Utopia Talk / Politics / Why does Africa suck so much?

habebe rank	Sun May 10 06:26:16 2009 Well what why do you think that Africa sucks so much? I'm talking about sub-saharan Africa, not the Arab/Muslim N. Africa which isn't really that bad, especially in comparison, I've always wanted to visit Morocco and Egypt. Some would argue the "guns, germs and steel" arguements , although he rarley spoke about Africa, and if you watched the show he cherry picked certain things, and blatantly skipped over many other things to prove his veiw of things. Off the top of my head he purposley never mentions Quinoa as a staple crop in the Americas, and also makes it seem as if written language was never invented in the Americas by putting emphasis on the Incas ad disregarding the Mayas. Yes I'm rambling a bit, and mildy drunk, but fuck you, I've got beer & choclate.
yankeessuck123 rank	Sun May 10 06:27:23 2009 Are you looking for the background reasons why it sucks today, or do you want an explanation of what it is about Africa that equals suck?
habebe rank	Sun May 10 06:33:56 2009 Well, I was meaning more along the lines of background reasons (geology, turning points in history etc.) but by all means it is open to interpretation.
yankeessuck123 rank	Sun May 10 06:39:09 2009 Geography is a major reason. Sub-Saharan Africa on the whole is pretty shitty geographically. Bad climate for agriculture, no natural resources that would give it an edge. No proximity to any other major civilizations. Combine poor agriculture with remoteness, and you've got a recipe for shit. And then the developed civilizations of the world come in and colonize and exploit them, and they end up worse still.
habebe rank	Sun May 10 06:46:01 2009 Well, one thing I would definitley argue is proximity to other civilizations. The first would be the most obvious, Egypt and Carthage. But also the eastern coast of Africa definitley was close and had trade and such with the the middle east.
Bushwasdabespresid rank	Sun May 10 06:50:44 2009 "Why does Africa suck so much?" niggars
habebe rank	Sun May 10 06:54:19 2009 Well, I was hoping for a bit more insight into the reason. My curiosity was spurred by watching guns, germs and settl recently, although he seem to deal much more with Europe Vs. Americas, and he had made overall many good points/arguements, but some things he definitley cherrypicked.
yankeessuck123 rank	Sun May 10 06:56:00 2009 They really weren't that close to Egypt. We're talking sub-Saharan, right? Because that was a ways off from Egypt, and I'm much mistaken if they traded with the Middle East.
Muslim rank	Sun May 10 07:02:08 2009 Corruption & tribalism.
yankeessuck123 rank	Sun May 10 07:02:49 2009 There was corruption and tribalism in Europe as well, but they got over it a lot earlier.
habebe rank	Sun May 10 07:03:17 2009 They were close enough to have contacts, many egyptian writings speak of battles/wars with the people of sub-saharan lands "and I'm much mistaken if they traded with the Middle East." ???
Muslim rank	Sun May 10 07:04:32 2009 "but they got over it" Exactly. They were in a much better position to get out of it. The Europeans further entrenched and exploited tribalism in Africa during their rule there.
habebe rank	Sun May 10 07:06:08 2009 "There was corruption and tribalism in Europe as well, but they got over it a lot earlier." As well as Asia/Asia minor etc. Now Agriculture/domestication of Animals seems to me to play an obvious role in all great civilizations. Africa obviously seems at a disadvantage here. On that point I would like to find out what animals/crops were available then and how well they could have prospered there, I mean it's no use to have access to plants animals if the climate kills them.
habebe rank	Sun May 10 07:07:35 2009 Muslim, But this is many many centuries after Asia/Europe/ME had already establsihed thriving civilizations.
Muslim rank	Sun May 10 07:13:29 2009 Because they were able to throw off the shackles of tribalism, and became united and instituted governance and the rule of law, and had open trade links with each other. The only major links Sub-Saharan Africa has had with the rest of the world is through imperialism. Unlike the slaughter of the peoples of the New World, in Africa the Europeans simply enslaved, exploited and entrenched tribalism further for their material gains. So most Africans have really only ever known tribalism.
yankeessuck123 rank	Sun May 10 07:14:45 2009 "Because they were able to throw off the shackles of tribalism, and became united and instituted governance and the rule of law, and had open trade links with each other." Absolutely correct, but it begs further questions. Why were they able to throw off the shackles of tribalism, and how did they get good (relatively) governance?
