Do Afro-Americans care for Africa? - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the nations of Africa.

Moderator: PoFo Africa Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum, so please post in English only.
#14674676
There are many Africans in other countries. In Brazil, USA, and in Europe.
They are much wealthier than those who stayed in Africa.

In Africa however there were horrible periods of famine, genocides, civil wars, and just extreme poverty, deseases and illiterates..

Basically till the Chinese have came, the only aid given was by .. whites. (white governments - not Brazil!), or white volounteers. Yeah, who goes to volunteer in Africa? White spoiled good hearted people.

My question is- don't blacks in rich countries feel they have to do more to their own ancestors? Or do they not feel anything special to Africa? I mean.. for how long can you blame the colonialism, when you don't really do something to your own group?

Just wondering.
#14674701
In the case of the United States, the specific identity of Africans was specifically removed.

Someone of European descent will be Irish, German, Polish, Russian, Italian, etc...

Someone of Asian descent will be Korean, Chinese, Nepalese, etc...

Most people of African descent will be...African.

That was by design. At this point it's only a vague continent-wide identity that is hard to square with Africans in Africa who inherited a lot of other forms of identity.

For this reason, Ethiopia, the only African country that resisted colonization, has a large appeal so far as the identity of many African-Americans, even though most probably didn't come from the area.

But it's difficult to get worked up about every single thing in Africa that other Africans may be doing because the point to contextualize it is gone. It's not like sitting there with my family scowling at the TV when the Orangemen went marching through a nationalist neighborhood while the people that lived there had the muzzles of British rifles pointed at their faces while they were ritualistically conquered again each year. That was an identity I grew up with and could identify with as far away as America.

My black friends don't like anything happening in Africa, but they are thoroughly American when asked to decide with the Hutu or the Tutsi or some other group. There is no frame of reference.
#14674705
Okay. So lack of connection to a specific country is one aspect. And.. the African countries are colonical creation .. so its hard to feel something, unless you have some memory of a specific sub-nation there.
So you tell me that you are as indifferent to a famine or malaria apademic in wide regions of Africa, as an Irish is.
#14674708
So you tell me that you are as indifferent to a famine or malaria apademic in wide regions of Africa, as an Irish is.


I like to think I'm not indifferent, but Europe—especially Western Europe—and the US are related enough that our sympathy for Africa is probably about the same.
#14674790
I think there could be a large possibility that some African Americans did come from the Nile area including Ethiopia and Sudan.
Not by colonial powers but by the Ottoman empire.
The Ottoman empire did trade with slaves for long periods of time.
And Arabs lords used to trade with slaves captured from Africa in those areas also for long periods of time. I believe only ending in the 1800s if i recall what i read currectly.
Even when you hear stories about just the begining of the 1900s. One of the people i met in Jordan was from Kelani family who are very wealthy Syrian clan. They own the Kelani petrol stations and have large stakes in the oil market in Syria and he told many times that up until his great grandfather (grandfather's father) they owned a large number of slaves and used to trade with them for a good number of generations before that (i.e 1700-1800s) and many of those were coming from Africa.
So history of slave trading in the Arab world is considerably recent and many of who they enslaved came from Ethipia and such areas. So they could have ended up in Europe and America.
Even in Turkey as some recent reports show that Africans in Turkey did come first as slaves.
#14674791
And Africa had some of the wealthiest nations in history only up until it was torn by wars in the late centuries.
And it is still the same continenet stuffed with resources.
If criminals didnt butcher and enslave its people it would make us all ashamed and feel small today.
So show some respect and dont joke about crimes.
#14674840
scamp wrote:The American Blacks could care less about Africa today. They are just glad that their ancestors got the hell out of Africa.

Thanks to slavery.

You're right but still.. America did help Europe during WW1/2. It wasn't just out of generosity, but still...

Besides, there are many blacks who immigrates today. They do send money to their families. But beside that they don't move a finger.

The blacks do see themselves as Americans, but there is some tention between them and the whites, and a feeling of explotation and victimhood. And I think they do have some pride of Africa.

But when it comes to actions, even demonstrations or some organization- none. There are enough black doctors, why do whites lead the doctors volunteering to Africa? ..

Okay, be Americans now, but you still blame the whites of destroying Africa, and you do have lots of respect to black heritage etc.. So isn't the situation in Africa should be closer to your heart?

