Africa is rebelling against de facto colonialism

They can all ****ing mass migrate to China and Russia as far as I'm concerned. But we all know those two countries won't have anything to do with Africans who are not white because both are incredibly racist.

 

Russia is mostly empty or very sparsely populated land. Perfect destination for masses of people fleeing climate change and Russia-instigated war and chaos back home.

 

Logic alone should prove that you are right.

I lived in Rhodesia during the later years of the Ian Smith regime. In 1978 they started to make some fake amends with the Africans (the "Harmony" project") but it was a fake show and although Rhodesia had already abolished lawful Apartheid (even before I arrived), racism was still very much in daily practice. It was disgusting. Oh, and as you say, Russia and China had nothing at all to do with it.

 

Just because you own an AK47 that doesn't make you a communist or a puppet of Russia (unless your name begins with 'T' and you have been indicted 3 times already.)

 

That sounds a lot like FL these days!

 

More like California or New York and especially Chicago.

 

Africa is overdue for a massive conflict to shake out its issues and try to form larger more cosmopolitan nations rather than the tribalist, post post colonial (ie its after the post colonial period, enough time has passed for them to straighten themselves out and they haven't) nightmare it currently is.

Ideally the more sane nations would smash these johnny come lately dictators and their more entrenched allies and incorporate into a single African nation that is continent wide so they can start getting some bargaining power on the world stage.

 

Well, you call yourself "Reality" but that is the most unreal suggestion I've ever heard. I'm guessing you don't know anything at all about Africa or geographic juxtaposition.

 

The Chinese supported and armed the government that perpetrated the genocide in Darfur.

"China stands accused of twin responsibilities over Darfur - for selling tens of millions of dollars' worth of weapons to the Sudanese government used to assault civilians in the region, and using its veto on the UN security council to delay and dilute action against the government in Khartoum."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/feb/14/china.sudan

At worst they sold them agricultural equipment?...lol

 

The Russian propagandists are all over this site. So he is pro-Russia at least.

 

The US gave massive of weapons to Saddam Hussein for the sake to attack Iran, with their WMD war.
The US gave massive of weapons to Indonesia who slaughtered up to a cool million civilians. The CIA called it on par with the Holocaust.
The US gives massive of weapons to Saudi Arabia, and with that they are committing genocide in Jemen.
The US gives massive of weapons to Israel, and with that they endlessly use it to ethnic cleanse Palestina to expand their Jew homeland.
While Europe used concentration camps all over Africa. Up to the late 1960's.

The genocide in Dafur is really not worth mentioning by the white western world, compared to what they did.
Good luck with your high horse standing in the deepest pit ever dug.

 

It's far more apparent that loads of white western people do not know what a disaster they have caused in Africa to realize that Africa turning their backs to the west is only logical.

 

Don't hurt yourself moving the goal post...lol

 

Oh the goal post is still there how China armed people who committed a genocide. But it's been put into the perspective that those who accuse China, did the same thing far longer, still at it and on a bigger scale.

 

You said China only did good things in Africa...lol

 

I think you're missing out on what I actually mean by the sane nations would incorporate into a continent spanning nation.
The insane nations? They'd need to go.
How do they go? Its generally by extreme violence.

 

Everybody is going for their own interests. But at the bottom line, African nations are currently far more better of by working with China than with the west. It's not as if the people of Niger got a lot to show for.

 

Right! They're better off in Darfur, because the government in Khartoum was working with the Chicoms...lol

 

Better of than with the West. They massacred over a million civilians in just Algeria in their death camps. And they got no silver lining at all. Sudan got powerplants and railroads. You can tell me why it takes Chincoms to drag them into the industrial age in a couple of decades. It's not what the West managed.

 

What death camps are you referring to?

 

What 4 different colonial powers got in common with Africa....
And in the end, they got nothing to show for it. Dafur was on a much smaller scale and not done by the Chinese directly.

https://www.cairn.info/revue-mondes-2020-1-page-33.htm?ref=doi
His men encircled and attacked the Herero at the Waterberg plateau on the edge of the Kalahari and then proceeded to chase survivors deep into the desert. The second phase of the genocide was even more destructive. Surviving Herero were rounded up and imprisoned in concentration camps, where they were put to work as slave laborers. Thousands succumbed to malnourishment, abuse, and exhaustion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_concentration_camps_in_Libya
the Italian military "killed half the Bedouin population (directly or through disease and starvation in camps).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algerian_War
The French destroyed over 8,000 villages and relocated over 2 million Algerians to concentration camps

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/aug/18/uncovering-truth-british-empire-caroline-elkins-mau-mau
British imperial history: the suppression of Kenya’s Mau Mau rebellion. Her study, Britain’s Gulag, chronicled how the British had battled this anticolonial uprising by confining some 1.5 million Kenyans to a network of detention camps and heavily patrolled villages. It was a tale of systematic violence and high-level cover-ups.

 

That is projecting western thinking onto African people. Yes, they do go to war against each other but it usually more about "lebensraum" than the ideology you are espousing. The conversion from tribalism to capitalism is causing strife but there is no single tribe, or coalition of tribes, with the warlike goal of imposing tribal culture on others. Likewise there is no capitalist African nation, or nations, with the military might to impose capitalism on others.

While tribalism has it's drawbacks as a concept it is actually a very effective form of social democracy at a local level. It just doesn't translate well into larger communities.

 

Maybe.

Because you don't know anything at all about Africa or geographic juxtaposition ... you don't understand what is "insane" and what isn't.

Again, you don't understand Africa. You have no idea what they have to work with and you only judge that huge continent (with a gazillion languages and cultures) by your fake Disneyland values where civilians blaze their assault rifles through shopping malls, kindergartens, primary schools, junior high schools, high schools, colleges, universities, post offices, churches, drive-bys, road rages & racial rioting, invading other nations such as Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Iran, Irak, Liby, Syria, Serbia, Afghanistan, Grenada, Cuba, Haiti, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, costa Rica, Columbia, San Salvador ..... virtually all of Latin America. "Insanity"?

 

It would be impossible to disagree with you.

 

The concept of an AU similar to that of the USA or EU is unlikely since those types of unions require some degree of equality in terms of governance and economy. There is a greater chance of that occurring in South America than in Africa and the odds in South America are dismal for that to occur while in Africa they are nonexistent.