Comments by "Lynott Parris" (@DenUitvreter) on "Zack Mwekassa (english channel)" channel.

Like what? If the Dutch had colonized Africa, you'd probably be better educated.
3
@suedavis1613 Suriname got by far the most money of any former colony, explicitely because of slavery, but squandered it. Half of the population came to the Netherlands and had all access to free higher education, but many squandered it and are on welfare. And some now are begging for money again. I guess that if you are a beggar you will remain a beggar.
2
Actually the Dutch were the nicest people back then too, the world was just far less nice. Only peoples like the Khoisan were nicer but that's why they became victim of history. Among the powerful, including the Arabs, the Ashanti, the Chinese, the Japanese, the Moghul Empire in India, the Persians, the British, the French, the Portuguese, the Spanish, the Barbaries, the Ottomans, the Dutch were the nicest. They were traders primarily, not imperialists, they didn't want to rule people, but just exploit a bit of land everywhere and sometimes people. They could be ruthless in conflict, but didn't have a desire to submit and rule large parts of the globe. Not nice enough, but still the nicest. That's also why she says "We were not slaves". They Dutch didn't enslave locals because they didn't enslave people, they only bought slaves. That's why they shipped the Cape Malayans to South Africa. In Ghana the Ashanti ran the slave trade, the Dutch didn't boss the Ashanti, they had a settlement and they intermarried, and children of the Ashanti elite were send to the Dutch Republic to study. You are projecting the British 19th century imperialism in South Africa and the world on the 17th and 18th century Dutch here. In the 17th century it took 3 minutes to load a handgun that couldn't shoot straight for over 5 metres. The only power they had over most people of the world is that they could sail the world and therefore trade their goods. Only the meek, the people who had lived in peace for hundreds of years, could be overpowered if necessary. The Dutch were the world's superpower because of their capitalism and proper fair trade, not because of their colonial crime on the side, the British couldn't compete in European and other fair trade, and were dependent on violence for their imperialism with their desire to rule as much land and people they could submit.
2
That's just American sillyness that has been imported. They used to be called just Dutch or, when appropriate Surinamese Dutch or Antillian Dutch. But the Dutch blacks have to import American history and racism otherwise they are not victim enough to beg for money.
1
The past 150 years the people with slave ancestry or other blacks with enslaver and slave trader ancestry who came as 'refugees' from Africa have reaped the fruits of white Dutch labour mainly. Since that labour is far more valuable and it was a lot more people, I'm afraid the blacks have to pay up.
1
@enlargevision8777 Who is 'us'?
1
@faithhope3071 If you wanted to remember them you would know that the British took over in 1795 and started colonizing the whole country and rule all the people, the Dutch never did that.
1
A bit of a shame that that is all nonsense. Some of it is indeed reported so not your nonsense. The profit was from the VOC though, and most of it's profits had nothing to do with slavery. Trade with Japan, India, China, Persia, that was 'bring presents, leave your gunship at the open sea and kneel before we can start doing deals'.
1
@CasperLabuschagne Besides the fact that there was no Dutch king. The Cape settlement was taken over by the British 20 years before the Dutch got a royal house. The VOC (Dutch East Indies company) was funded by the Dutch Republic to take the war for independence with Spain and Portugal overseas. The Dutch stood up against foreign rule and gave the world freedom of religion, freedom of print (especially the books of the enlightenment), equality and upward social mobility. That worked out a bit unfair for people outside Europe for a few centuries, but good things take time spread over the world. All the values Dutch colonialism is no condemned on, rightly so, originate from the Dutch.
1
We are at a net loss with these people, please let Africans who sold them to us take them back. And all the other no use Africans that came posing as 'refugees' too. Reparations were already paid in the 70's, but were squandered. Good luck feeding South Africa without the people who made unused land into huge food producers.
1
@nagast3185 Not it's not similar. One was in the past, we don't do that anymore, we decolonized from our own free will, from a position of power we just like the rest of the West gave up power of people and lands. Unique in the history of mankind. People from the colonies asked for independence, convinced they could do it by themselves better, and got it. That was the deal, we don't need you anymore and we don't want you anymore. Fair enough, but then they messed up and now they all start moaning about colonization again and begging for money. They don't stick to their part of the deal and are beggars once again, it's embarassing. They claimed they wanted to end racism, but now farmers that have been there for centuries and took unused land can't keep feeding the people because they are white, embarassing. I don't know how colonized Africa was feeding itself before, but it had far less mouths to feed because Western medicine and it lowering especially infant mortarlity drastically caused the population growth. A far bigger population that is sustained by Western farming methods. You act like you want to turn back the clock 1.5 century for most of Africa, but you really don't because that would mean just 200 million Africans, every other child dying before the age of 10, primitive agriculture and hunter gatherers, and enslaving one another. De new democratic government of Suriname got billions in reperation, about 30K per inhabitant, and the land of course. Suriname wasn't much more than a peace of South American jungle before the Dutch made something out of it. Half of the population moved to the Nehterlands were they got free higher education and stuff, but a lot actually stayed on welfare. The king apologized because of pressure from an America inspirid activist movement supported by the racist left that doesn't really believe blacks are equal and should be handed advantages and gifts. Ironically the Netherlands had been a republic for over 200 years, and the first king abolished the slave trade in his first year in charge.
1
No, the British took over in 1795, that's when things got much worse for the indigenous people. I know you guys like to pick on the small country and only read the English self serving versions, but you really have to get your courage together and adress the British.
1
@xolisangcengedizzyworld Today's pain is your own pain, it's always the countries that got themselves into a mess where people feel the pain of many centuries ago. I don't see the reason to be still be mad at the Germans, the French, the British, the French again, and the Spanish. All of them have been much worse to the Dutch than the Dutch have been to South-Africans. If you can't move on, you can't get anywhere.
1
Then you will starve. It's only because of European science and agriculture the whole continent of Africa can keep more than 200 million people alive.
1
@waskyhenry6306 How do you know how those sound? They have been dead for very long. If you don't know shit about who colonized what and when, and how the different colonies and colonizers differed, shut up about it and go read a book.
1