habebe rank	Sun May 10 07:15:27 2009 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_Africa This seems to have some decent info. "The drying of the Sahara created a formidable barrier between the northern and southern portions of the continent. Two important exceptions were Nubia that was linked to Egypt by the Nile and Ethiopia that could trade with the northern regions over the Red Sea. Powerful states grew up in these regions such as Kush in Nubia and Axum in Ethiopia. From these regions ideas and technologies from the Middle East and Europe could travel to Sub-Saharan Africa. One of these was iron working that arrived, presumably from Sudan around 1200 BC and quickly spread to West Africa and reached South Africa by the fifth century AD. Some historians believe that iron working may have been developed independently in Africa. Unlike other continents Africa did not have a period of copper and bronze working before the Iron Age. Copper is quite rare in Africa while iron is quite common. In Nubia and Ethiopia iron, trade, and agricultural surpluses lead to the establishment of cities and civilizations. Quite interesting stuff, especially the early iron age of Africa
habebe rank	Sun May 10 07:19:23 2009 "Absolutely correct, but it begs further questions. Why were they able to throw off the shackles of tribalism, and how did they get good (relatively) governance?" Exactly. Were these merley historical coincidences that by chance took root, such as Confucionism in China for example, or are there more basic geographic reasons. Also, for anyone who hasn't wathed it, this is a link to guns, germs and steel, very interesting. http://vid...ns+germs+and+steel&hl=en&dur=3
hahahaha rank	Sun May 10 07:40:09 2009 Inland Africa south of Mali had pretty much never had contact with the outside world right up to the 1800s, which explains some of it.
hahahaha rank	Sun May 10 07:44:56 2009 And when the Europeans got the fuck out of Africa, they REALLY got the fuck out. They basically gave the keys of power to whatever nig seemed trustworthy enough, said "good luck" and left. The degredation of order the ensued in many places therefore wasn't that surprising to anyone who wasn't a retard.
yankeessuck123 rank	Sun May 10 07:45:14 2009 Shaka Zulu revolutionized warfare in sub-Saharan Africa around the turn of the 19th century by using a shorter spear and a bigger shield. Yep...
habebe rank	Sun May 10 07:46:45 2009 haha, Yes and no. There were obviously large civilizations in Sub-Saharan Africa, most notably the Kingdom of Nubia and then less known is ancient ethiopia. IIRC also coastal W. africa also had civilizations (past tribalism) why had these civilizations failed so quickly that they did not get to spread out and settle the areas you speak of. I mean look at Britain, Britain owes much of it's current success to the Romans conquering it, I doubt many would argue that.
habebe rank	Sun May 10 07:48:28 2009 "Shaka Zulu revolutionized warfare in sub-Saharan Africa around the turn of the 19th century by using a shorter spear and a bigger shield. Yep..." Not to mention his manipulation of Europeans and their firearms, pretty cool movie on it as well, but really really long.
Dukhat rank	Sun May 10 07:53:55 2009 1) The climate is very hot and tropical. You can subsist with a hunter-only society instead of a farming-gathering society which creates specialization and the free time to develop civilization. There are studies that show that colder climates tend to create societies that need to cooperate more to survive and thus create a greater need for specialization and civilization. 2) Non-farming societies never have the critical mass in terms of urban areas and population density to be a hotbed of ideas and innovation like we have seen in modern societies. 3) The types of resources in Africa were not conducive to the same development as europe. The industrial age was developed because of the close proximity of coal and iron deposits in Eastern England as well as the Ruhr/Lorraine region. In America, the midwest was the center of industrial development because of all the iron and coal located there. Africa while rich in certain things like Diamond and gold never got off the ground with modern-age goods. 4) Isolation. Only East Africa was near trade routes. The rest of Africa was largely circumnavigated except for the cape so they never were able to trade and get the ideas necessary to progress into the modern age. By the time advanced cultures encountered them they were already far behind without any large nation states to act as a counterweight to European powers. African tribes who warred with each other were eager participants in the exploitive slave trade. 2) Isolated. Africa is actually quite rich in resources, but it has largely been isolated. Muslims pretty much conquered east africa and were an active part of the slave trade.
Dukhat rank	Sun May 10 07:55:00 2009 Last shoudl be 5. I was editing.
yankeessuck123 rank	Sun May 10 08:11:40 2009 All 5 are correct.
lucifer rank	Sun May 10 09:28:36 2009 " background reasons" niggers brains dont work "turning points in history" about 60 thousand years ago, the niggers came down out of the trees. this was a mistake.
