[flickerstorm]

Yeah. It couldn't possibly be because of the vast distances, low population, harsh terrain, harsh climate lack of contact with the outside world or lack of interest etc.

[Suska]

...Or absent necessity. What's clear is PP doesn't know how simple living in the bush keeps life. He doesn't imagine folks and music, but incompetent fools.

[politburo player]

Yeah. It couldn't possibly be because of the vast distances,

When has that been a problem for faraway colonies? Europeans shipped millions of cattle and beasts of burden to the Americas. Merchant ships make that a mute point.

low population,

From what I understand Africa's central interior had a thriving (yet uncounted) population which blossomed even more after the fall of European colonies and the onset of 'guilt aid'.

harsh terrain,

If Americans could conquered the wild west using tools and technology purchased or bartered from greedy Europeans, why couldn't Africa have done the same?

harsh climate

The people of Scandanavia, Russia, and Northern Europe know all about that, yet they aren't suffering from the same societal shortcomings.

lack of contact with the outside world or lack of interest etc.

What about Japan? Their isolation from the outside world was much more significant than Africa's, yet it didn't inhibit their progress...

[grassroots1]

What about Japan? Their isolation from the outside world was much more significant than Africa's, yet it didn't inhibit their progress...

Even the short list he proposed was inadequate and most likely not entirely accurate.

You are arguing for a position with no proof, therefore we all know that you know nothing.

Why won't you just come out and say what you really mean? I hate the fact that racists here hide their racism behind pseudoscience. We can clearly see that you're attempting to justify racism with science, and you're not examining the science and arriving at a conclusion.

Here, I would like a response to my previous post:

But to try and dissuade you from such an absurd position, can you not see that there are environmental factors that affect the determination of IQ (which itself is a flawed measure), and that until those environmental factors are equalized, no determination or conclusion can be reached? And you surely must understand that speculation in a situation like this is very dangerous and results in marginalization of people of those races, which itself perpetuates and fulfills the prophecy of the people who are making these assumptions.

[politburo player]

All you do is continuously mutter "rayciss" and evolve into more of a troll as this thread progresses.

But to try and dissuade you from such an absurd position, can you not see that there are environmental factors that affect the determination of IQ (which itself is a flawed measure) and that until those environmental factors are equalized, no determination or conclusion can be reached?

If IQ tests are so unfair, why do East Asians continually beat Europeans at their own test ? Obviously there are huge cultural and environmental differences between Europeans and East Asians, and somehow they always score higher than the 'makers' of the IQ test itself.

And you surely must understand that speculation in a situation like this is very dangerous and results in marginalization of people of those races, which itself perpetuates and fulfills the prophecy of the people who are making these assumptions.

Yes, you're right, its all just a big scientific conspiracy to keep the poor man down. Even though scientists and demographers from all over the world have noted the same intelligence trends regarding various populations for almost a century, and therefore there is a virtual universe of information backing up their claims, you stubbornly deny their validity because of your preconceived notions of political correctness, fairness, and above all, your belief that all cultures and people should be equally smart no matter what.

.

[Suska]

point is smart is a relative term, it depends on what you need which depends on your environment.

Also, you obviously didn't read Jared Diamond's book.

[grassroots1]

If IQ tests are so unfair, why do East Asians continually beat Europeans at their own test ? Obviously there are huge cultural and environmental differences between Europeans and East Asians, and somehow they always score higher than the 'makers' of the IQ test itself.

Um, it probably has to do with their circumstances. You have literally no grounds by which to suggest with the tenacity that you are, that the difference is genetic. Therefore, you must be justifying your preconceived racist ideas with pseudoscience.

even though scientists and demographers from all over the world have noted the same intelligence trends regarding various populations for almost a century, and therefore there is a virtual universe of information backing up their claims, you stubbornly deny their validity because of your preconceived notions of political correctness, fairness, and above all, your belief that all cultures and people should be equally smart no matter what.

"Scientists and demographers from all over the world," eh? Give me a taste of this "virtual universe of information" backing up the claims of these "scientists and demographers from all over the world," please. I deny the validity of suggestions that difference in IQ stems from genetics, because there is no reason to come to that conclusion, scientifically. Where is the control group? There is no group of black people who are in an equal situation to that of a group of white people (never will be), so any attempt to draw that conclusion is patently absurd.

