|
On November 22 2012 20:44 robert1005 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2012 20:42 Slaughter wrote:Oh Africa. If only Europe hadn't fucked you up so much back in the day  Not europe's fault at all. They had war with eachother way before we came to africa. This didn't begin there. As long there are people, there is war...
Colonialism really fucked up the continent. Its pretty underrated in the popular thought but its true. I am not blaming Europe specifically, basically all powers would of done similar things.
|
United States43960 Posts
On November 22 2012 20:42 Slaughter wrote:Oh Africa. If only Europe hadn't fucked you up so much back in the day
Back when the Romans did it they backed up the conquest with ethnic cleansing. Likewise you don't see the descendants of the Native Americans continuing the wars of their fathers, they were defeated and degradated so utterly that they could never recover, you could make the case that Europe insufficiently marginalised the local population. It's a tragedy for the generation that get wiped out but then a new country full of new lives that never would have existed can be born in its place and a baby born of one parentage has no more right to life than one of another. Food for thought.
|
On November 22 2012 19:40 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2012 19:34 1Dhalism wrote:
takes a special kind of ignorance to, while talking in hypotheticals, out of all possible imaginable situations to pick a murderous and oppressive regime and talk about it with such pride and affection.
There is something very wrong with you Kwark. Kwark is arriving at his conclusions by logic. Now, while that logic may be flawed and the conclusions are certainly absurd, to engage in that sort of critical thinking without presuppositions is a mark of intellectual bravery, and to be admired.
Logic is overrated. It's only really good at creating true statements from true statements. Once you introduce anything slightly inacurate into your premises you can prove anything using logic. Since absolutely true statements about the real world are hard to come by using only logic often leads to patently absurd conclusions.
|
On November 22 2012 20:56 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2012 20:42 Slaughter wrote:Oh Africa. If only Europe hadn't fucked you up so much back in the day Back when the Romans did it they backed up the conquest with ethnic cleansing. Likewise you don't see the descendants of the Native Americans continuing the wars of their fathers, they were defeated and degradated so utterly that they could never recover, you could make the case that Europe insufficiently marginalised the local population. It's a tragedy for the generation that get wiped out but then a new country full of new lives that never would have existed can be born in its place and a baby born of one parentage has no more right to life than one of another. Food for thought.
Are you playing devil's advocate? This is an incredibly cynical view, and a justification for genocide if I ever saw one. I get where you're coming from, but this kind of bluntness is just depressing.
As an aside, what particular event are you referring to for the Roman ethnic cleansing? Their modus operandi as far as I know consisted of establishing puppet states which converted by themselves to the Roman civilization. Of course, up until the time they made everyone a Roman citizen, the rest of the population had basically no rights, but still... Perhaps I'm missing something.
In any case, there seems to be an awful lot of ethnic conflicts in Africa (and partly the Middle East), due to the fact most of the countries' borders make no geographical sense. Compare the amount of straight lines in Europe and those regions. Of course, corporate interests are also a factor, but how can a country be stable if the guy in charge sees his tribe or family's interests above that of his country's?
|
On November 22 2012 20:56 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2012 20:42 Slaughter wrote:Oh Africa. If only Europe hadn't fucked you up so much back in the day Back when the Romans did it they backed up the conquest with ethnic cleansing. Likewise you don't see the descendants of the Native Americans continuing the wars of their fathers, they were defeated and degradated so utterly that they could never recover, you could make the case that Europe insufficiently marginalised the local population. It's a tragedy for the generation that get wiped out but then a new country full of new lives that never would have existed can be born in its place and a baby born of one parentage has no more right to life than one of another. Food for thought.
Except the Native Americans never were able to recover, while Africa was able to eventually retain the rights to their land. Colonialism set back the continent many many years. Sure they had advanced growth due to the times but its not organic. Its forced due to outside influence. They basically haven't had time to develop for hundreds of years.
|
Belgium never should have left Congo in the state it was after the brutality of the colonisation had gone to light. Many of the issues today in Congo stern from the atrocious treatment during the time Belgium had control. It's also saddening how in history class that particular dark aspect of Belgium's history is barely ever talked about.
