If Africa Was Never Colonized? (view, influence, culture)
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.
If Africa was never colonized it would still be a continent dominated by 3rd world nations. The borders and number of these nations would look very different.
Africa today is not backward because of European colonization, rather it was successfully colonized because it was backward. Unless the absence of colonialism somehow resulted in Africa finding itself with more enlightened leaders (it wouldn't have), the current condition of the continent wouldn't be much different than now.
How about what was there BEFORE European colonies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HumbleMerchant
Did the colonizers somehow suppress the potential of the African people, bringing about stagnation? I think not...
The theory that the entire continent was backwards is based on what? Let's get that answered before we move on. Keep in mind that Europe would look a lot different, no?
Both of those countries were partially colonized. If Africa was never colonized it will likely range in looks from somewhere like iran to like Afghanistan in terms of economy. Algeria and a few East African city-states could be advanced because city-states are more likely to be advanced and North Africa has been historically close to Europe or passing Europe up in development. Benin was well on it's way to becoming semi-developed before the British but I think besides North Africa.
The five year invasion of Ethiopia never took, they never established a permanent presence. Liberia was never a colony. I suppose one can argue the ex-slaves colonized the Africans but it's a tenuous argument at best.
There was no literacythat developed organically in Africa, minimal math and scant trade routes among African polities. Saying they'd be Iran an ancient civilization predating Islam with a 2500 year history of literacy and monotheism (in fact the birthplace of monotheism) is a big stretch and historically dubious. Even comparisons to Afghanistan although currently mired in poverty worse than many African countries seems specious.
The reality is colonialism as it existed was minimal in most of Africa, Few white settlers in all but a handful of countries and the living standards of African peoples by and large rose.
That being said I'm a proponent of self-determination and peoples rising and falling on their merit. So I don't support colonialism per se but it's clear it had many benefits. Heck African countries today can barely maintain the infrastructure left to them by colonial masters.
The theory that the entire continent was backwards is based on what? Let's get that answered before we move on. Keep in mind that Europe would look a lot different, no?
Enlighten us about the technological advancements of the pre-colonial Africa.
The maker of the video and others who say Africa would be just as badly off is forgetting one thing. Even if trade with outsiders would cause more conflict and cause some of the groups to depopulate the remaining, winning tribe would be better off in this scenario than colonialism. Using the Iroquois as the example, like in the video, if the Europeans had not encroached on their territory then at least they would get to live in their ancestral land instead of being confined to tiny reservations. Their numbers would also be much greater today. This is not to say the Iroquois' enemies wouldn't suffer but at least some Native Americans would be better off had colonialism not happened. The same would apply to Africa.
We also shouldn't blindly apply modern standards to define quality of life. Missionaries who visited Benin or Kumasi saw that Africans live in large, mud houses with comfortable furniture. Some even had conveniences like indoor plumbing. While these cities lack modern amenities like electricity or running water they were hardly hellholes. Sanitation and modern medicine did bring a lot of benefits, but without a lot of the turmoil associated with colonialism disease wouldn't be so rampant anyway.
Bingo
No one said if colonization of Africa never happen there would been just kambaya.. there oblivious there would been conflict as African Kingdoms expand...... If video compared the trading situation to native Americans. This flawed..
first off because the native Americans tribes were already influence of the British and France, The British and France didn't just trade they claim the territory.
Second in North America especially The US and Canada the tribes were't as technological advance as some African states. The were some advance states pre- combian but those were in Central and parts of South America. But along the African coast Europeans were trading with more technological states then the comparison he made with native American trade in the midwest.
Third off European and Asian states trade and fought each other to expand there borders. He used Native American tribes like it was the only example, while essentially the worst example possible.
The Expansion of prussia
The Unification of Germany
the unification of Italy
formation of the United Kingdom
Ivan III of Russia, Unification of Russia
Napoleon French Empire
Even the Ottoman Empire.
And etc
Quote:
Originally Posted by HumbleMerchant
Enlighten us about the technological advancements of the pre-colonial Africa.
And this comment brings me 4th there already examples in African history what trade can do,
by the time European reached African interior some African Kingdoms already fell. But By evidence of The Songhai Empire and others in the African interior that even have center for education, Africa did not need colonization trade could had worked fine.
Africa is not monolithic, In the history of Africa different kingdoms at parts, and time had different influence and powers.
