They are underdeveloped because they have no access to resou-

They are underdeveloped because they have no access to resou-

Literally all of those are controlled by foreign corporations now, and prior to that, they were controlled by foreign governments.

So they have one of each item?

responding to your own strawman in the OP should be a bannable offense

aint got time fo dat cracka shit

>what is the resource curse

They're underdeveloped people of

1. Population boom caused by advancing medical care
2. Being the cold wars unrecognized playground for Capitalist-Communist ideological wars
3. Being absolutely fucking exploited to shit by corporations
4. Trying to go from being undeveloped to developed in the same length of time as Soviet Russia or Communist China but without gigantic reforms and 5 year plans and larger than life dictators controlling most of the continent

Actually they were controlled by their own government. Nigeria's government was the same as England's government, for example.

They were undeveloped way before then. Face it, sub-saharan African "civilizations" are like the retarded, deformed baby that everyone is just supposed to pretend is cute even though the babbies around it were building cathedrals, castles, and universities many centuries before anything of note in Africa.

>many centuries before anything of note in Africa.
>centuries
Wow it's fucking nothing, it took humanity existing 190,000 years before we had any civilization, so you can forgive africans for being a bit behind given the impassible desert between them and where it developed and spread from.

Literally the only time they were majorly exposed to trans eurasian trade routes which leads to the exposure of complex ideas was through colonization, which then was replaced by the cold war. African's haven't even had a chance to develop yet until now with China actually investing in something besides resource extraction

>Europe before the Romans.

whenever they try to use those resources for themselves some (((westerners))) get assblasted that they don't get a cut for no reason so they send in men with guns to overthrow whoever had the spine to try to actually look after their people and replace them with cronies and gangsters

Do people on /his/ really doubt that Africa is a shithole mainly because of what Africans are like? I thought we realized that, we just differ from Sup Forums in that we don't think it's ok to treat those below us sociopathically and we don't think fascism is a good idea.

>Minoans
>Mycenaean

But let me guess, dey wuz kangz?

Kill yourself you pathetic negrophile

Are they shit people because their countries are shitholes, or are their countries shitholes because they're shit people?

The answer is complex, but the parallel experience of Australia, as an equally isolated part of earth, lends credence to the idea that civilization is a gradual process taking root over millennia, and that the geographical isolation of a region from more dynamic parts of the globe can slow development to the point where cultures become nearly unrecognizable to more advanced parts of the globe.

TL;DR niggers

>implying Minoans and Myceneans were white

>Transeurasian trade routes is why they couldn't invent the fucking wheel
lmao

Also they had trade with both Europe and Asia through the Indian Ocean and Mali respectively

Niggers, niggers, niggers, niggers, niggers, nuke them all.

Hmm almost like I predicted your retardation
>But let me guess, dey wuz kangz?

>don't need wheels to do hunter-gatherer shit
>don't build wheels

It goes farming, then all the cool shit.

>they have no capital to develop these and most that are developed are owned by foreign interests

So which is it, they're undeveloped because they didn't have contact or because they didn't need to?

It's not that they're shit people, and I have no negative feelings towards them. I wish them the best and I hope that they figure their problems out. I just think they're worse in abstract thinking and long-term planning than whites on average, and that makes an enormous difference. I'd rather not that it were so, but the fact that there are probably 100 times more significant white scientists and inventors than black ones makes it hard to doubt. That's not to say that there are no genius-level Africans. I'm just talking about averages. I mean, I guess we could say that their circumstances have retarded their development, but for most of its history Europe was a disease-ridden shithole full of small nations fighting each other while believing in various absurd religions, yet Europeans created modern civilization.

>but the fact that there are probably 100 times more significant white scientists and inventors than black ones makes it hard to doubt. T
How is this a valid point in any way? You make no logical sense. OF course there are more white countries scientists, whites are more developed than black countries, you can't just have scientists pop up from a fucking undeveloped country.

> you can't just have scientists pop up from a fucking undeveloped country.
but they did in Europe

>never develop beyond hunter-gatherer societies
>Everyone else is at fault

*revisionism intensifies*

You do realize that the wheel has been thought to be invented only twice. Once in the new world, and once in the old world. It spread really through, you guessed it, trade, conquest, and diffusion. It's the same shit with writing, tl;dr most people copy, they don't invent themselves

They had the same DNA Greeks had today.

Not quite. Scientists in Europe came from the more developed countries. Albania, for example, has negligible scientific output and always has had.

Which was a literal 400 year process from the development of the scientific method to Industrialization and imperialism. It's ridiculous to expect them to be on the same level as Euros in only 60 years, especially for most of those 60 years they've been under the mercy of Neocolonial interests.

Why do people act like ~50 years of independence should have been enough for Africa to develop itself?

