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.
So "ethnically" diverse, yet still "racially" monolithic?
And are you saying that diversity/multiculturalism leads to brutal conflict? So, does that mean that "global cabalists" are deliberately using this agenda to Balkanize, divide, & conquer the "first" world - not "better" it?
Except race is a concept and ethnicity is a shared culture, their are plenty of people who have people of different races in their immediate family yet ethnically are the same. Ethnicity is something that can actually be measured same with nationality and religion this is why US and maybe 3 other countries are the only countries that use race on the census. Yes multiculturalism leads to conflict, that is why China in the early dynasties forced centralization and a large Chinese culture on the ethnic groups that made up eastern china and that is why Han Chinese is one of if not the biggest ethnic group because of shared government policies like forcibly making a national language to unified the region known as china into one ethnic group. Almost 0 major wars are caused by two races fighting each other, most conflicts are caused by a clash of ideologies or a clash of ethnicity. The U.S isn't really multicultural as most Americans are either in general American culture or in an American sub-culture that is why places like Boston aren't warzones of ethnic gangs fighting each other anymore, before their used to be lost of ethnic fights between mafia members but nowadays with a monolithic white culture except for those diehard Italians, Jews and Irish who managed to keep their ethnic neighborhood together most don't see the difference between them and the Italian, Irish or Jewish neighbor. In Africa since these areas aren't really neighborhoods like in America but regions were people all speak a different language, due different traditions, celebrate different holidays buy different clothes then the difference is apparent.
You say African Countries are corrupt? Europe and the US's governments are insanely corrupt. The corruption is so great that we don't see it. It is a more, cerebral type of corruption. Most African countries are simply banana republics for these two powers. They are allowed to stay corrupt because of the US and Europe.
White South Africans are still the most prosperous people in the country. Despite making up only 4% of the population, they control most of the wealth.
"Africans don't get a long with each other" in most cases because white rulers played the tribes against one another to manipulate them (This is why slavery lasted as long as it did). Also, the Europeans carved up the continent without any consideration for the people already living their. Even to this day I needn't let anything go. Would you tell the Jews to let the Holocaust go?
Africa has a lot of problems, some of them stem from remnants of colonialism, but it is not like Africans are not 100 percent responsible for themselves. If Africans want to prosper they can. Blaming White people for failure is just an excuse.
Blaming White people is justifiable because they treated the Africans like animals and orchestrated everything that goes on today. Look up Thomas Sankara...
I wouldn't go as far as saying whites are responsible for every African development problem. I'm of the view that much of Africa's post-colonial problems are related to the path to development that many of Africa's new leaders chose after gaining independence. Too many new leaders wanted to emulate the Soviet Union's version of Socialism and it's one-party political system. This wasn't good for Africa's new countries. African countries need some form of mixed economies and flexible political systems.
Here's an example of the type of bad economic policies that too many African leaders implemented after independence:
Quote:
In the same year, Nkrumah visited the Soviet Union and returned much impressed at the pace of industrialization there. He came back with a rigid Seven-Year Plan. "We must try and establish factories in large numbers at great speed," he argued. State-owned companies and public authorities mushroomed in all fields. So did mismanagement and graft. The price was most painfully felt in the countryside as Nkrumah used cocoa revenues, controlled by the official marketing board, to cover the growing losses of public companies. The imposition of unrealistically low cocoa prices on farmers, combined with the bloated organization of the marketing board, devastated the industry. Many farmers switched crops altogether; others found ways to smuggle their cocoa through neighboring countries, where better prices were offered. Commanding Heights : Kwame Nkrumah | on PBS
Blaming White people is justifiable because they treated the Africans like animals and orchestrated everything that goes on today. Look up Thomas Sankara, a man who thought very much like you--that Africa should be self-reliant and independent. He fought for women's rights, Land redistribution, and self-sufficiency. What happened? The French had him killed and put in a puppet ruler in his stead. You're right, Africans can prosper if the can, but the Whites need to stay out of it
The Whites have left actually, the Chinese are now doing the dirty work, there are over a billion Chinese people, they will wreck more havoc than Europeans. Why did the Chinese move in so easily? Because African "leaders" sold their own country out. The past is the past, things are gonna get worse for Africans.
