Africa discussion

Africa discussion

why is africa so impoverished?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=Wfg-DK1I1JE
twitter.com/AnonBabble

wh*Tes

Because niggers live there,

Because niggers are not human.

why is Sup Forums so infatuated with black people?

/thread

It's filled with 60 IQ niggers that's why

>hurr durr niggers
i want to bash your head against the wall and rape your mother in front of your corpses

nigger/jew shill

Even worse than a nigger, it's a fucking roach.

The white people steal our land & wealth, rape & kill our children.

>gets upset that people are racist on Sup Forums

You should probably go back where you came from, Mohammad.

Cuz da eveel whie devah enslavin n sheet

I used Algeria as an example, and French people that lived there faced exteme violence agisnt them from the natives. Im not unaware of the violence against whites in Africa

My argument against the "nationalized" infrastructure is that there is no skilled labor to operate it, if a mine is left behind it most likely employed white laborers in upper positions who had prerequisite experience as well as managers with experience in mining. You cannot expect unskilled labor to just take up base infrastructure, education also plays a huge part in the economy of a country, and the Europeans, while investing in resource extraction, did not educate the Africans.

Also the nationalization put the means of production with the government which will of course just line their pockets because there is no "national" identity for many of these countries.

A good counter example of a backwater helped by colonization is UAE which had the wealth of resource extraction and infrastructure invested back into the country.

Daily reminder that by using the word "racist" (a term invented by a JEW to control your mind!) you're still playing into the jew's hands

>posts pic of niggers nigging
>see niggers aren't so bad :)
roaches are the dumbest most violent cancer on the earth, there's nothing to do but spray them

I've encountered the following explanations:

* An area is rich in resources; food and basic resources are generally easy to find. Inhabitants haven't needed to "plan ahead" for many generations, so they tend to live in the moment.

* An area has been socioeconomically repressed many times throughout history, draining resources and starving the people.

I lean more towards the first explanation. We see similarly lax behavior among welfare recipients of all races - to the extent that their homes and lives collapse into abject poverty. There is no incentive to plan ahead, or really do anything at all.

Yeah I suppose you're right user.

They had the ability and the means to take it, and you didn't, so what does that say about you compared to them? Do you now see why egalitarianism is a Jewish farce? Africa isn't going to get better. Accept that you're a nigger and that natural selection demands that you kys or your circumstances eventually will.

Shouldn't you rape our mothers corpse In front of us?
God roaches can't plan for shit

jew.

>I lean more towards the first explanation
except its hard to build a civilization when the neighboring tribe burns down your shit every 300 years.

there's a reason China eventually built a great wall

>the Europeans, while investing in resource extraction, did not educate the Africans.
same as the burgers who back-broke nigs for generations and then let them loose to run amok -- never re-integrating them, even denying them language skills as slaves -- and who now reaping the storm of a the little wit and wisdom the nigs' have garnered in the last 50 years... in the form of BLM and the "dib" / "kangz" movements

>bad institutions,
>difficult terrain to build infrastructure on
>hinterland has a really steep decline at the coasts, making port and rail infrastructure infeasible in many areas, hampering traid and economic specialization,
>resource curse, preventing stability due to allowing governments to not have to rely on the populus for tax revinues, and thus have concent of the governed/allowing functional government oversight.
>large number of diseases that decrease productivity, dengue fever, Schistosomiasis, the worst straign of malaria, yellow feaver, the most agressive and virulent species of mosquitoes,
>unpredictable weather paterns, preventing stable andanced agraculture in many areas.

Even if africa were to be full of europeans, it would be poor.

>why is africa so impoverished?
pic related (...and nigs)

also, if everyone has a million shekels, no one is rich -- a disparity must be maintained for there to be a distinct "first" and "third" worlds

what you're seeing lately is the rise of the developing nations toward a more "first" level of lifestyle (at least in their cities), which has a downward pressure on both western societies, as well as the bearers at the bottom of the Ponzi pyramid -- afro nigs

Africa is still mostly a trible landscape. Family is very important, more so than in Europe. They also have places that have been exploited for the resources.
My old man went to Lagos a while back and saw a guy put dirt into his food just to get the mineral content.
Very impoverished due to the resistance to change, traditional values, and a under educated population, where greed runs rampant. Also the overall lack of technology that is imported into places.

Good thing is that I have met some people from Africa who have an overwhelming amount of faith in Christ, and that bring me hope for the love.

>every 300 years

I've been under the impression it was more frequent than that.

I should've added a "people of the valley" analogy to the first point - blood sports and frivolous land wars are things taken up by very bored/narrow-minded people with nothing else to do but obsess about festering superstitions.

I'm not a sociologist, though. Just trying to participate in one of an increasingly rare type of discussion on Sup Forums actually relating to world affairs.

I really, really, REALLY don't want to say it's niggers and the Africans simply have had a lot of bad luck.

But it's niggers.

Africa needs less children tho

Cuz yall so funny and sheeeiit.

The land is really fucked up, the climate in large parts of Africa is horrible.

Rurally yes they were having high turnovers but central cities? nope
Timbuktu was not constantly pillaged, but it still wasn't able to have enough time to develop the surrounding area

And 300 years turnover still isn't great if you want to specialize, Istanbul, Egypt, and the Levant is a great example of this.

And again using Northern China, it was not developed until the nomadic tribes were subdued, and before that it was basically a shithole. Manchuria and Central Asia is a great example of what happens when a resource abundant land is not able to develop a sedentary lifestyle with civilization.

Actually this
More children > malthusian trap > everyone malnourished > everone retarded > more children

Angola during colonial rule
>high production volume of agricultural products, enough to export
>infrastructure being built
>better living standards than mainland Portugal

After independence in 1974
>nigs takeover and whites disappear
>3 different factions immediately start a civil war lasting 27 years
>agriculture grinds to a halt
>all infrastructure left by whites os destroyed beyond repair
>population booms causing mass famines

All you guys saying luck/environment are just clueless. Nigs are just subhuman retards, no way around it.

I don't think that's gonna be a problem for very long, they're all dying from stds and malnutrition

Same reason why people remain tribal at those latitudes the world over.

They had climates that didnt require, them to or lend themselves to making the neccessary steps to more advanced civilization.

In the Desert climates you needed water and agriculture, in cold climates you need to prepare for winter.

In Central Africa there was enough natural abundance they didn't need to make the jump to agriculture.

What is a more interesting question is what would have Happaned in the Americas if given enough time.

Technically the peoples of north america arrived on the continent about 15,0000 years after people were already well established in the Old World.

There is plenty of examples in North and South America of people more or less "pre-bronze" age.

If they had another couple thousand years to cook I bet the natives would have developed full blown civilization like you saw in Europe, Asia, and North Africa.

The Jungles of Brazil, and the Caribbean probably not, but Central Mexico, The Andes, Southwestern US, Southern US states, Up the east coast all had rudimentary civilization.

youtube.com/watch?v=Wfg-DK1I1JE

>he expected people to properly care for things they wern't educated in taking care of

The thing that made the "old world" civilizations so advanced was the sheer ammount of diverse cultures diffusing knowledge. American civilizations did not have this luxury and so were more prone to technological stagnation.

Nigga, you don't own any land and no one wants to steal that chicken bone you wear through your nose.