|
United States43960 Posts
On November 22 2012 21:20 scFoX wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2012 20:56 KwarK wrote:On November 22 2012 20:42 Slaughter wrote:Oh Africa. If only Europe hadn't fucked you up so much back in the day Back when the Romans did it they backed up the conquest with ethnic cleansing. Likewise you don't see the descendants of the Native Americans continuing the wars of their fathers, they were defeated and degradated so utterly that they could never recover, you could make the case that Europe insufficiently marginalised the local population. It's a tragedy for the generation that get wiped out but then a new country full of new lives that never would have existed can be born in its place and a baby born of one parentage has no more right to life than one of another. Food for thought. Are you playing devil's advocate? This is an incredibly cynical view, and a justification for genocide if I ever saw one. I get where you're coming from, but this kind of bluntness is just depressing. As an aside, what particular event are you referring to for the Roman ethnic cleansing? Their modus operandi as far as I know consisted of establishing puppet states which converted by themselves to the Roman civilization. Of course, up until the time they made everyone a Roman citizen, the rest of the population had basically no rights, but still... Perhaps I'm missing something. In any case, there seems to be an awful lot of ethnic conflicts in Africa (and partly the Middle East), due to the fact most of the countries' borders make no geographical sense. Compare the amount of straight lines in Europe and those regions. Of course, corporate interests are also a factor, but how can a country be stable if the guy in charge sees his tribe or family's interests above that of his country's?
We're off topic here but, for a start, the entire citizen population of Carthage. Countless Gallic tribes too, literally millions died or were enslaved in Caesars wars. Then there's the Dacians, wiped out by Trajan.
|
Damn, not even I would say sub-Saharan Africa was beyond help.
There are certainly countries that have huge problems, but there are places where you see a brighter future like Nigeria. Corruption, yes. Organized crime, yes. Sectarian conflict, yes. But they have a quickly growing economy. They might be able to come through it. What I am saying here is that it is probably best not to lump all of Africa below the Sahara in to the same category. All quite bad... yeah, but some are better than others.
I would like to point out though that Africa was a terrible place before colonialization. It is still terrible after. Hard to blame everything on colonialization when sub-Saharan Africa didn't have much to show for itself before the Europeans showed up.
Congo is just a giant mess. I hope they get a stable government... at some point.
|
On November 22 2012 19:22 Caihead wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2012 19:15 Destro wrote:
Sad.
I really hope the UN doesn't twiddle its thumbs and actually does something. Lord knows the western world only steps in when money or political interests are involved.
When will the world put humanity before money and politics?
The UN seems like the only armed force in the world with good intentions, but gets wrapped in international politics that cuts its arms and legs off. I wish the UN had more power and abolished the bullshit security council. The UN can't flex its muscles because its legal entities and peace keeping troops are hamstringed and made invalid by the policies of specific first world countries which also provides the majority of the funding for it. What do you want them to do when they can't hold the veto power states responsible for anything. When UNESCO recognized Palestine as a country the US / Canada / UK pulled their funding and vastly crippled the operations of the organization in actually providing valuable educational and health services around the world. Tens of thousands are affected by their operations on a daily basis and those individuals affected are holding UNESCO responsible for it. Look at the history of US Vetoes in the UN for the past 30,40 years, it's frankly disgusting.
Exactly. The dream people once had for the UN is mostly dead. As a canadian expat, i lost all faith in canadian foreign policy when that happened.
|
On November 22 2012 21:24 Slaughter wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2012 20:56 KwarK wrote:On November 22 2012 20:42 Slaughter wrote:Oh Africa. If only Europe hadn't fucked you up so much back in the day Back when the Romans did it they backed up the conquest with ethnic cleansing. Likewise you don't see the descendants of the Native Americans continuing the wars of their fathers, they were defeated and degradated so utterly that they could never recover, you could make the case that Europe insufficiently marginalised the local population. It's a tragedy for the generation that get wiped out but then a new country full of new lives that never would have existed can be born in its place and a baby born of one parentage has no more right to life than one of another. Food for thought. Except the Native Americans never were able to recover, while Africa was able to eventually retain the rights to their land. Colonialism set back the continent many many years. Sure they had advanced growth due to the times but its not organic. Its forced due to outside influence. They basically haven't had time to develop for hundreds of years.
I wouldn't say colonialism set the continent back because they would still be in the stone age if Europeans hadn't gone over there. I'm not saying it was the best way to try and bring them up to speed with the modern world and it did screw them over pretty badly but it wasn't all bad.
On November 22 2012 21:51 Romantic wrote:
Damn, not even I would say sub-Saharan Africa was beyond help.
