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.
Huh?? What are you talking about?? You're certainly not following this discussion, so let me repeat: The multitude of problems that African nations are facing today are a DIRECT result of European colonization. By colonizing Africa Europe intentionally underdeveloped that continent.
In regards to those white farmers that you are blathering about, answer this question; who farmed that land before those whites got there, and also how did those white farmers come to own that land?
I agree. And before the gringos invaded California in the 1840's, the morning commute on the Golden Gate Bridge was a breeze, the freeways weren't crowded, and you could get a plane out of LAX without hunting for a parking spot. Good points...who DID grow all that wheat and corn in Zimbabwe before those whites took the land ...(and took over the electric irrigation pumps and the climate-controlled storage facilities)?
Liberal want to dwell on past mistakes and excuse every bit of violence as justified. It just makes more sense to admit mistakes were made and move forward. But everyone wants to dwell on past evils, in effect excusing all of this nonsense in Africa.
The point is the people who farmed that land before the whites are gone. People can either deal with that, and do the best they can, and work with the whites that live in S. Africa now and aren't going anywhere, or they can further violence and storm the farms then whine about starvation. The whites that live know no other home, neither do the blacks. What's done is done. You can whine about injustice or try to move forward and live together.
I don't think you get it. The people who did farm the land are STILL there, they didn't go anywhere. Furthermore the whites own most of the land and they own the BEST land, which gives them a great deal of economic power, a disproportional amount to be exact. This WAS the old way of doing things, a way which quite obviously isn't working out for blacks. What that country needs--I assume you're talking about Zimbabwe--is land reform, but the whites are against it, because it basically amounts to a massive transfer of wealth into the hands of blacks, in which case the whites lose whatever power they had.
So in the interest of living together and moving forward would you be in favor of land reform in those African countries where a disproportional amount of farm land is owned by whites?
who farmed that land before those whites got there, and also how did those white farmers come to own that land?
African's owned and farmed the land first.
The Euros took the land and built rather large, successful farms (I recall hearing Rhodesia referred to as "The Breadbasket of Africa" many years ago).
Through the benevolence of Robert Mugabe, the Africans got the land (along with the farms) back.
Now, all is well in Zimbabwe. I love happy endings.
I agree. And before the gringos invaded California in the 1840's, the morning commute on the Golden Gate Bridge was a breeze, the freeways weren't crowded, and you could get a plane out of LAX without hunting for a parking spot. Good points...who DID grow all that wheat and corn in Zimbabwe before those whites took the land ...(and took over the electric irrigation pumps and the climate-controlled storage facilities)?
You're not making any sense dude, why don't you try offering something substantive or move along. Hold on, better yet; why don't you try reading something about African history, before making yourself look foolish, before offering up nonsensical opinions.
The Euros took the land and built rather large, successful farms (I recall hearing Rhodesia referred to as "The Breadbasket of Africa" many years ago).
Successful for whites, but not for blacks. That's one fact you conveniently left out. Why? Probably because you know that that makes ALL the difference. One group of people--a small minority--get most of the wealth, while the rest--the vast majority--get scraps.
Liberal want to dwell on past mistakes and excuse every bit of violence as justified. It just makes more sense to admit mistakes were made and move forward. But everyone wants to dwell on past evils, in effect excusing all of this nonsense in Africa.
Are you saying cause and effect is a "liberal" concept??
No one is "justifying" violence. But, duh!, look at those "mistakes" and many of the problems today are a direct consequence of the past colonization, imperialization, slave trade, ect.
Liberia..."founded" by returned slaves, that rift between the haves (americanized returned slaves) and have nots (africans) still exists, still affects society. Add to that the (western run) diamond industry.
Rwanda... have you seen "Hotel Rwanda"? no, my knowledge is not based just on the movie, I have seen Paul Rusesabagina speak and read his memoirs. Society there was fractured by European colonialists coming in and elevating certain groups of people based on arbitrary qualities which they valued.
AIDS... Until the 80's drug patents lasted a short time, 8 years or so, and then were able to be available generically. Well, they hit the jackpot with AIDS drugs (which BTW, were developed from research by public funding). These drugs now have patents to 20+years, effectively keeping them from 95% of the population in Africa in need of them!!!! I'm not pulling that # out of my ass either. Why are they so expensive? So that big pharmacutical co.s can make fortunes, in the mean time millions of parents of the next generation are dying off, leaving children with few options of survival.
Global Gag order... how 'bout we pull foreign aid from countries who teach something besides abstinence with their OWN money??
Is it all OUR FAULT?? Hell no!! But hey, if your dog is defecating on your neighbors lawn, do you roll your eyes and complain that his crappy yard is bringing down your property value???
IMHO
"garden of eden theory" is used to explain much. b4 "you" showed up, it was a perfect world here.
is that true? with the "new folks" invention and new ideas come too. change is not evil. violent
purges under any movement, not matter how righteous they appear, harm many. we touch and
affect each other forever. liberty, what crimes have been committed in thy name.
for all its flaws the media is good. it prevents control groups from filtering what we see.
Last edited by Huckleberry3911948; 02-17-2008 at 11:33 PM..
If whites had never step foot in Africa it would still be the same sh*thole it is today, probably worse. As far as America exploiting Africa, I think the Chinese are doing the best job at that today. Why don't you go complain to them, I'm sure they will listen.
This just isn't true, it's hasn't been until recently (last century) that Africa went downhill. Prior to that it did very well, dating all the way back to King Tut and Shaka Zulu. No, Africa went down hill when the "white folks" took over. But at this point, it doesn't matter what happened then something should be done to help it now.
But to answer the original poster's question, the reason that most people don't realize that there are some very nice places in Africa is because most people don't realize that it's a continent and not a country (It is the second largest continent after Asia). While there are plenty of countries that are obviously struggling, there are also many countries in Nothern Africa that are doing quite well and have plenty of areas that can rival any upscale area here in the US. You just don't hear about them. That's why he was surprised, I know quite a few people who vacation there all the time.
Nietzschean Gangsta;2860258]Successful for whites, but not for blacks.
No argument there. I said the whites took the land. Not "bought the land" or "was given the land as a gift" or "won it with a King high straight in a poker game".
How did you arrive at my thinking that it was successful for blacks?
Quote:
That's one fact you conveniently left out. Why?
To keep it brief. You barking up the wrong tree of outrage.
Quote:
Probably because you know that that makes ALL the difference
.
Lost me on that one. What makes "ALL the difference"?
Quote:
One group of people--a small minority--get most of the wealth, while the rest--the vast majority--get scraps
Close. Here's my take: One group of people--a small minority--got most of the wealth, while the rest--the vast majority--got scraps.
The past, however horrid, is the past. I'm sure Mugabe is doing what it takes to secure a prosperous future for all Zimbabweans. Who has a problem with that?
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.
What are you talking about?? You're certainly not following this discussion, so let me repeat: The multitude of problems that African nations are facing today are a DIRECT result of European colonization. By colonizing Africa Europe intentionally underdeveloped that continent.