Last edited by littlemissrock; 11-14-2015 at 12:26 AM..
Jews remember the Holocaust, but they do not let it hinder their future. Israel is a very developed, wealthy country, it took them 50 years to accomplish that, Israel had no resources and had to fight its neighbors for decades. The political climate in the Middle East is still very precarious, Israel is at the forefront of scientific research, Jews have suffered a lot, imo way more than Africans yet they are extremly accomplished.
Hong Kong was a British colony for 100 years, Hong Kong gained independence in 1997, it has one of the highest gdp per capita on Earth, same with Australia, Canada and New Zealand. Colonialism was not necessary a bad thing.
libreria was never a colony and its poorer than most african countries.
Hong Kong was a British colony for 100 years, Hong Kong gained independence in 1997, it has one of the highest gdp per capita on Earth, same with Australia, Canada and New Zealand. Colonialism was not necessary a bad thing.
British colonialism often improved whatever country the British went into...Yes that is true because their motives were generally not as cut and dry as that of other Western European countries.....
But Spanish, French, Belgian, Portuguese, German, Italian ehhhhh not so much....Those Europeans nations tended to outright steal and not really care about developing any infrastructure in whatever region they dominated....They just took the resources and labor and used it for the sole benefit of their respective European countries...
The "White Mans Burden" is a old British concept....It's the concept that Whites (the British especially since they were the most powerful Whites at that time) must help other "less civilized" nations and that it was their burden to do so....Sounds incredibly arrogant and racist, but I would (much) rather be colonized by a country with that mindset than an outright genocidal mindset like the Spanish and Belgians had....
Of course it should be pointed out that MANY European countries never colonized Africa at all (most of Eastern Europe and most of Southern Europe and also Scandinavia).....Some European countries were colonized themselves like Greece which was colonized by Ottoman Turks for 300+ years....
British colonialism often improved whatever country the British went into...Yes that is true because their motives were generally not as cut and dry as that of other Western European countries.....
But Spanish, French, Belgian, Portuguese, German, Italian ehhhhh not so much....Those Europeans nations tended to outright steal and not really care about developing any infrastructure in whatever region they dominated....They just took the resources and labor and used it for the sole benefit of their respective European countries...
The "White Mans Burden" is a old British concept....It's the concept that Whites (the British especially since they were the most powerful Whites at that time) must help other "less civilized" nations and that it was their burden to do so....Sounds incredibly arrogant and racist, but I would (much) rather be colonized by a country with that mindset than an outright genocidal mindset like the Spanish and Belgians had....
Of course it should be pointed out that MANY European countries never colonized Africa at all (most of Eastern Europe and most of Southern Europe and also Scandinavia).....Some European countries were colonized themselves like Greece which was colonized by Ottoman Turks for 300+ years....
Everybody has been invaded by someone else, everyone has been oppressed, everyone has been exploited. It just happens that only black people seem to use Colonialism and Imperialism as an excuse for their current failures and problems.
Everybody has been invaded by someone else, everyone has been oppressed, everyone has been exploited. It just happens that only black people seem to use Colonialism and Imperialism as an excuse for their current failures and problems.
I think this applies to certain Black people.
First I'll acknowledge that colonialism did have it's negatives as far as the conditions that some black African countries had inherited. But I think these negatives could have been overcome had more post colonial African leaders chose the right paths to development. When I say that thinking in your quote is found among certain black people I'm referring to those who have economic views more on the "left".
Many post-colonial leaders in Africa adopted a more socialist-dominate view of economics where the gov't controls most economic activity. This is where things really went wrong in Africa. Not enough African leaders adopted a more capitalist-dominate view of economics or at least an open attitude towards capitalism. The only two leaders that did were the leaders of the Ivory Coast and Botswana. Both countries have had black Africa's better economies. See it's blacks on the "left side" of economics who tend to overly blame colonialism when their socialist-dominate policies don't work. If more post-colonial African leaders had adopted the more capitalist mindset of the "right" or adopted some type of mixed economy that included capitalism then I think more African countries would be better developed economically today.
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.