There are certainly countries that have huge problems, but there are places where you see a brighter future like Nigeria. Corruption, yes. Organized crime, yes. Sectarian conflict, yes. But they have a quickly growing economy. They might be able to come through it. What I am saying here is that it is probably best not to lump all of Africa below the Sahara in to the same category. All quite bad... yeah, but some are better than others.
I would like to point out though that Africa was a terrible place before colonialization. It is still terrible after. Hard to blame everything on colonialization when sub-Saharan Africa didn't have much to show for itself before the Europeans showed up.
Congo is just a giant mess. I hope they get a stable government... at some point.
You're right, Africa is the fastest growing continent in the world at the moment and countries like Botswana, South Africa, Angola and Nigeria are showing the way forward. If the DRC, Zimbabwe and Somalia ever sort themselves out then the continent has a relatively bright future.
|
On November 22 2012 17:03 KwarK wrote:
Things were better when we owned the damn place. If it weren't for all the anti-imperialist protests we could invade, steal 90% of the natural wealth of the country and still be doing everyone a favour. These countries ought to be among the richest in the world, even in the grips of civil war and anarchy there is still enough wealth to fund constant warfare.
Unfortunately nobody wants the bad PR involved with imperialism these days, far better to indirectly sponsor it with demand for the riches of the country while ensuring that a black guy pulls the trigger.
That sounds an awful lot like our ancestors who were going to try and 'civilise' the place. And look what it has done.
Sorry, but that statement you've made sounds a lot like one that has led to repeated mistakes althroughout history. I'd think abit more before posting stuff like that. Back when Belgium had a pretty big claim on Congo, the land itself didnt get much richer. The rich get richer, and the poor just stay poor if you apply what you just said.
|
Lot of white man's burden and white guilt going around.
I'll admit though, I have to laugh when someone suggests that the impact of colonialism is underrated.
Literally every single problem in Africa is attributed to colonialism. Everything from the economy down to diseases are blamed on colonialism.
Sounds harsh, but we can't keep being responsible for these people. At some point they have to admit that they are in control of their destinies, and century old actions do not in fact resonate so strongly as to rob them of their agency.
Colonialism was horrible, but it's als a cheap excuse to blame everything on the white man.
|
Very unfortunate as Congo could become a modern economic superpower as it is abundant in natural resources, it seems as it's neighbors and other countries are determined to delay this as long as possible, especially Uganda as wounded and killed rebels have been found wearing said country's uniforms.
I'm surprised France hasn't had enough and just decided pull a Ivory Coast type of operation.
|
On November 22 2012 23:08 zalz wrote:
Lot of white man's burden and white guilt going around.
I'll admit though, I have to laugh when someone suggests that the impact of colonialism is underrated.
Literally every single problem in Africa is attributed to colonialism. Everything from the economy down to diseases are blamed on colonialism.
Sounds harsh, but we can't keep being responsible for these people. At some point they have to admit that they are in control of their destinies, and century old actions do not in fact resonate so strongly as to rob them of their agency.
Colonialism was horrible, but it's als a cheap excuse to blame everything on the white man.
White man's burden? Its not about being white, its about ethnically cleansing several races off the planet. I could careless about their actual race but the fucked up things Europe and their proxies(Euro-Americans, Euro-Latin Americans, Euro-Australians, etc) did throughout the last 400-600 years is by far the worst crimes in human history.
A large portion of what Africa is going through is because of European colonialism. The black race was even well on the way of being wiped out by Europeans, just like they did to the Natives of North America, Australia, and partially South America. The only thing which saved black people of Africa is ironically Diseases such as malaria which the black race could survive but white people would be killed by it due to different immune systems. Europeans couldn't "take" over Africa like they did with both Americas and Australia, so they settled for colonizing them through divide and conquer tactics.
Granted most problems of today are caused by African people onto themselves but it was the Europeans who fostered the initial culture of theft, murder, looting and crime in Africa. Afterall this all started when Europeans offered the first guns to Africa for slaves, which led to a very sad comment by the then King of the Empire of Kongo:
1526 Afonso wrote two letters concerning the slave trade to the king of Portugal, complaining of Portuguese complicity in purchasing illegally enslaved people.
In one of his letters he writes
"Each day the traders are kidnapping our people - children of this country, sons of our nobles and vassals, even people of our own family.This corruption and depravity are so widespread that our land is entirely depopulated. We need in this kingdom only priests and schoolteachers, and no merchandise, unless it is wine and flour for Mass. It is our wish that this Kingdom not be a place for the trade or transport of slaves."
Many of our subjects eagerly lust after Portuguese merchandise that your subjects have brought into our domains. To satisfy this inordinate appetite, they seize many of our black free subjects.... They sell them. After having taken these prisoners [to the coast] secretly or at night..... As soon as the captives are in the hands of white men they are branded with a red-hot iron.
|
On November 22 2012 23:08 zalz wrote:
Lot of white man's burden and white guilt going around.
I'll admit though, I have to laugh when someone suggests that the impact of colonialism is underrated.
Literally every single problem in Africa is attributed to colonialism. Everything from the economy down to diseases are blamed on colonialism.
Sounds harsh, but we can't keep being responsible for these people. At some point they have to admit that they are in control of their destinies, and century old actions do not in fact resonate so strongly as to rob them of their agency.
Colonialism was horrible, but it's als a cheap excuse to blame everything on the white man.
Its childish to think - "hey, big deal that we colonised this country, used its natural resources, enslaved the people, suppressed all cultural and moral values of the locals, enforce our way of life and our social norms, even exterminated 2/3 of the population (which is the case in Congo).But we are out of this continent for more than 50 years, its their problem now, we dont have to be blamed anymore"
|
On November 22 2012 23:30 sekritzzz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2012 23:08 zalz wrote:
Lot of white man's burden and white guilt going around.
I'll admit though, I have to laugh when someone suggests that the impact of colonialism is underrated.
Literally every single problem in Africa is attributed to colonialism. Everything from the economy down to diseases are blamed on colonialism.
Sounds harsh, but we can't keep being responsible for these people. At some point they have to admit that they are in control of their destinies, and century old actions do not in fact resonate so strongly as to rob them of their agency.
Colonialism was horrible, but it's als a cheap excuse to blame everything on the white man. White man's burden? Its not about being white, its about ethnically cleansing several races off the planet. I could careless about their actual race but the fucked up things Europe and their proxies(Euro-Americans, Euro-Latin Americans, Euro-Australians, etc) did throughout the 400-600 years is by far the worst crimes in human history. A large portion of what Africa is going through is because of European colonialism. The black race was even well on the way of being wiped out by Europeans, just like they did to the Natives of North America, Australia, and partially South America. The only thing which saved black people of Africa is ironically Diseases such as malaria which the black race could survive but white people would be killed by it due to different immune systems. Europeans couldn't "take" over Africa like they did with both Americas and Australia, so they settled for colonizing them through divide and conquer tactics.
Noone argues against that. The point being made is that you can not blame everything that is happening today on that, forever. Yes, Africa got fucked up pretty badly by colonisation. Noone argues against that. But you can't blame everything that happens today on things that happened long ago. Maybe you can blame it on stuff that happens today and exploits the past.
For example, take europe after WW2. That was a mess. Everything bombed to pieces, people hating each other, etc... Now compare that to europe today. The point being is that just because something was a mess 50 years ago does not mean that it needs to stay a mess forever. Of course there are no simple solutions to this. But it should be possible for people to stop having civil wars that slaughter millions of people every 5 years. You really can't blame that on something that happened hundred years ago.
Also, i see no reason to feel guilty about colonisation. I also don't feel guilty about WW2. In general, i don't feel guilty for stuff that happened when my parents were not even born yet. That stuff is not my responsibility.
|
On November 22 2012 23:30 sekritzzz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2012 23:08 zalz wrote:
Lot of white man's burden and white guilt going around.
I'll admit though, I have to laugh when someone suggests that the impact of colonialism is underrated.
Literally every single problem in Africa is attributed to colonialism. Everything from the economy down to diseases are blamed on colonialism.
Sounds harsh, but we can't keep being responsible for these people. At some point they have to admit that they are in control of their destinies, and century old actions do not in fact resonate so strongly as to rob them of their agency.
Colonialism was horrible, but it's als a cheap excuse to blame everything on the white man. White man's burden? Its not about being white, its about ethnically cleansing several races off the planet. I could careless about their actual race but the fucked up things Europe and their proxies(Euro-Americans, Euro-Latin Americans, Euro-Australians, etc) did throughout the last 400-600 years is by far the worst crimes in human history. A large portion of what Africa is going through is because of European colonialism. The black race was even well on the way of being wiped out by Europeans, just like they did to the Natives of North America, Australia, and partially South America. The only thing which saved black people of Africa is ironically Diseases such as malaria which the black race could survive but white people would be killed by it due to different immune systems. Europeans couldn't "take" over Africa like they did with both Americas and Australia, so they settled for colonizing them through divide and conquer tactics. Granted most problems of today are caused by African people onto themselves but it was the Europeans who fostered the initial culture of theft, murder, looting and crime in Africa. Afterall this all started when Europeans offered the first guns to Africa for slaves, which led to a very sad comment by the then King of the Empire of Kongo: Show nested quote +1526 Afonso wrote two letters concerning the slave trade to the king of Portugal, complaining of Portuguese complicity in purchasing illegally enslaved people.
In one of his letters he writes
"Each day the traders are kidnapping our people - children of this country, sons of our nobles and vassals, even people of our own family.This corruption and depravity are so widespread that our land is entirely depopulated. We need in this kingdom only priests and schoolteachers, and no merchandise, unless it is wine and flour for Mass. It is our wish that this Kingdom not be a place for the trade or transport of slaves."
Many of our subjects eagerly lust after Portuguese merchandise that your subjects have brought into our domains. To satisfy this inordinate appetite, they seize many of our black free subjects.... They sell them. After having taken these prisoners [to the coast] secretly or at night..... As soon as the captives are in the hands of white men they are branded with a red-hot iron.
The Arabs started the African slave trade long before the Europeans did, it wasn't us that introduced Africa to these things.
(not that they needed introducing to them because it was a continent of violent, tribal societies)
|
White man's burden? Its not about being white, its about ethnically cleansing several races off the planet. I could careless about their actual race but the fucked up things Europe and their proxies(Euro-Americans, Euro-Latin Americans, Euro-Australians, etc) did throughout the 400-600 years is by far the worst crimes in human history.
European colonialism isn't even in the top 5 of the worst crimes in human history.
A large portion of what Africa is going through is because of European colonialism.
Actually a large portion of what Africa is going through is because the Europeans left. Just like Muslim colonialism brought more advanced culture and a higher standard of living and an end to tribal warfare in the areas it penetrated, and the gains started to slide when the Muslim states started to decline. Europeans did the same thing, they left, the standard of living stops advancing and tribal warfare returns.
The black race was even well on the way of being wiped out by Europeans, just like they did to the Natives of North America, Australia, and partially South America.
You can look at the numbers and African population had been stagnant for over a hundred years before colonialism and remained stagnant for the first 50-70 years of colonialism, started to rise after WW1, and really took off after WW2. The "black race" was not "well on the way to [sic] being wiped out by the Europeans." And neither were the natives of North America and Australia "wiped out."
The historical ignorance in this thread - born of our terrible education system that places PC ideology over actual facts - is atrocious.
Granted most problems of today are caused by African people onto themselves but it was the Europeans who fostered the initial culture of theft, murder, looting and crime in Africa. Afterall this all started when Europeans offered the first guns to Africa for slaves, which led to a very sad comment by the then King of the Empire of Kongo:
Exactly what I'm talking about. The Africans "fostered" a "culture" of theft, murder, looting and crime in Africa because those things are universal among all human cultures. Slavery existed in Africa thousands of years before "Europe" was anything more than a collection of Celtic tribes trading with the Greeks. The various ancient Egyptian empires were, to varying degrees, built on the backs of slaves captured from Nubia, the Levant, Mesopotamia, Asia Minor and the Arabian peninsula.
If all you know about history is what your "Introduction to Why Whites Are the Devil" class taught you, you have been taught a story that is so simplistic as to be useless.
|
On November 22 2012 23:44 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2012 23:30 sekritzzz wrote:On November 22 2012 23:08 zalz wrote:
Lot of white man's burden and white guilt going around.
I'll admit though, I have to laugh when someone suggests that the impact of colonialism is underrated.
Literally every single problem in Africa is attributed to colonialism. Everything from the economy down to diseases are blamed on colonialism.
Sounds harsh, but we can't keep being responsible for these people. At some point they have to admit that they are in control of their destinies, and century old actions do not in fact resonate so strongly as to rob them of their agency.