Aeros rank	Mon May 11 00:39:29 2009 I think I should point out the obvious here. The Answer to the question is War and Bread. War is the driving dynamo of Civilisations, and Bread is what gives birth to the civilisations that make war. Sub Saharan Africa had plenty of places where Agricultural civilisations were possible. However, they were missing one key ingrediant. Grain. No Oats, no Barley, no Wheat, no Lentils, and no Rice occur naturally in Sub Saharan Africa. Bread is in fact, the greatest human invention after fire. Bread allowed people to stop being nomadic and begin to build societies. And once civilisation is established around the Bread, and the growing of grain to make Bread, you can start developing culture, art, technology, and finally, militaries. And with militaries comes war, which drives humanity in a hyper evolutionary state. War makes us surge technologically in ways we cannot do during sedentary peace times. The civilisation that prevailed was the one who could gain a major advantage over another. Be it Iron weapons vs. Bronze, or Guns vs. Bows and Arrows. Sub Saharan africa did no have Grain. Grain meant no Bread. No bread meant no civilisation. No civilisation meant no military. No military meant no need to develop technology for a military. Which meant no progression.
StabYourThroat rank	Mon May 11 00:40:21 2009 Africa sucks so much because it populated by fat lipped baboons. The rare areas inhabited by whites are doing just fine.
habebe rank	Mon May 11 05:22:43 2009 "no Rice occur naturally in Sub Saharan Africa. " But, almost none of these occure naturally in Europe as well, most of them originate from Asia minor. Which both European and African societies had contact with. Also I've looked more into their climate, they have alot of savannahs with frequent rain, which sounds to be pretty god for crop growing, however, I do realize that climates/regions change alot over time, I'm curious as to what they were over the past few thousand years. The more and more I look into it, Africa to me seems less disadvantaged by geography (comparativley) and more just the guy who drew the short straw in history.
habebe rank	Mon May 11 05:27:18 2009 I take Britain again as a great example. They really lucked out with ceing conquered by Rome, that led to them gaining loads of tech advances that led to a more prosperous civ. even after the Romans left, and then they had decent trade back and forth with the rest of Europe.
habebe rank	Mon May 11 05:34:34 2009 On the other hand, they do seem to have less of an ability to make lemonaide with lemons. Case in point, the Incas, they cultivated the modern potatoe from a poisonus relative of the nightshade family.
roland rank	Mon May 11 05:42:47 2009 What's the point of bringing up the history from thousands years ago? Were you interested about the present?
habebe rank	Mon May 11 05:51:09 2009 I am interested in the prsent, but it's difficult to fully comprehend the present without knowing the the past. How does the old saying go, those wh o do not know history are doomed to repeat it...or something like that.
roland rank	Mon May 11 05:59:47 2009 "I am interested in the prsent, but it's difficult to fully comprehend the present without knowing the the past. " I gotta disagree with this, I thought yankee has said this. While the other countries who have gained independent are doing much better, while the African countries are lagging behind, this has nothing to do with what happened 2000, 3000 years old.
habebe rank	Mon May 11 06:58:35 2009 I fully admit, that thngs that happened in the last 2-3k years do not all have direct links to todays problems. However to say that they have absotlutley nothing to do with it seems ignorant. If Rome had not colonized Britain, would they have turned out the same as they are? What if the Steam engine had been invented hundreds of years prior to when it was, wouldn't that have changed world history dramatically?
habebe rank	Mon May 11 07:01:22 2009 Roland, If you want to start a thread on why modern Africa is the way it is by using the history of say the last two hundred years or so, be my guest, I would gladly join in.
RiverofAmericanBlood rank	Mon May 11 07:30:51 2009 If Africans weren't dumb animals, they'd be just fine
roland rank	Mon May 11 09:20:33 2009 "Roland, If you want to start a thread on why modern Africa is the way it is by using the history of say the last two hundred years or so, be my guest, I would gladly join in. " Your thread I recalled is "Why does Africa suck so much?", not Why did Africa suck so much? Too much pills again?
habebe rank	Mon May 11 12:47:44 2009 roland, well, whatver, iuf you want to actually post the causes from just the last few years or whatever, go ahead I suppose.
habebe rank	Mon May 11 12:53:52 2009 Although considering it would be straying from the thread's basic conversation, I probably won't respond, but wh knows
HOer rank	Mon May 11 12:56:36 2009 Surprising to see that noone mentioned the most obvious, that if Western plunderers managed to wreck any place with their contrived borders going right through villages and forcing together rival tribes, it was in Africa.
habebe rank	Mon May 11 13:00:09 2009 Funny thing is, South Africa, a once European nation (well, a seperated euro/african) was the most successfull sub-saharan african nation. Until they let the natives back in, it's been going down hill ever since.