I am saying that cause this is very different when you look at other groups, who do care of their own origins homeland- Chinese, Jews, and even Europeans to some extent. Even though they are happy to leave their shithole and live in America, enough of them would be active and caring. Chinese do act and care of the situation in China. And China is also a multyethnic and wide as the region of sub-sahara is, where the vast majority of blacks have came from..
#14674869
And Africa had some of the wealthiest nations in history only up until it was torn by wars in the late centuries.


Not really in relative terms. There were some that were much more advanced than we gave credit for (until recently) but still ...
#14674898
True. It lagged behind due to wars.
Yet it had and still has great potentials and even now its still building up.
However its can not be said that the crimes done against Africans are acceptable. Nor anyone has the right to make jokes about the worst crimes in human history.
What happened in Congo alone is more horrific than the holocaust.
And there are plenty more as such.
#14674903
True. It lagged behind due to wars.


I doubt wars are much of a reason. Europe was probably the most war like of all regions and we created the modern world.

Yet it had and still has great potentials and even now its still building up.


Yes its getting better but not as fast as most places. The fact it has resources that are more useful in the modern world may not actually be a plus. There is debate on the "resource curse".

What happened in Congo alone is more horrific than the holocaust.
And there are plenty more as such.


I disagree. What makes the holocaust so awful was that it was designed/intended to wipe a people out. Congo was about resource extraction and not murder as such. This is why it is less of a "crime" or evil or whatever your choice of word.
#14674905
Europe had many wars however no foreign power managed to come in and annex it for centuries.

Africa is on the other hand have been invaded and annexed by many.

resources might be a curse sometimes but the people of Afruca can make difference. If they stood up with riots and demanded rights.
Those who want resources will have to give them what they want as instability disrupts the flow of resources.

The holocaust was ment to wipe out European jews and gypsies.
The invasions of Africa by first the Arabs and then Europeans was meant to de-humanize an entire race.
When the holocaust was done.people stood up with the jews and sympathiesed with them.
For Africans, for many people it became quite ok for them to die and suffer as if they were less than animals.
When you directly attempt to genocide a race is less dangerous and damaging than to de-humanize one.
The first mostly cant be done.the second results in far more deaths and suffering over prolonged period of time.
#14674911
If they stood up with riots and demanded rights.


No, no, no. Neither riots or rights are what is needed in Africa. Guess what the average working day for a teacher in Uganda is? 2 hours …

What is needed is education and a massive improvement in inter-social relations and the balance of power within.

Those who want resources will have to give them what they want as instability disrupts the flow of resources.


Having resources discourages investment. Compare Saudi to south Korea.

The holocaust was ment to wipe out European jews and gypsies.


Correct.

The invasions of Africa by first the Arabs and then Europeans was meant to de-humanize an entire race.


Nope, that wasn’t the intention at all. It was to make money and ‘save their souls’ to a lesser extend. There was a genuine cilizing mission, especially from the French and british.

When the holocaust was done.people stood up with the jews and sympathiesed with them.


correct

For Africans, for many people it became quite ok for them to die and suffer as if they were less than animals.


Not really. Both Sympathy and charity to africa is pretty big. From the west anyway.

When you directly attempt to genocide a race is less dangerous and damaging than to de-humanize one.
The first mostly cant be done.the second results in far more deaths and suffering over prolonged period of time.


I get what you are saying. A short sharp shock like the hollacaust could be recovered from because those it didn’t kill it made stronger. Africa was brutalized over multiple generations, thus sapping its energy as a collective.
#14674920
Layman wrote:I get what you are saying. A short sharp shock like the hollacaust could be recovered from because those it didn’t kill it made stronger. Africa was brutalized over multiple generations, thus sapping its energy as a collective.

The recover from the holocaust is due to a very good education and organization of Jews.
Jews suffered brutal persecution and discrimination for centuaries as well..

The Holocaust did drag larger attention than events in Africa. But people (whites) were stood against Leopard too, I think that Britain even sanctioned him?
The WW2 was a trauma. And the holocaust happened right in the core of civilization, to people who were in the center hub of civilization (economy, culture, science), not to a side group. So it was rather change than barbaric attack barbarics, but civilized attack civilized people. And the tools and methods were new and super efficiant. Frankly its not killing millions during 50 years, but millions during 5 years. In factories designed to that. And the scale in such a short period. All together contributed to the shock and fear of the potential of that danger. And of course Jews are still alot in the media (atleast in the USA) and in the academics, and thats contributes to the cultural exposure of that. How many Hutsu guys go and write books? So the position of Jews in the cultural world also influences on the spot. IMO. Eventualy, who explore the recent horrors in Sierra Leone and Ruwanda? ... I hear whites interview blacks, its all comes from whites. Africans may share knowledge to one another, but are less producing stuff in white culture. Or if they do- they are Americans, and careless of Africa.
#14674923
There are primery needs to fill before education honestly.
If you are starving youll look for food not for books.

