expense of leaders who put the well being of their people ahead of any personal greed and aggrandizement. Which is kind of the American way to begin with.
I think all of the aforementioned reasons are symptomatic of the much larger cause of isolationism. The geography of Africa kept it apart from the rest of the developing world. What we see as “Western Progress” is a culmination of the interactions of the numerous societies on the Europe and Asian continent. Look at how the American Indians developed in isolation from the rest of the world. They were smart, innovative and in control of their environment but the Europeans were almost like gods to them.