They spent the last century under foreign occupation and millennia before that effectively isolated from the wider world in tsetse hell with no access to most cereal grains, no tractable livestock and few navigable waterways. On independence most of them were left with fucking nothing. You could count the number of college degrees Belgium left the Congo on one hand (which is just as well, because Belgium also only left them one hand). What the fuck do you niggers expect them to achieve in less than a century?

I mean originally, in the first place. Europe wasn't that developed in the 5th century BC, when Greeks created their intellectual revolution... and it wasn't that developed in the 16th century AD, either, when the Renaissance got going.

Nope. Scientist came from all over Europe.

Why weren't they on the same level as Europe to begin with, when the first contact began between sub-Saharan Africa and modern Europe?

Cont. 15th AD century Africa wasn't even as intellectually developed as 3rd century BC Europe.

How even is a scientist is born, what is he going to do if he is dirt poor?

It took europe hundreds of years to reach a capacity inwhich scientists are generated.

Africa barely transitioned from hunter gather to an agriculture society.

Why were those regions so dirt poor that scientists could not exist in them?

Europe had a frame work from the greek and romans.

Which in turn they had a frame work from the early civilizations in the middle east.

Africa didn't even have a contact, plus agriculture is hard due to climate.

What? European science took thousands of years to develop, with many setbacks, from the initial inquiries of a bunch of Greeks who were mostly making shit up. That was only possible to begin with because they lived in a part of the world rich in food to keep them alive and with high stone walls to protect them while they drew their circles.

If a fucking Bantu nomad sat down to draw a fucking circle he would get eaten by a fucking lion and his family would die of starvation because they had no high yield crops. How many scientists are they supposed to produce?

Why did Africa never develop its own framework?

>le "nomads have it harder than seditary farmers" meme
Already disproven.

>most people copied the wheel, therefore Africans are not stupid for not being able to invent a fucking cylinder with a hole

Because scientist need funding and alot of funding can be used for better purposes.

Plus schools were probably damaged due to the civil wars that happened.

Because they were isolated from Greek intellectual tradition which spurred the renaissance due to the fall of constantinople to the muslims and the fleeing Greek refugees. This wouldn't be an issue if like I said originally, they were more integrated with the world trade network.

It's not like Europe was a paradise before Europeans civilized it. It's not like high stone walls were just sitting around before Europeans built them. And it's not like Europe was rich in food before Europeans innovated new food gathering and farming techniques. Maybe a bit more rich than Africa, but it was no land of milk and honey.

crops in Africa were shit compared to the ones Europe got from the middle east.

We're talking about many hundreds of years ago.
Why did they not develop their own version of the Greek intellectual tradition?

Europeans never invented agriculture or writing, they imported it, by your logic does that make white people retarded too?

>but they did in Europe
Except they absolutely did not. You're equating medieval or early modern with undeveloped. You're confusing lack of modern technology with undeveloped.

Development refers to the level or organisation not whether you have an iphone.

there a great deal of reasons but i feel like the reason your inching for is "dey inferior to da white man"

They did not have a high enough population density or funding.

I already said earlier that I believe Africans to be on average less intelligent than whites. I'm not inching toward it. I'm not saying they're inferior - that's a separate matter. Inferior in intelligence? Yes.

>Europeans imported it
From whom? The Middle East doesn't exist. It was a construct of he British empire in the 19th century. Mediterranean people invented both the wheel and written language.

Lack of writing, which was imported by the greeks, from Mesopotamian civilizations to record old modes of thinking. Which would be less of a problem if THEY WERE MORE INTEGRATED IN GLOBAL TRADE NETWORKS like I've been saying you dense fucking mong.

It's not that they've failed to develop, they've actually regressed.

Watch empires of dust

The people claiming its BECAUSE NIGGERS always have absolutely no idea how states development or how civilization works.

They expect the black man to spontaneously create a modern infrastructure and also scientists from a state of tribalism.

From fucking Israel.

>part of the world rich in food
Zimbabwe was the fucking breadbasket of Africa.

kys cucky

>Focuses on the worst country as an example for the whole continent.

Do you have any proof than 1 documentary

Europe had grains which literally never reached sub saharan africa. They had many navigable rivers to facilitate commerce. They did not have vast death zones of tsetse flies. The Mediterranean was quite literally a land of milk and honey.

>White people learned how to use machines and modern agriculture practice they learned

>Black people did not know how to use machines or modern agriculture practices.

So what, what does this prove?

Israel and Greece are both Mediterranean Civilization.

Because

>they didn't have contact
>they didn't develop sufficient agricultural technology

Both of which would reinforce one another.

Yes, i was joking, because our written language comes from the Phoenicians, which is now Israel. The Wheel also comes from Kazakhstan

South African crime rates.

>sumer was on the mediterranean
It's time to stop posting user

You all seem to be so convinced that there's no way it could possibly be that they're just less intelligent on average for biological reasons.
I can understand disagreeing with me, but why are you so convinced?
Are you at least open to the possibility that it's for biological reasons?
Individuals differ in intelligence, and there's almost certainly a genetic component to that. It would be surprising if there were NOT differences in the average intelligence of races.