Colonialism was horrible, but it's als a cheap excuse to blame everything on the white man. White man's burden? Its not about being white, its about ethnically cleansing several races off the planet. I could careless about their actual race but the fucked up things Europe and their proxies(Euro-Americans, Euro-Latin Americans, Euro-Australians, etc) did throughout the 400-600 years is by far the worst crimes in human history. A large portion of what Africa is going through is because of European colonialism. The black race was even well on the way of being wiped out by Europeans, just like they did to the Natives of North America, Australia, and partially South America. The only thing which saved black people of Africa is ironically Diseases such as malaria which the black race could survive but white people would be killed by it due to different immune systems. Europeans couldn't "take" over Africa like they did with both Americas and Australia, so they settled for colonizing them through divide and conquer tactics. Noone argues against that. The point being made is that you can not blame everything that is happening today on that, forever. Yes, Africa got fucked up pretty badly by colonisation. Noone argues against that. But you can't blame everything that happens today on things that happened long ago. Maybe you can blame it on stuff that happens today and exploits the past. For example, take europe after WW2. That was a mess. Everything bombed to pieces, people hating each other, etc... Now compare that to europe today. The point being is that just because something was a mess 50 years ago does not mean that it needs to stay a mess forever. Of course there are no simple solutions to this. But it should be possible for people to stop having civil wars that slaughter millions of people every 5 years. You really can't blame that on something that happened hundred years ago. Also, i see no reason to feel guilty about colonisation. I also don't feel guilty about WW2. In general, i don't feel guilty for stuff that happened when my parents were not even born yet. That stuff is not my responsibility.
I dont think that anyone wants people from Germany, Belgium, UK etc to feel any guilt or burden. It makes no sense. But my personal opinion is that these countries have won billions and billions exploiting African nations and should do something to stop the madness happening in Africa. I dont know exactly what, but something can be done if the former colonial powers have the will. There should be responsibility. I think this is the normal, human position on this matter.
|
On November 23 2012 00:00 mdb wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2012 23:44 Simberto wrote:On November 22 2012 23:30 sekritzzz wrote:On November 22 2012 23:08 zalz wrote:
Lot of white man's burden and white guilt going around.
I'll admit though, I have to laugh when someone suggests that the impact of colonialism is underrated.
Literally every single problem in Africa is attributed to colonialism. Everything from the economy down to diseases are blamed on colonialism.
Sounds harsh, but we can't keep being responsible for these people. At some point they have to admit that they are in control of their destinies, and century old actions do not in fact resonate so strongly as to rob them of their agency.
Colonialism was horrible, but it's als a cheap excuse to blame everything on the white man. White man's burden? Its not about being white, its about ethnically cleansing several races off the planet. I could careless about their actual race but the fucked up things Europe and their proxies(Euro-Americans, Euro-Latin Americans, Euro-Australians, etc) did throughout the 400-600 years is by far the worst crimes in human history. A large portion of what Africa is going through is because of European colonialism. The black race was even well on the way of being wiped out by Europeans, just like they did to the Natives of North America, Australia, and partially South America. The only thing which saved black people of Africa is ironically Diseases such as malaria which the black race could survive but white people would be killed by it due to different immune systems. Europeans couldn't "take" over Africa like they did with both Americas and Australia, so they settled for colonizing them through divide and conquer tactics. Noone argues against that. The point being made is that you can not blame everything that is happening today on that, forever. Yes, Africa got fucked up pretty badly by colonisation. Noone argues against that. But you can't blame everything that happens today on things that happened long ago. Maybe you can blame it on stuff that happens today and exploits the past. For example, take europe after WW2. That was a mess. Everything bombed to pieces, people hating each other, etc... Now compare that to europe today. The point being is that just because something was a mess 50 years ago does not mean that it needs to stay a mess forever. Of course there are no simple solutions to this. But it should be possible for people to stop having civil wars that slaughter millions of people every 5 years. You really can't blame that on something that happened hundred years ago. Also, i see no reason to feel guilty about colonisation. I also don't feel guilty about WW2. In general, i don't feel guilty for stuff that happened when my parents were not even born yet. That stuff is not my responsibility. I dont think that anyone wants people from Germany, Belgium, UK etc to feel any guilt or burden. It makes no sense. But my personal opinion is that these countries have won billions and billions exploiting African nations and should do something to stop the madness happening in Africa. I dont know exactly what, but something can be done if the former colonial powers have the will. There should be responsibility. I think this is the normal, human position on this matter.
You want to invade a dozen African countries with millions of soldiers and stay there for 20 years? No other kind of outside intervention is going to "stop the madness" in Africa. Tribalism is back. The Europeans suppressed it, and the instant they left it came back. Throwing money at Africa, when it will just be stolen by men with guns who are not open to any methods of persuasion except force, isn't going to solve the problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