Along the cost of africa, Ashanti, Yoruba states and etc the more powerful states ...... probably would been the "Prussia" and etc in Africa. Especially in West Africa. Another power Sahalian states would also likely risen.
No one said if colonization of Africa never happen there would been just kambaya.. there oblivious there would been conflict as African Kingdoms expand...... If video compared the trading situation to native Americans. This flawed..
first off because the native Americans tribes were already influence of the British and France, The British and France didn't just trade they claim the territory.
Second in North America especially The US and Canada the tribes were't as technological advance as some African states. The were some advance states pre- combian but those were in Central and parts of South America. But along the African coast Europeans were trading with more technological states then the comparison he made with native American trade in the midwest.
Third off European and Asian states trade and fought each other to expand there borders. He used Native American tribes like it was the only example, while essentially the worst example possible.
The Expansion of prussia
The Unification of Germany
the unification of Italy
formation of the United Kingdom
Ivan III of Russia, Unification of Russia
Napoleon French Empire
Even the Ottoman Empire.
And etc
And this comment brings me 4th there already examples in African history what trade can do,
by the time European reached African interior some African Kingdoms already fell. But By evidence of The Songhai Empire and others in the African interior that even have center for education, Africa did not need colonization trade could had worked fine.
Africa is not monolithic, In the history of Africa different kingdoms at parts, and time had different influence and powers.
Along the cost of africa, Ashanti, Yoruba states and etc the more powerful states ...... probably would been the "Prussia" and etc in Africa. Especially in West Africa. Another power Sahalian states would also likely risen.
What are the last four images?
The first one is probably a Benin bronze. The last one looks like either Kumasi or Abomey. Not sure about the other ones.
The five year invasion of Ethiopia never took, they never established a permanent presence. Liberia was never a colony. I suppose one can argue the ex-slaves colonized the Africans but it's a tenuous argument at best.
There was no literacythat developed organically in Africa, minimal math and scant trade routes among African polities. Saying they'd be Iran an ancient civilization predating Islam with a 2500 year history of literacy and monotheism (in fact the birthplace of monotheism) is a big stretch and historically dubious. Even comparisons to Afghanistan although currently mired in poverty worse than many African countries seems specious.
The reality is colonialism as it existed was minimal in most of Africa, Few white settlers in all but a handful of countries and the living standards of African peoples by and large rose.
That being said I'm a proponent of self-determination and peoples rising and falling on their merit. So I don't support colonialism per se but it's clear it had many benefits. Heck African countries today can barely maintain the infrastructure left to them by colonial masters.
Again Africa is not monolithic. The History of Africa is not monolithic. The Idea that trying to use Liberia a small areas that never was a center a powerful African state as a example of how Africa would be like never colonized is flawed. Oh because Liberia was like blank so Ghana and etc would be like that too. That views seem to be missing something.
Also while Ethiopia was hardly colonized the general region around Ethiopia was. Giving Ethiopia minimal influence and power even it's own region.
There actually was a few Sub sahara African society that develop a form communication through writing but that isn't the point. a lot of advancement in the world had through trade. Christianity is not native to Europe, Islam is not native to most of the middle east. Along the Sahel and Parts of East Africa there was spread of Islam. And So parts a spread of Christianity that spread of literacy among the elite. So idea that education and etc could not be spread is false.
Keep in Mind my point is not that African states would not endure conflicts my point is through trade with Europe and Asia the power African states would likely expand into other areas of Africa. Spreading ideas and etc. The idea that colonization was necessary to spread advancing technological is bs, because the more powerful African states could did it themselves. The difference would been powerful African states drawing borders themselves then European forcing lines that conflicted with cultures.
Last edited by chiatldal; 02-14-2018 at 03:44 PM..
What are the last four images?
The first one is probably a Benin bronze. The last one looks like either Kumasi or Abomey. Not sure about the other ones.
You pretty much got it.
MY point there were clearly African Kingdoms interested in learning new idea and developing.
From The 1750 to point Africa colonization in the late 1890's Europe inter the industrial revolutions.
There was a lot of colonization in not just Africa, but in India and Indochinia that did not need colonization for technological advance trade would had worked fine because they was Mid-evil like states. But at this point Europe powers where not into trading they wanted to colonized those places for power and political regions. If they colonized those places they will be able take resources from them with out previous political system there benefiting.
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.