HOer rank	Mon May 11 13:01:46 2009 Thats because they forced enemies to live within the same borders and divided friends. They're still fighting over the borders.
HOer rank	Mon May 11 13:05:56 2009 Competition between the Somali clans that lived in these states persisted through the colonial period, when various parts of the region were colonised by Britain and Italy. This era began in the year 1884, the end of a long period of comparative peace. At the Berlin Conference of 1884, the scramble for Africa started the long and bloody process of the imperial partition of Somali lands. The French, British, and Italians came to Somalia in the late 19th century. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somalia etc
habebe rank	Mon May 11 13:06:49 2009 So, you are saying that you think they should go back to apartheid? that way there is less border fighting as one group could fairly well contain the rest.
habebe rank	Mon May 11 13:07:52 2009 What? I never mentioned Somalia, I brought up South Africa.
HOer rank	Mon May 11 13:08:42 2009 Just an example. Its a similiar story all over africa.
habebe rank	Mon May 11 13:10:01 2009 But I must admit in 1936 Mogadishu looked like a great place....not su much today though.
HOer rank	Mon May 11 13:11:16 2009 "So, you are saying that you think they should go back to apartheid?" Errr, no. under gunpoint of other govts just got them killed if they rioted. Now their own rogue governments kill them as the mess of impossible borders slowly gets unravelled.
habebe rank	Mon May 11 13:16:40 2009 So then your gowing with it's worse now, but on it's way to getting better (somethings must get worse before they get better), or am I still missing your point?
HOer rank	Mon May 11 13:19:38 2009 I've stated my point pretty clearly. i didnt read your whole post, did you ask for a solution? I havent got one. I thought you only asked how it all started: "This era began in the year 1884, the end of a long period of comparative peace. At the Berlin Conference of 1884, the scramble for Africa started the long and bloody process of the imperial partition of Somali lands. "
HOer rank	Mon May 11 13:20:11 2009 They had peace until they got raped. Since then its all fucked up.
habebe rank	Mon May 11 13:21:30 2009 No, I havn't asked for a solution, the reason being that would really need another whole thread. I thought you were somewhat giving your opinion on the current state of things, my apologies, thanks for your posts.
HOer rank	Mon May 11 13:22:32 2009 my pleasure
Aeros rank	Mon May 11 13:26:51 2009 True, Grain does not appear naturally in Europe either. However, getting the technology of grain growing from the Nile and western Asia to Europe was a simple affair. Getting it to the Sub Saharan Africa not so much. Keep in mind nobody charted the far extreems of the Nile until the 19th Century. And the Sahara desert was just as impassable. There had to have been some economic reason for traders to go that far to give the grain in exchange for something else. But Central and Southern Africa did not have this. They are victims of geography primarily. Arbitrary border drawing does not help, but its not the root cause. We simple forced modern style nations on people who were and still are to a large extent living in the Iron Age.
habebe rank	Mon May 11 13:48:43 2009 "Arbitrary border drawing does not help, but its not the root cause. We simple forced modern style nations on people who were and still are to a large extent living in the Iron Age." Well, this I sort of agree on. Although I wouldn't call getting that technology to Europe "simple", and also Nubia/Kush empires definitley had contact with the middle east, as evident in trade artificats and what not. Some Israelites even permanently moved to modern day Ethiopia. (the lost tribe)
Aeros rank	Mon May 11 13:53:20 2009 Yes, but Ethiopia benefited from Proximity. Going out into the wilderness of central africa however would have provided little benefit for the Ethiopians so it was not done very often. We do see an interesting case study in Mali, where viable agriculure was finally established in the the 1000's AD, leading to the establishment of the Malian Empire that lasted for a few hundred years and eventually became the Ivory coast principalities that the Europeans bought slaves from.
roland rank	Mon May 11 14:01:40 2009 "Arbitrary border drawing does not help, but its not the root cause." I think this is one of the main cause, you have these arbitrary borders drawn by the Europeans themselves to divide the continent as their property. Which grouped all the previously hostile or competing tribes together. When the European left, they left behind a arbitrary state where these tribes begine to fight each others and compete for the local resources.
habebe rank	Mon May 11 17:32:49 2009 Aeros, Do you have any more info on mali? that sounds very interesting.
yankeessuck123 rank	Mon May 11 18:28:04 2009 Mali was also swimming in gold, and fairly close to Europe.
earthpig19767 rank	Sun Feb 05 09:33:17 2012 always together over direct cause class between .
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: