Africa is rebelling against de facto colonialism

I've found this site to be objective.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/?s=niger&x=8&y=11

 

Thank you Scott for providing a perfect definition of what you find 'objective'. That website is wall to wall anti-Western propaganda. Not all made up, but all written to a particular end. You find it 'objective' because it tells you what you want to hear, nothing else.

 

Yes, its a barely coherent rant so drenched in smug self-satisfaction that its impossible to make much of it. I certainly don't plan to waste my time seaching for the point. Maybe try again using actual points and actual arguments rather than snide smugness and see how that goes.

You seemed to imply (I say seemed because I'm not sure even you know) that Vietnamese-Australians were disproportionately Catholic. You seemed (and again I say seemed because I'm not even sure you know) to think this was significant. Less than 20% of Vietnamese Australians are Catholic. More are athiest. Almost half are counted as 'Buddhist', though this is a bureacratic over-simplification that skates over the role of traditional religion. They have many temples, including one dedicated to Thich Quang Duc. It is only necessary to walk along a Vietnamese dominated shopping strip to see that significant numbers of Vietnamese here follow the blended Buddhist/folk religion traditions that the majority of Vietnamese have long followed. We also have Cao Dai followers.

Now, if you have an actual point to make just make it. Lets hope it is better informed than what you implied about Vietnamese Australians.

 

The West brought civilization to Africa and today is the moral yardstick of the world. Do they really think dealing with 2 of the greatest human rights abusers on the planet will benefit them? The kleptocrats are just exploiting anti-imperialist nonsense to try to muddy the issue.

 

I find it objective because what its articles and videos say is consistent with what people from those countries tell me.

 

Civilization BEGAN in Africa and western civilization derives from Egyption civilization, which happens to be an AFRICAN nation. There is archeological evidence for other civilizations in Africa and the oldest know civilization comes from a region of modern Turkey and dates to around 12000 BC. It appears to be the central "market" for what were smaller surrounding remains of settlements which might be even older than that.

The MODERN western invasion of Africa began around the 15th century with Portuguese explorers sailing around the western coast and eventually reached southern tip of the continent.

 

Ger real.
The west industrialized slavery in Africa, build concentration camps all over and butchered the indigenous population, installed white supremacy, leached their resources... and spit them out.

You sound like DeSantis claiming there is a silver lining to all of that.


For the heck of it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_universities_in_Ghana

All of Ghana had just 2 universities build recently in 1948 and 1952. Recently considering the west left Ghana in 1957. Ghana build over 20 after they left. Do note. The West found Africa long before they found America. First university build in America was in 1650! Odds even are that the west build them 2 universities for themselves in Ghana.

 

No, it is consistent with the way you process information - seek out opinions that confirm your own and ignore anything & everything to the contrary. I don't doubt you are capable of finding people from all manner of places to confirm your biases and I don't doubt that they are the only ones you pay attention to.

The fact that you have decided that a military coup removing an elected leader is perfectly fine because someone told you it is 'anti-imperialist' neatly summarizes how confused your worldview has become. Soon those military leaders will start killing people to prop up their dictatorship and you will finds a way to justify it. I wonder what you won't justify in the name of imaginary 'anti-imperialism'. Chomsky attacked people who tried to expose the mass killings under the Khmer Rouge, and you seem to be a fan of his.

 

Don't know much about Africa, do you rob? I have stood in the ruins of a beautifully constructed 3000 year old temple made by black Africans and I have seen a city carved out of solid rock by those same people. All done without the 'civilizing' assistance of westerners or anyone else. There was very little 'civilized' about colonialism at ground level. You wouldn't have tolerated being on the recieving end of it for a moment.

 

The function of empires is to impose civilization on barbarians. The Roman Empire imposed civilization on the Celts. The Holy Roman Empire imposed civilization on the Germans. The European empires in sub Saharan Africa ended centuries too soon.

European imperialism brought hospitals, schools, water purification, electricity, and other aspects of Western civilization to sub Saharan Africa. These have been deteriorating since independence. That is why African Negroes risk their lives moving to Europe.

 

You're not anti-imperialism, you are anti-Russian.

If you were actually anti-imperialism, you would be anti-US government, the largest practitioner of violence, imperialism and terrorism in the world today.

 

Coups de tat? Counts.
There are further koalifications that have no relevance to this thread particularly but deposed own elected leaders and is holding them hostage is just terrorism with extra steps.