For example. In the 70-80s both Lebanon and Iran had a large wave of poverty hitting it. Both countries were almost entirely destroyed by wars.
For Lebanon it had the civil war for almost 15 years. And the war although called civil war but was actually 3 foreign armies maunly fighting each other in Lebanon. In Iran the Baathist had destroyed most of the industrial facilities. Social structures like schools and hospitals were targetted and destroyed. Agricultural land was hit with chemical weapons.
Poverty hit both countries very hard after this period.
Illiteracy literally sky rocketed in the direct period after it.(now its bacl on track). Why ? People didnt have food to eat. They didnt have a home to stay in. For them. Fuck education they want to eat first.

For Africa its worse. Its not a period of 5-10 years. Its centuries of continuing bad conditions. They can barely survive with auch conditions.
Education is important but its not the one to get them the first step.
They first need to organise and utilize lands and basic resources for basic life needs like growing food and building houses.
Then when everyone is good they can start building and improving schools and universities.

Saudi Arabia is a really bad example. Compare Iran with simillar resources to Saudi Arabia to south Korea. Its not counting much on resources and rather using it as a leverage.
And the idea wasnt investments. I meant give them their basic rights like having food on the table. Or being able to drink clean water. Or health care. And education for sure.
Africa's problem isnt that they dont have enough investments. Its problem is that everyone is taking from it while its people in many places dont havs the very basic human rights.
If everyone wants to take resources. They should atleast do something for them in return. And small charities from normal people is simply in one hand not enough and on the other no where near what we take from them.

And that was kind of the intention of both Arabs and Europeans.
Thats really what it means when you call someone barbarian and take his or her suffering and death as if it doesnt matter.

African people for centuries were treated as less than humans. Whether the goal was money and power or just for the sake of it. The crime is still there.
And just the fact the everyone cries over the holocaust while barely any mention to 10s if not 100s of millions of Africans killed. Ebslaved. And tormented for 100s of years continuing kind of proof my point.
The process of de humanizing Africans over the centuries has made most people simply care less about them. Or perhaps even far too less about them to a dangerous point.
#14674930
Jews were persecuted much longer than 5 years in Europe.. anasawad..

The reason they are not in the situation of Africans is they took their faith in their own hands and dindn't blame others for poverty, even if it was often true. So when denied holding lands in europe they turned to marchanism..
And Israel: without oil or resources (till recently), no wide territories, and completely isolated here- is the richest country here. Cause you have to move forward no matter what your foes cook for you. True the Arab seige and boycotting harms Israel.. So Israel found a way. Whites shouldn't be super nice to Africans, Africans has to find a way to move forward. And about education and mentality- it will take generations. And its okay. But the lack of solidarity just means there is some problem. Some indifference, some too much acceptance of things as they are without wanting to change them.

And today in sub Sahara- what Arabs are doing to blacks there (Darfur etc) is also horrible. But .. just don't allow them to. The attackers won't stop by themselves.. the blacks are lucky the whites turned concious. Actualy the whites are helping the blacks there, and in Mali, against the Islamists.. But its not enough. Education is needed.
#14674998
anasawad wrote:The Ottoman empire did trade with slaves for long periods of time.
And Arabs lords used to trade with slaves captured from Africa in those areas also for long periods of time. I believe only ending in the 1800s if i recall what i read currectly.
(...)
So history of slave trading in the Arab world is considerably recent and many of who they enslaved came from Ethipia and such areas. So they could have ended up in Europe and America.
Even in Turkey as some recent reports show that Africans in Turkey did come first as slaves.

By recent you apparently mean "only six or seven centuries old"?

Yet Muhammad did bother to rule slavery because it was already common place in the VIIth century in the ME, just like it was common in Ancient Egypt, in the old Roman Empire, in India, in China, etc. Muhammad's conquests turned many people into slaves and he personally owned some. According to Muhammad as long as one is not Muslim, it is right to make a slave of him. Racist asshole.


