---

Quote: from Prince o palities at 12:30 pm on Aug. 19, 2008

---

Quote: from kidd rune at 2:20 pm on Aug. 19, 2008

---

Quote: from summababy93 at 12:15 pm on Aug. 19, 2008

---

I agree with KweenZ. Africa was doing just fine, they didnt need anyones help.  Back then it was a very successful.  YOu should really know the facts before you talk about this stuff.

---

Not really.

---

 

 No.  He's right.  The superior technology and highly organized governmental structure of the African people is what allowed them to so successfully repel the Europeans.  The Africans had guns, cannons, warships, and highly structured empires while the tribal Europeans had only sub-standard Iron-age close combat weapons and hide armor.  

 Or was that the other way around...

---

First off im a female, but anyway.
They had kingdoms -- which means no need for a western governmental structure which they still try to impose on everyone to this day. And who says that highly advanced WEAPONS make for a great country? I think weapons are one of the number one problems in the world now so I think Africans had the right idea. They obviously werent concerned about devastating mankind for their own financial gain as much as your beloved white man was

---

Why don't you start naming off some of these expansive empires that existed in Africa in the 15th century before the white man showed up in the 16th century to be the single cause for the fall of Africa?

You're so educated, then this should be no problem for you, correct?

-------
whoisabs i'm not sure
Guess who's back?

---

Quote: from summababy93 at 2:29 pm on Aug. 19, 2008

---

You really dont get it.  Africa has so many problems now because of the influence of other countries.  To this very day people are still exploiting africa.  Its not a barren waste land, if it was no one would be there!  Africa was once full of successfull and intelligent people. They had there own kindoms, languages, and beliefs.  They were doing just fine on their very own.  Yes i do not know whether they would have failed or not. In my opinion if they were bound to have failed let them have done it on their own. They couldnt have been in a much worse situation then they are in now.

---

First off, if Africa were a barren wasteland, that doesn't mean that no one would live there. By your logic, no one should live in ghettos either.  
Second, this topic was not about how it affected the Africans in Africa, it is about Africans in America.

---

Quit pretending these morons can read or understand much of anything.

-------
whoisabs i'm not sure
Guess who's back?

---

Quote: from Springs at 6:13 pm on Aug. 19, 2008

---

Quote: from hithere at 4:05 pm on Aug. 19, 2008

---

i think it's likely that if the population of africa hadn't been dented by slave trade, more smart people and more leaders would have been available and they would have conquered the problems of the time and prevented africa from becoming a third world continent

---

thats what i was thinking  

 but obv this thread is a TRAAAAAAAAP

---

Obviously...  

Anyway, I don't know that this argument is statistically sound. If the sampling of people taken was truly random as many truly exceptional people would have been taken as were left. Thus, only a few would have been taken at all, meaning the impact would be relatively minimal. Furthermore, since the sample wouldn't truly be random, but rather favoring the less intelligent stronger population, it would stand to reason that there was even a smaller impact.

Anyway, all of this ignore the very politically incorrect fact that Africa has always been societally and technologically behind the West, Mid East, and Far East. It isn't a race thing. It's a geography thing, since much of the geography of Africa is ill-suited toward the centralization of culture into advanced civilization. It's why there were period of high civilization in all the other major regions of the world (the Chinese/Japanese, the Semitic and Akkadian peoples, the Indo-Europeans, and the Native Americans) early on except Africa.

The Renaissance was almost two hundred years delayed in getting to the Northern most parts of Europe, but you don't here the modern Danish complaining and trying to rewrite history. What is it to you (the "you" being a hypothetical black man) if your ancestors didn't figure out two plus two as soon as mine (the "mine" being a hypothetical white, Asian, Arab, or Persian man).

---

and to be honest only person who'd catch feelings over their ancestors not picking up something as fast as someone else's ancestors is probably the type obsessed with racial pride

and how do you get those special smileys?

-------
Anonymous is the greatest among us. A vote for him is a vote for a e-utopia

---

Know what. I think African Americans should be more grateful to the ancestors for not killing themselves, and enduring the conditions they were in.

---

Fuck that, I don't want my ancestors to be viewed as pussys. We should be grateful for people like Nat Turner. Kill WHITEY!

-------
I'm jazzy jeff.

---

I already explained the topic's inspiration Springs.

---

reads it

*facepalms*

i gotta stop skipping pages in topics

-------
Anonymous is the greatest among us. A vote for him is a vote for a e-utopia

---

It's OK, Abs. Prince O Palities is doing fine by himself.

---

---

Quit pretending these morons can read or understand much of anything.

---

---

The Africans had guns, cannons, warships,

---

Post edited at 5:48 pm on Aug. 19, 2008 by jakelong

-------
"Everyone helpin' each other whenever they can we makin' it happen, from nothin' to somethin'
That's how we be survivin'" - BEP

---

Anyway, all of this ignore the very politically incorrect fact that Africa has always been societally and technologically behind the West, Mid East, and Far East. It isn't a race thing. It's a geography thing, since much of the geography of Africa is ill-suited toward the centralization of culture into advanced civilization.

---

---

I guess it was the white man who is the one responsable for things like the Hutus and Tutsies slaughtering each other?

---

---

In the early years the Germans had a control in the region and were completely dependent on the indigenous government. The Germans didn't encourage modernization and centralization of the regime.

During this period many Europeans had become obsessed with the study of race, and this had an impact on life in Rwanda. Now to the Germans, the Tutsi ruling class was a superior racial type who, because of their apparent "Hamitic" origins on the Horn of Africa, were more "European" than the Hutus they oppressed.

Because of their seemingly taller stature, more "honorable and eloquent" personalities, and their willingness to convert to Roman Catholicism, the Tutsis were favored by colonists and powerful Roman Catholic officials, and were put in charge of the farming Hutus (almost in a feudalistic manner), the newly formed principalities, and were given basic ruling positions. Eventually, these positions would turn into the overall governing body of Rwanda. Thus the Tutsi oppression of the Hutus seemed somehow normal and expected. As with later Belgian colonizers, the Germans romanticized Tutsi origins.

Before the colonial period about 15-16% of the population was Tutsi; many of these were poor peasants, but the majority of the ruling elite were Tutsi. A significant minority of the political elite were Hutu, however. Europeans simplified this arrangement and decided that the Hamitic Tutsi were racially superior and should thus make up the entire ruling class, while the inferior Bantu Hutu should become a permanent underclass.

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Rwanda

-------
"Everyone helpin' each other whenever they can we makin' it happen, from nothin' to somethin'
That's how we be survivin'" - BEP

---

---

Anyway, all of this ignore the very politically incorrect fact that Africa has always been societally and technologically behind the West, Mid East, and Far East. It isn't a race thing. It's a geography thing, since much of the geography of Africa is ill-suited toward the centralization of culture into advanced civilization.

---

Exactly, Its also a climate thing. The climate in Sub sahara africa cuts down on population growth and without some amount of that civilization just doesn't grow.

---

All but 1 of the countries in the top 10 highest birth rate countries are in Africa. The US is at 14.0 Births per 1000 persons, while Africa is, on average, 30-35.

-------
"We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White children"
-David Lane

---

The birth rate in Africa is higher than that of the USA.  

---

If people are born but few survive then it doesn't help. Besides we are not speaking of today but historically how civilizations get created.

Post edited at 7:28 pm on Aug. 19, 2008 by jakelong

-------
"Everyone helpin' each other whenever they can we makin' it happen, from nothin' to somethin'
That's how we be survivin'" - BEP