O, no, I fully understand which is why I said a whole **** ton of violence would be what sorts it out. Disneyland values? Nice strawman you've got there Quixote, I'm basically describing the continent of Africa deciding its going to finalize its differences by essentially killing anyone who has beef with being a modern polity. That's not real disney approved chief. But you're a broshevik, so your lack of understanding is not surprising.

When you have people that sold each other into slavery, hold more slaves now than during the transatlantic slave trade, and have had every opportunity to modernize but instead stubbornly and foolishly persist with tribal governments and basic grease my palm I'm the headman corruption at every level, nothing short of a bunch of people that live on that continent taking out the trash will make any significant inroad.
Foreign intervention only goes so far. If the Ukrainians weren't willing to fight and die to keep the Russians out, it wouldn't matter how many missiles we lend lease them.
Same principle goes here: If the people of Africa generally speaking are ready to move into the modern era and ditch the tribalist bullshit that is about 75% of what holds them down, and they take active measures, that is the ideal to resolve the issue.

Ideals don't generally happen, that doesn't make them not ideal.

 

Lebensraum..... a term coined by a guy who started a genocidal war to unite an entire continent (and change, for an opener) under a single culture.
Want to use a different term and we'll pretend you didn't just run full speed into that wall?

Its not a conversion from tribalism to capitalism. Essentially every african nation's government on one level or another is beholden to local tribal authorities. Generally because no one will gainsay the 'chief' or 'headman' or 'shaman' or whatever the **** they call their head swinging dick. Tribal tensions cause projects to not get done because one side thinks the other side are animals for being born 1 valley over. Tribal relations get advanced by nepotism, corruption and kickbacks occur in tribal hierarchies that interact in other levels of government. And that's corruption IE straight bribery and embezzlement. That's not even talking about your standard pork which of course goes on tribal lines.
No conversion, its a war between a prior society and modern society. This war has numerous factions, which all interact with each other in various ways, but at its root its people who want the old way and people who want the new way clashing. These ways? Mutually exclusive. Tribal govs can be rather stable, though they don't have power and don't grow and get ****ed to death by larger polities. Modern polities tend to fluctuate wildly, but they also tend to be better equipped to deal with entities their own size and less susceptible to corruption.
That can draw out for centuries and kick off wars like this constantly, and suffering prior to it kicking off as conditions worsen, and during that time larger polities like the US, Russia, and China will economically control the resources of these nations in perpetuity, or they can lance the ****ing boil now and handle their **** like adults.

That's not projecting western thinking, that's demonstrable, observable, fact. They have this clash.

It ends one way: Either the moderns win or the tribals do. If the tribals do, the rest of the world will repeat the Spheres of Influence era of Chinese history (and African colonial history basically) and this time we'll keep that stranglehold. If the moderns do, and Africa acts as a bloc as Europe and the US do, they will be able to control their own resources and keep from getting divided and conquered.

 

I sincerely agree with this. As I've stated earlier I have traversed the African continent overland from north to south (eastern coast), from west to east (northern coast), and also several nations along the western coast and central Sahel. That doesn't make me an expert by any means but it does mean that I have seen so many diverse cultures and languages that I clearly understand that Africa (as a continent) is much more diverse than any other continent on this earth. It is easier to find common values between Portuguese and Finns than to find common values between Gambians, Kenyans, and South Africans for example. There are several reasons for that and there is no secret about those reasons but the point is that it is true and it shouldn't be overlooked when trying to understand the vast differences in cooperating with our neighbors.

 

You are plucking unrelated factors and even fantasy scenarios and trying to make it coherent by your standard so let us agree to disagree, move on, and try to be friends.

 

I see. So you're free to make **** up and attribute it to me, but if I point out you're doing that we now need to agree to disagree and be 'friends'.

Lol.

Dude we ain't friends. You're a known propagandist ffs. Further: Nothing I've said in that post is off base.

 

Well said, Eleuthera.

 

Now that that's settled.

 

Don't fool yourself. You won't be getting any sleep. You know it and I know it.

 

French Invasion of Niger could Turn Into an “All-out Franco-African War”?
https://www.globalresearch.ca/frenc...rn-into-an-all-out-franco-african-war/5827642
(excerpt)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To make matters worse for France, Algeria has joined the chorus of Niger’s allies.

The French archrival that spearheaded the independence of many of its “former” colonies in the 1960s is effectively an African superpower, heavily armed and highly motivated to never allow Paris or any other Western (neo)colonial power to establish a firm foothold in the region.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


I can understand why the people of Niger are sick of being a French colony.

Algeria’s war for independence: 60 years on
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/7/5/algerias-road-to-independence-60-years-on
(excerpt)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
France’s 2018 acknowledgement that torture was practised in Algeria marked a change in the French government’s dealings with the realities of the colonial period.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


This is a historical movie that shows what it's like to be a French colony.

The Battle of Algiers (1966) (EN, NL subtitles)
https://archive.org/details/TheBattleOfAlgiers1966

Click on the cc icon on the lower right to activate the English subtitles.

 

This looks interesting.

The French Colonization of Africa: The Pact for the Continuation of Colonization
https://jump.africa/news/the-french...the-pact-for-the-continuation-of-colonization
(excerpt)
---------------------------------------------
France’s involvement in Africa
France established a lot of colonies in Africa during the 19th century, some of which are still under French rule to this day. France was one of the last European countries to leave Africa, and it left its former colonies with mixed results.

One of the most significant events in African history was the establishment of the French Colonial Pact. This treaty stated that France would have military intervention powers in any country that signed it. It also said that all countries would be sovereign, but they could not sign any treaties with other countries without France’s consent. The goal was to maintain French colonial rule in Africa.

This pact came into play during the Cold War era when France had to take sides with either NATO or USSR. The end result was independence for many African countries around 1960-1970s, but these countries' relationship with France still remained intact (i.e., Tunisia). It also had repercussions for European politics as well as US foreign policies.>>>
---------------------------------------------

France's Colonial Pact with Africa.
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/France's+Colonial+Pact+with+Africa.-a0256805823
(excerpt)
---------------------------------------------
The Colonial Pact which France signed with its former colonies (NA, Feb) remains one of the most unfortunate things to ever happen to Africa. Let's begin with the historical context that produced it.

First, France never intended to grant independence to its African colonies. The French had a colonial assimilation policy deliberately designed to get Africans to see themselves as part of France; an effort that meant the absorbing of Africans into cultural harmony with the French.
---------------------------------------------

I wonder why the government of a former colony of France would sign a pact such as this. Maybe those colonies had puppet governments after official colonization ended so that de facto colonization could continue. That's what the US has been doing*.


*
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/american-imperialism.371897/

 

Well I just did, which makes this two nonsensical replies in a row. At least this one was brief.

The unearned superiority complex is amusing though.

 

The concept of "living space" PREDATES Hitler. The Boers in South Africa did exactly that when they invaded the Zulu territories and so did the British, Germans, French, Italians and Portuguese. Probably the only thing that stopped the Spanish and Dutch were their preoccupations elsewhere.

As far as the rest of the blathering above goes of course there is a tribal conflict with the imposition of western forms of government. There was a conflict in North America and they committed genocide against the tribal Native Americans.

Africa will EVOLVE at it's OWN PACE towards embracing some type of government that actually works within their culture provided OUTSIDERS stop trying to IMPOSE their own NEFARIOUS agendas. The RACIST Apartheid regime that caused so much harm to MILLIONS of Africans is WHY outside concepts do not work. The British, under Thatcher, tried to reintroduce racism into South African politics and the entire nation, black, white, colored and asian CONDEMNED that attempt. No one wanted to go back to that evil horror show.

So the solution is to allow Africa to figure out what works best for themselves. The people are generally friendly and will find a way to solve their problems in a manner that they can live with. In the meantime if the west destroys the environment to the point where it resembles a desert wasteland at least the San people of Africa will survive since they have the skillset that enables them to survive under those conditions. Who knows, they might even be able to teach westerners how to survive without their gas guzzling SUV's and air conditioning.

 

Communism wasn't as popular in Vietnam as Nationalism was. Its just that we turned the nationalists against capitalism by supporting their colonization. Before we sided with their colonizers, the Vietnamese nationalists were expecting that we, 'the west' and especially the US, would support them in their independence. Instead it turned out be Soviet Russia that supported them ...and so, ya, they took up communism too. We had every chance to avoid that. ...its almost like someone preferred to have a big war in southern Asia rather than an ally there.

 

No, they don't count. Believe me ... severed tattooed arms & legs have nothing to do with it. I think you must have posted in the thread.