African post-colonialism - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

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

'Cold war' communist versus capitalist ideological struggle (1946 - 1990) and everything else in the post World War II era (1946 onwards).
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14822777
Saeko wrote:Africa was no paradise before European colonialism.
May I introduce you to:
  • The Mali, Ghana, and Shonghai (spelling empires)
  • the Swahili civilization
  • The richest man in history -- Mansa Musa
  • The first Modern University in Timbuktu
  • The Arabic golden age
  • Ibn Battuta a traveler who rivaled Marco Polo

No place was a paradise in that time period but Africa didn't need Europe, thank you very much.
#14822779
MememyselfandIJK wrote:@B0ycey A large portion of Africa's problems stems from European colonialism


Saeko is correct, but whatever the problems of yesteryear, Macron was discussing money coming to Africa like Europe had after WWII so colonalism is irrelevant to my (and his) point. Money is wasted being sent to Africa nations unwilling to change and improve their people's living standards and lives. Macron was just highlighting this point in a diplomatic fashion.
#14822784
MememyselfandIJK wrote:No place was a paradise in that time period but Africa didn't need Europe, thank you very much.


They didn't need it then, and I don't see why they'd need it now, but all that is beside the point as I never said that Africa needed Europe, just that most of their present-day problems predate European colonialism.
#14822793
Saeko wrote:...just that most of their present-day problems predate European colonialism.


I don't agree. Pretty much everything wrong with Africa today is the result of colonization during the 19th and 20th centuries. I should add that in the last few years we've seen three major neo-colonial political upheavals in North Africa alone, indeed, the Arab Spring started in Tunisia, after all. The Egyptian coup of 2013 was orchestrated by the US State Department, and Colonel Ghadafi was overthrown and murdered by a NATO led military intervention, so I think the neo-colonial issues are very much still alive and well.
#14822795
MememyselfandIJK wrote:@B0ycey Plenty of African nations have been willing to change. Have you forgotten about South Africa?

There are plenty of programs that are helping the governments help their people.


South Africa is actually quite wealthy. Unfortunately their wealth is not shared out throughout society. And that can be attributed to their goverment policy and tax system. Also Europe has had over 200 years of industrial strength and infrastructure investment. South Africa has only just moved away from the apartheid since 1990. Give them time. They also have a gun issue which puts off foriegn investment (not aid), which would increase growth. As for other nations, aid is given to nations who adapt and accept change. Nations who don't, won't have so much. Then there is the commonwealth which helps out these nations finacially and politically. However aid will only go so far. It is up to individual nations to promote there own growth. Not Europe to do it for them. Being Africa is not, perhaps tourism would be a good move to invest in. But like everything, people will only go to nations that are safe and have good standards. Not dictatorships who exploit their civilians.
#14822798
South Africa as a modern nation was of course formed by imperialists working for Cecil Rhodes and the British colonial office, their objectives were mainly to extort diamond wealth from the country while grabbing as much land as possible in the struggle for Empire. Even relatively European settlers such as the Boers were re-colonized by the British after 1902. The tragedy of South Africa's wealth has been its relentless extortion at the hands of huge combines working for European financiers and industrialists.
#14822814
MB. wrote:South Africa as a modern nation was of course formed by imperialists working for Cecil Rhodes and the British colonial office, their objectives were mainly to extort diamond wealth from the country while grabbing as much land as possible in the struggle for Empire. Even relatively European settlers such as the Boers were re-colonized by the British after 1902. The tragedy of South Africa's wealth has been its relentless extortion at the hands of huge combines working for European financiers and industrialists.


South African history goes back to the sixteen hundreds. The Boers fought two bloody wars with the British. South Africa was a country created by Whites in the middle of a sea of Black. It became a first world country and was eventually turned over to the Blacks and has become a third world country.
#14822977
If you want to call apartheid a characteristic of a first world country, @Suntzu, you clearly have no idea what a first world country is.
#14823018
Before the discovery of gold and diamonds in the 1800's South Africans were the poorest White people on the planet. The first concentration camp were invented by the Brits to use on the Boers. The Blacks living in South Africa, except for the Zulu, are invaders from surrounding African countries who came to work in the mines. The reason for the various homelands was that Black Africans from different tribes tended to hack each other to death if given the opportunity.
#14823586
@Suntzu

S O U R C E S

Also I would like sources of the fact that there were no blacks in South Africa during the 1800s and that they were invaders who came to work in mines. Also if they were invaders, why would they go work in the mines? Wouldn't they have come to invade South Africa then? Oh wait, you need to demonize Blacks because if you don't, your entire beliefs system gets out of wack.
#14823591
Oxymandias wrote:@Suntzu

S O U R C E S

Also I would like sources of the fact that there were no blacks in South Africa during the 1800s and that they were invaders who came to work in mines. Also if they were invaders, why would they go work in the mines? Wouldn't they have come to invade South Africa then? Oh wait, you need to demonize Blacks because if you don't, your entire beliefs system gets out of wack.


Did I say that? You never heard of the Zulu Wars. When the Europeans (Vortreckers) move inland they met the Zulus coming south. Later with the discovery of diamonds and gold others came seeking to work in the mines. They were male guest workers and were supposed to eventually leave. They never did.
#14823593
Suntzu wrote:Did I say that? You never heard of the Zulu Wars. When the Europeans (Vortreckers) move inland they met the Zulus coming south. Later with the discovery of diamonds and gold others came seeking to work in the mines. They were male guest workers and were supposed to eventually leave. They never did.
I don't see a source anywhere in that
#14823596
@Suntzu

No you explicitly say so. Every post on this sub-forum you are constantly trying to put down and delegitimatize Blacks in Africa in every way possible. This is blatant and ignorant racism.

Also the Anglo-Zulu Wars are nothing at all of what your talking about:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Zulu_War

And the Zulu kingdom lived in the western part of South Africa, they did not come from the south. It would be easy for you to give a source but the thing is, you probably were afraid to do that. You were afraid that, by looking into exactly what the Anglo-Zulu Wars were, instead of just listening to whatever ignorant bullshit comes out of the mouths of people on PoFo, you would be wrong. This goes to show how little faith you have in your own beliefs.

@MememyselfandIJK

He's too afraid to provide a source. He knows he's spouting BS.
User avatar
By MB.
#14823601
Haha, I love it when a call for sources is used to cover general ignorance. The migratory history of South Africa is actually really interesting. The British of course were at war with the Dutch for many decades in the 17th century prior to the ascension of William of Orange to the English throne. Finally the French Revolution gave the Empire an excuse to annex the territory as part of the staging area for the route to India. Britain went on to fight various colonial wars in South Africa for the next 100 years.
#14823608
@MB.

I am aware of the Anglo-Zulu War. I learned about it ever since noir brought it up. I tried to verify the stuff he said, however although he got the basic framework down that there was a war between the Zulu and the British, he certainly over-simplified and left out many things. Suntzu's statements are purely false. I asked him for sources just to prove another point, that Suntzu won't ever give sources due to sources not giving him the validation he wants.
#14823612
Oxymandias wrote:He's too afraid to provide a source. He knows he's spouting BS.
I know, just trying to hold him to it

I dont buy it, Why would anyone go for a vacation […]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

@JohnRawls No. Your perception of it is not. I g[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

I'd be totally happy for us to send ground troop i[…]

Any of you going to buy the Trump bible he's promo[…]