[Alchemy]

IQ tests do not measure academic performance. It tests raw intelligence (capacity) using analytical, mathematical, and spatial questions. That is why it is impossible to 'study' for an IQ exam.

Oh dear..Do you not see that all of the above is academic? All hugely dependent on literacy? That is why it is ridiculous to insinuate what you are attempting to in this thread given the bias in education levels. Unless of course you believe that all white babies come out of the womb with the ability to do all of the above without any formal kind of training and education.

[grassroots1]

And I've made that point before in the Basement, that maybe racism should be allowed so they don't have to disguise their views in pseudo-science. But I think the way we are is right because to allow it would take down the quality of this forum several notches.

[grassroots1]

Interesting parallel: along the same vein of logic that politburo player uses, we can say that the powerful status of white peoples over darker skinned people is indicative of their inherent brutality and not their intelligence.

[grassroots1]

Some people believe and you automatically label them racist through ignorance,

He's blindly defending a position that he doesn't know is true. What other reason could there be?

If this same conversation was about the genetic advantage of black athletes no one would rush to call the adovocate racist? why is that?

One, it's positive and not negative. Two, it's less important in today's world. Three, it's more demonstrable. Four, it's not necessarily the case in all athletic fields. Fifth, even the perceived "genetic advantage" of black athletes could not be based on genetics but instead on environment itself.

Eh?

I've already seen that thread and decided not to waste my time with it. Probably should have done the same with this one.

[grassroots1]

Ok, he is claiming there is along with some academics.

You are saying it isn't genetic along with some academics.

What makes your position more rational?

What I've actually said since the beginning is that it is "probably" based on their circumstances and not on their genetics. PP is the one who has been claiming that it is unquestionably a matter of genetics, which is stupid, racist, and pseudoscientific. Do you even read this shit?

Now you know I am not a racist. Perhaps you are one?

I notice peoples races, but I don't believe one race is inherently dumber or smarter or more this or that than any other race. Those things are incredibly hard to prove.

[flickerstorm]

You guys don't know half of the things you are saying. First of all, there is no way in hell you can put all Africans on the same boat. There is more genetic diversity in Africa than on any other continent. There are places in Africa where civilisation has thrived for thousands of years. In some places people live way better than absolutely anyone in the western world. Then there are groups like the Masai and the bushmen of the Kalahari that are so far behind the rest of the world. The Masai at least herd cattle, the bushmen don't even do this much.

Yes the western world is more modernised than the vast majority of Africa, but this has only been the case for about 200 years, the lifetimes of 3 people! Three lifetimes and Europeans have already forgotten what they did, how many hundreds and hundreds of millions they killed all over the world to get to where they are. Does this mean that Europeans are genetically more aggressive, more violent than any other race? Just look at the past, how you got to where you are, how many wars you fought, how many other races you almost completely wiped out! The huge majority of your "technology" was developed for military use. Even today, you spend 12 times more on your military than you do on aiding the continents you destroyed. There is not a single corner of this world that has not been affected negatively by white men.

I believe that just because you can't take the time to look at what you have done and are still doing, it does not give you the right to say that one race is superior to another in any way. I know people in Africa that are extremely intelligent. I lived there for 8 years of my life, I know from experience that kids going to school in Kenya are just as intelligent as kids going to school in Norway, because I have had contact with both for years. In Kenya, after eighth grade almost everyone goes to a boarding school. This place has a strict schedule, wake up at 6 AM, go to bed at 11 PM. Learning is mandatory, tests are frequent. You must have a very high average to stay in school most of the time. Compare that with Norway where kids go to school at 9 in the morning and leave at 2 in the afternoon. That is five hours compared to 16 hours of school a day, which leads to better test results than the Norwegian kids can dream of. This means that a LOT of people are graduating from university. Most of them wind up working in the US or Europe, getting a better paid job than most Europeans.
does that mean that Kenyans are more intelligent than Europeans? no. It just means that they scored well in their exams because they were learning under a strict military like regime.

Africa is rising far faster than you might think. in 10 years, your argument will be irrelevant because most of Africa will be out of poverty. Africa has a population of 700 million, on a continent that can fit the United states, western Europe, India, China, Argentina and the British isles combined. We have more untapped wealth than any other place on Earth. As we learn how to utilise this wealth, we will become once again the leader of the world. All we lack at the moment is a proper leader. Someone that believes in something that unites us all. The only thing that unites all Africans is the history of colonisation and humiliation and disgrace at the hands of the Europeans. This is the only thing that I can think of that is common to all Africans.

