Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Say what? They were pumping OPIUM in there and extracting SILVER - not the other way around!!! The only money being pumped was into colonial pockets, which sometimes then went into building their infrastructure, etc. But that was owned by the colonialists, not the Chinese.YES, it was a port to receive and distribute opium further inland... Again, opium was about the only product the Chinese would buy from the colonialists. Because all their other manufactured goods were basically inferior or undesired.No, you relabeled a century-long drug war "genocide" into "developing the country into a trading port" in order to "explain away" how HK became fabulously wealthy despite long colonial subjugation (as opposed to Africa).
So bascially, you don't like my wording and want to call me out on it, but you acknowledge that I am correct.
The UK pumps money into HK; builds it up extensively; the UK abandons their colony but leaves it with one of the world's most robust financial and trade sectors, which is left in the hands of their former colonists. HK is doing great.
The UK, France, Spain, Belgium, etc pump money into African nations whose borders they carved up themselves, build up their infrastructure where it suits them to extract natural resources (which, again, HK lacked), left the nations with the physical infrastructure, but not the means with which to maintain it. Africa has a ton of problems.
That is a very large difference, one that benefited HK in the long run (without British colonialism, it likely would not have ever seen a massive population boom and simply been another city in Guangdong). Although we can point to some examples where colonialism benefited Africa, for the most part, I think it's quite fair to say that its legacy created more problems than anything else.
Quote:
Otherwise, you would have to acknowledge that colonialism alone cannot be to blame for African poverty, and other factors are far more significant.
The reality is that colonialism was usually a mixed bag for everyone. It inflicted a lot of heavy damage from brutal subjugation...but there was also often a silver lining of very solid infrastructure being built. Most societies experienced both - although you are trying to claim that Africa only suffered the negatives while certain other countries only benefited from the positives. Which is just patently false (like with HK - which undeniably experienced BOTH, just like everyone else!).
Of course they experienced both positives and negatives. Of course the former colonial powers aren't solely to blame for the problems in African nations. Never said that they weren't. I'm addressing previous assertions that because HK did it, Africa can, too, and only has itself to blame since it didn't, which is a cartoonish and simplistic way of looking at it, and one that I think we can both agree is incorrect.
So bascially, you don't like my wording and want to call me out on it, but you acknowledge that I am correct.
The UK pumps money into HK; builds it up extensively; the UK abandons their colony but leaves it with one of the world's most robust financial and trade sectors, which is left in the hands of their former colonists. HK is doing great.
The UK, France, Spain, Belgium, etc pump money into African nations whose borders they carved up themselves, build up their infrastructure where it suits them to extract natural resources (which, again, HK lacked), left the nations with the physical infrastructure, but not the means with which to maintain it. Africa has a ton of problems.
That is a very large difference, one that benefited HK in the long run (without British colonialism, it likely would not have ever seen a massive population boom and simply been another city in Guangdong). Although we can point to some examples where colonialism benefited Africa, for the most part, I think it's quite fair to say that its legacy created more problems than anything else.
Of course they experienced both positives and negatives. Of course the former colonial powers aren't solely to blame for the problems in African nations. Never said that they weren't. I'm addressing previous assertions that because HK did it, Africa can, too, and only has itself to blame since it didn't, which is a cartoonish and simplistic way of looking at it, and one that I think we can both agree is incorrect.
Only 5 European countries colonized Africa, there are over 1 billion Chinese and 1 billion Indians. They are going to Africa to "build infrastructure", Africa will be sucked dry. The European colonizers in hindsight seems pretty tame.
The attitude in China regarding the Opium War is quite benigh, sure the British did some crap but the Qing Empire was already rotting from within. The Opium War was just a nail on the coffin. The Opium War greatly weakened the Qing dynasty which lead to the formation of the Chinese nationalist party and the eventual formation of Modern China.
Ask any person in Hong Kong how they feel about the British the answer will mostly be positive. The British built an impressive infrastructure and most importantly a strong legal system. The average person in Hong Kong is a lot more sophisticated and worldly than those in the Mainland. They do not see Colonialism as a bad thing, in fact most of them would rather have their own autonomy than to subject to corrupt Chinese rule.
Complete nonsense many moved because they wanted land. Many Europeans owned very small plots of land but had huge families generation after generation the plots became smaller and smaller due to being divided up it became more and more difficult to grow enough food to support a family.
Your hypothetical example of asking a white man and then asking a black man is laughable.
They wanted land and they couldn't find any in Africa?
So maybe civilized folks didn't want to have to keep fighting parasitic bullies (who had to steal or use force because they couldn't compete fairly?), and so started "White Flight" probably tens or hundreds of thousands of years ago? And continues on to this day in cities like Detroit, etc...
At least you admit it.
People would do well not to romanticize migrations out of Africa as exploratory expeditions stemming from a natural curiosity or intelligence that Africans lack. What utter nonsense. I do not know for fact that my theory of largely coerced migrations out of Africa is accurate..but there are two sides to every coin. You want to call your ancestors more intelligent for having the spirit to leave? Then don't mind me calling your ancestors less competitive for not having the spirit to stay.
Kudos for connecting it to the modern phenomenon of "white flight", I hadn't even made that connection. Modern day evidence, how interesting.
Black people are so easily offended when it comes to their shortcomings, instead of defending their failures, why don't they use some of that energy and actually accomplish something once in a while.
Jokes on you, Im half black and half white. I see this whole race thing for what it is, and when I see bs, I say. Sensitive to what? Im neither black nor white, Im both black and white. I see both sides clearly. Id suggest you attempt the same. Perhaps its beyond you, idk.
Last edited by gumisgood; 11-05-2015 at 03:52 AM..
You still haven't disprove my post but anyways it doesn't matter if Nigerians or Indians are on top what I am trying to say is that brought up in the same socioeconomic status both Nigerians with parents who push becoming a doctor on them and Indians or whites who do it will succeed as long as they are in the same schools etc.
Intelligence is something that no specific race, nationality, or ethnicity has a hold on, no matter how much any group wants to push the issue in their favor. It really is more about social conditioning, access to education, parenting, etc.
I live in China. In the West, especially the US and Canada, the common stereotype is that "Asians are smart," with the Chinese being thought of as exceptional businesspeople, doctors, and scientists. That's all fine and dandy. Come over here to China; every day, I meet plenty of people who are dumb-bordering-retarded. Are they the average? No. The "average" Chinese person is average. They did average in school, have an average level of education, have average aspirations, and live average lives, with somewhat lower access to amenities than most Westerners.
The same goes for any Western nation, when it comes to white people: sure, there are plenty of wealthy, educated, cultured white folks... there are also the "rednecks," the "chavs," the rural or suburban or inner-city, "low class" people who aren't exceptionally intelligent by any means, and in many cases, make up or contribute to the average of that nation. It doesn't take a stretch of logic to figure that the same applies in African nations.
I went to middle and high school in Cambridge, MA, where the school district was well-funded, well-organized, and generally (though not always) did a good job of distributing resources. There were plenty of high-achieving African-American, Africa, and African-Caribbean kids who went on to do very good things and go on to very good universities, because they had access to the resources to do so. I have a very hard time believing that the problems in Africa can be attributed to a pervasive lack of intelligence among Africans.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