Regressed from what, exactly?

It was culturally Mediterranean. They mostly interacted with Levantines, Anatolian and Egyptians. They themselves had extensive relations religiously, genetically culturally and physically with Mediterranean peoples.

Crime was always this high, the regime hides it in order to make it more appealing to whites who want to immigrate.

Also give me more proof with stats that show Africa is getting worse.

The Egyptians developed writing contemporaneously with Mesopotamia.

Our alphabet derives from the Egypt's 24 unilateral signs.

You learned something today, and now my sticky learning juices are in your knowledge hole.

After Europeans introduced high yield grains. Christ, you're dumber than an actual zimbabwe nigger.

>You all seem to be so convinced that there's no way it could possibly be that they're just less intelligent on average for biological reasons.
Because it's the easy answer which requires no intelligence though (the irony).

It's clearly not for biological reasons, the Romans would have been making the exact same racial arguments against North Europeans, you realise this? That every single argument you make now could be made against North Europeans in 200AD.

People acting stupid or uncivilized is pretty common.

It doesn't make sense to me to use genetic differences to explain something that was the universal norm for all humans until very recently in our development.

Especially since Northern Europe was completely illiterate at the time when the Babylonians had cities of a quarter million.

It was culturally Mesopotamian you twonk, all those others were inward looking, not outward, Rome and Greece and Carthage were Mediterranean because they controlled and used the sea, but these cultures did not to any significant degree.

IQ rates in Africa are similar to IQs in the rural US 100 years ago. Did white people evolve higher iqs in the last century?

Did Romans write that North Europeans were stupid, or just that they were savage? Cause there's a difference.

Whats the difference?

The form we use is developed from Phoenicians..

The difference is Europeans could easily import it, while Africans never had the chance. They did have another 5.000 years to invent it on their own.

Probably not, but let's see comparative intelligence tests of whites and blacks with the same socioeconomic backgrounds.

>It was culturally Mesopotamian you twonk
Mesopotamia didn't exist in a bubble.

>invented civilization
>is part of a subset of a subset of a thing that it created itself
No user

Egypt had a large trade network though.

It's dumb to divide it into culturally Mesopotamian or culturally Mediterranean when they were connected to both.

Both
They would have arguments about how the Northerners would not be able to adopt Roman civilization because they are inferior.

The oldest structures are in Russia so I don't think they invented anything.

Savage is when you say "they have strange customs"
Stupid is when you say "they're stupid"

Yeah, but the Phoenicians got it from the Egyptians.

So really, the only people who can say that they didn't import their system of writing from someone else are Egyptians and Chinese.

Sources?

> MFW Alexander the Great, emperor of greece, conquered Egypt/Nubia.
> MFW Rome did the same a few centuries later
>MFW Ancient Egypt was one of the first civilizations

Nigga the fuck are you saying

>Mesopotamia didn't exist in a bubble.
Except it did when its the birthplace of civilization and it doesn't exist anywhere else.
Yes it is stupid, but Egypts med trade wasn't much more than trade coastal trade along the levant and up to turkey, it's not on the same scale as Carthage or the Phoenicians, but this all depends on which period of egypt we're talking about

My great grandfather was a Rhodesian farmer and his diary describes teaching his black farmhands astronomy and mathematics. He concluded they too were savage, not stupid. What is your basis for saying they are?

>inb4 mugabe's farm disasters
The Russians and Chinese also completely destroyed their own agricultural output on a similar timescale despite being smart enough not to.

And Egyptians are a Mediterranean people.
Savage implies a certain behavior. Not just difference. Ancient Greeks didn't consider the Egyptians or Indians to be savage, for example.

I mean by the same argument you can say it's culturally Arab and Dravidian considering the trade links it had with IVC and Dilmun

>but Egypts med trade wasn't much more than trade coastal trade along the levant and up to turkey,
THAT IS THE CORE MED AT THIS TIME

No it not
noun
1.
(chiefly in historical or literary contexts) a member of a people regarded as primitive and uncivilized.

Check Mate.

Why did you lye to me?

>From classical origins the Hellenic stereotype of barbarism evolved: barbarians are like children, unable to speak or reason properly, cowardly, effeminate, luxurious, cruel, unable to control their appetites and desires, politically unable to govern themselves.
Sounds familiar

So you're just going to continually change the definition to suit your idea that they were Med cultures. If the med trade was 10 feet off the coast of egypt would you say THAT IS THE CORE MED AT THIS TIME

They weren't Med cultures man, they just bordered it, but for Egypt the nile was the basis of culture, and the Euphrates for the Mesopotamians, only really the Anatolians focused on the Med but not that much, they were often far in land and traded overland.