To all that believe Africans are stupid or dumb, all I can say is that we can argue on and on, and each bring evidence for our cause, but in the end, all that matters is what history has to say, and what happens in the next few years will determine whether Africans are labelled as backwards for the rest of this century, or if we can finally gain back that respect that we lost during the colonial era.

[grassroots1]

Thank you for that, flickerstrom. And you're absolutely right when you say that westerners have very little knowledge about the history of Africa, or at least I can attest to that for myself. I really don't even know where to go for a good source of African history, so if you have any suggestions I would like to hear them.

[flickerstorm]

http://wysinger.homestead.com/ancientafrica.html
http://africanhistory.about.com/od/king ... Africa.htm
http://www.whenweruled.com/
check out this section for books: http://www.whenweruled.com/articles.php?lng=en&pg=89

I can't think of any other sources right now, I will check with some of my friends to see if they know something.

Also, to all the haters, I just want to post this so you can keep on hating: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=977406

[XAdamX]

Also, to all the haters, I just want to post this so you can keep on hating: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=977406

Very interesting. Thanks for sharing.

[Le Rouge]

Then there are groups like the Masai and the bushmen of the Kalahari that are so far behind the rest of the world. The Masai at least herd cattle, the bushmen don't even do this much.

I would like to add that the Masai and and Khoi-San are behind the rest of the world in terms of access to clean water, health care, and other things that contribute to a long and health life. However, the herding of cattle or the lack thereof isn't necessarily hampering their lives and given the historical and ecological origins of their economic activity, it's very sensible. The Khoi-San used to be farmers until being pushed onto drier lands by the southward migration of Bantus.

[flickerstorm]

It's been more modern for more like 500 years at least.

Not if we go by the number/size of cities, the quality of metals such as Iron and gold et cetera

As for killing, how many millions of africans have been killed over the centuries in your own tribal warfare? Even the recent genocide in Rwanda is an example.

The Rwandan genocide was caused by the fact that the people who colonised Rwanda would reward those who sold out plans, locations and so on of the people that were trying to get independence by educating them and when they left, they left them their mansions and servants. There was no ethnic division before the colonists came, but after they left there were huge divisions in economic status. The Hutus and Tutsis speak the same language, they would never have gone to war had the Europeans not interfered

Africa is in extreme poverty but dictatorships and militia there still spend massive money on arms to fight and kill each other such as in sudan, chad, angola, nigeria, serria leone, somalia, and your dictators such as mugabe etc while your own people starve to death.
Then you blame the white man for your own self made misery?

I don't blame white people for everything wrong in Africa. The darfur war for example has no European connections AFAIK.

Yes, these dictatorships do spend a lot on their military.
Dictators like Mugabe and Idi Amin were put where they are by the British. What the British did is they "groomed" them to be president. Then they gave him the seat and laugh as the country was destroyed by these illiterate idiots. The US used to back them because they knew if Africa fell into the hands of the soviet union, it might spell disaster for them. so they gave these dictators money by the boat load, and all these people could think of spending it on was military hardware. Yes, these dictators are terrible human beings, but that is no way to judge a whole continent.
What if Africans judged all Europeans by the actions of Hitler or Stalin? Would you consider that to be fair?

Most people in Africa don't blame the Europeans for the situation they are in. They know very well that their government could have done something about it for the past half century, but they also know that if Europeans had never invaded, and if the slave trade among other things never happened, then they would be in a much better position.

But like I said, the current situation wont last for long. Most of these old dictators are either stepping down or dying off, and change is already taking place.

[flickerstorm]

I doubt it, but I really hope so. Everybody should life a prosperous and good life in not only africa but all across the world.

Doubt what? The economic growth? The size?

http://headleefamily.net/how-big-is-africa/
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/4 ... _466gr.gif

We had 6% growth when places like the US had -2% in 2008. This year the percentage is going to be 7-8% or more. Some places like Angola (which you mentioned) have 10% economic growth!

[Godstud]

European imperialism did a lot of damage to Africa that it still has not entirely recovered from and even teh recent genocides in Rwanda were partly linked to things connected to that imperialism and the influx of European religion, etc.