Sure, the Ottoman empire amplified slavery, practicing it at an industrial scale for centuries, with people from all continents (Christian children from occupied regions in Greece and Balkans, Christian Mediterranean villages attacked by Algerian pirates, Western African slaves, ...). To the point that some related Arab words entered our vocabulary (razzias, devchirmé).

But it was already an old tradition in the Arab world and the trade from West Africa to the Arab world is much older. At some points of history slaves were the most important exporting industry in West Africa (the slaves themselves usually came from farther).


Europe is actually the exception as the late Roman Empires first and Christianism later did a lot to extinguish slavery in our lands. When it resurfaced during the colonization of Americas, it only lasted two centuries. Only one in Spain as they quickly deemed it immoral. Although I will not deny that it was a very brutal form of slavery (slavery is always brutal but it was worse).


The Holocaust did drag larger attention than events in Africa. But people (whites) were stood against Leopard too, I think that Britain even sanctioned him?

I fail to see the point of putting slavery in comparison to the holocaust. Anyway westerners are perfectly aware that slavery was something brutally wrong and there are as much movies about it than there is about the Shoah. I still have to see a single Muslim movie about the wrongdoings of Muhammad and the slavery in the Islamic world.

That being said here are a few reasons why the Shoah holds a distinctive role in western consciousness:
* Its brutality: 6 millions of people were killed over four years, against ten millions deported over two centuries for slavery.
* It took the complicity or passivity of many people. The tale of the www2 is the tale of how ordinary people can be turned into mass killers, and how others can turn blind eyes.
* Its purpose was specifically to eradicate categories of people. Slavery's purpose was profit.
* It is recent and it happened right next to us, to people like us. All human beings are like that, not just westerners.



anasawad wrote:And Africa had some of the wealthiest nations in history only up until it was torn by wars in the late centuries.

No, this is not what happened. Africa was never such a big deal, although it hold a respectable rank until the first millennium. But this its demise is far older than European intrusions.

First of all you must distinguish western Africa (the half of the western bump under the Saharah) from the rest as they had very different fates. Western Africa is where most of empires happened and it was even relatively prosperous at some points. Aside of that, the rest was pretty much savage, with a few notable exceptions such as the African horn and the Eastern coast close to the ME.


Africa has a simple geographical problem:
* One third is a desert, another is arid and/or threatened by desertification, another is a jungle. Western Africa is relatively nice but it is still subtropical and the desert has kept progressing for the past 5K/3k years. Maybe it never had the capacity to consistently feed a feudal-level civilization.

* Destructive meteorological cycles, that yield famines and others. Some cycles last centuries and are big enough to destroy civilizations, some last decades and can kill half of children.

* Obstacles to trade and knowledge diffusion. The Saharah and other deserts are walls. The jungle is a wall. The Atlantic is risky to navigate. The southern half of the continent is a plateau that stands 1km above the coasts. Few rivers, some encumbered by the jungle. The two thirds of the continent are void of any significant river. The climate is too hot, which causes many deaths and makes labor very hard.


And I know the ME is not hospitable either. But the coasts are and they consistently are. And more importantly the ME was the nexus between Asia and Europe, and it has great maritime opportunities.


They first need to organise and utilize lands and basic resources for basic life needs like growing food and building houses.
Then when everyone is good they can start building and improving schools and universities.

Hands do not make plants grow. But cash allows you to buy what you need to improve your land's productivity and import the food you lack.

The solutions to the African agricultural problems are still unknown. Traditional African agriculture does not work, not with so many mouths and such an infertile land. Modern western agriculture does not work either: fertilizers cannot make the land revive and our varieties are not fit for their soils and climates. Those interested in agriculture can find great challenges to solve in Africa. This takes biologists, chemists, and all of the talents that come with them.
#14675014
I remember watching a documentary in the 1980s. A village in Sub Saharan Africa had a terrible death and disease rate. So several American doctors went to see if they could help.

A small river ran through this village. The doctors noticed that the people of the village were using the river as a toilet. And they were also using the same river for drinking water and cooking.

The doctors told them not to do that.

Moving the goalposts won't change the facts on th[…]

There were formidable defense lines in the Donbas[…]

World War II Day by Day

March 28, Thursday No separate peace deal with G[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Meanwhile, your opponents argue that everyone e[…]