Comments by "" (@orboakin8074) on "Whatifalthist" channel.

  1. 7800
  2. 2500
  3. 1200
  4. 939
  5. 652
  6. 251
  7. 231
  8. 202
  9. 135
  10. 63
  11. 48
  12. 47
  13. 44
  14. 38
  15. 38
  16. 38
  17. 37
  18. 33
  19. 31
  20. 31
  21. 30
  22. 26
  23. 25
  24. 25
  25. 25
  26. 22
  27. 21
  28. 17
  29.  @Luid101Clips  My guy, I see some of the points you are making but let me offer some counters: 1) One the issue of colonialism never happening, the two countries in Africa that were never colonised (Ethiopia and Liberia) didn't end up better than most of the colonized ones. both have been plagued with tribal conflicts and civil wars. Ethiopia has one currently ongoing and has no strong national unity, despite no colonialism and both their economies lag behind ours. A lack of colonialism doesn't automatically equal prosperity. 2) Regarding our country, is it as bad as you imagine? In the south, we are more tribally and culturally different than the north where they are more culturally and religiously homogenous. Yet, the south is more stable and economically rich and more developed with infrastructure than the north. Clearly we have shown that our diverse country can work if we have done it well in teh south. It's a matter of political leadership, not just tribe. 3) Even if the Europeans had never colonized us, it would have happened with another power; most likely teh Arabs in the Sahel region. They were an encroaching force in west Africa before the Europeans and had they gained more inroads, we would probably be a country like Sudan. Power imbalances and differences in economic strength and development always leads to colonialism. It would have happened to our region regardless. I am just glad it was by a better group like the British. 4) Finally, on the issue of technology and modernity, it would have been nice for us in Africa to get all those things via trade or diplomacy but in reality, this is not how it happens. Even in western Europe, the ancestors of the French and British got development and modernity and their identity after being conquered by Romans and adopting stuff from them. Same thing in Singapore where their own founder said the British were teh reason their civilization became established. This is the sad but true basis of human history.
    16
  30. 16
  31. 14
  32. 13
  33. 13
  34. 12
  35. 12
  36. 12
  37. 11
  38. 10
  39. 10
  40. 10
  41. 10
  42. 9
  43. 9
  44. 9
  45. 9
  46. 9
  47. 9
  48. 8
  49. 8
  50. 8
  51. 8
  52. 7
  53. 7
  54. 7
  55. 7
  56. 7
  57. 7
  58. 7
  59. 7
  60. 6
  61. 6
  62. 6
  63. My guy, I see some of the points you are making but let me offer some counters: 1) One the issue of colonialism never happening, the two countries in Africa that were never colonised (Ethiopia and Liberia) didn't end up better than most of the colonized ones. both have been plagued with tribal conflicts and civil wars. Ethiopia has one currently ongoing and has no strong national unity, despite no colonialism and both their economies lag behind ours. A lack of colonialism doesn't automatically equal prosperity. 2) Regarding our country, is it as bad as you imagine? In the south, we are more tribally and culturally different than the north where they are more culturally and religiously homogenous. Yet, the south is more stable and economically rich and more developed with infrastructure than the north. Clearly we have shown that our diverse country can work if we have done it well in teh south. It's a matter of political leadership, not just tribe. 3) Even if the Europeans had never colonized us, it would have happened with another power; most likely teh Arabs in the Sahel region. They were an encroaching force in west Africa before the Europeans and had they gained more inroads, we would probably be a country like Sudan. Power imbalances and differences in economic strength and development always leads to colonialism. It would have happened to our region regardless. I am just glad it was by a better group like the British. 4) Finally, on the issue of technology and modernity, it would have been nice for us in Africa to get all those things via trade or diplomacy but in reality, this is not how it happens. Even in western Europe, the ancestors of the French and British got development and modernity and their identity after being conquered by Romans and adopting stuff from them. Same thing in Singapore where their own founder said the British were teh reason their civilization became established. This is the sad but true basis of human history.
    6
  64. 6
  65. 6
  66. 6
  67. 6
  68. 6
  69. 5
  70. 5
  71. 5
  72. 5
  73. 5
  74. 5
  75. 5
  76. 5
  77. 5
  78.  @bevvy.bee9  Okay, my guy. Let's discuss: 1) You are correct that the British allowed the North to remain more intact and they didn't influence them as much or "they gave them power" as you say while they stayed longer in the south. But look at the result. The north was allowed to remain culturally and religiously the same with little British influence and as a result, they didn't get the positive British influence or infrastructure the we in teh south got. That is why the north remains poorer, less educated, less infrastructure and more insecure with terrorism and also have less co-existence compared to us in the south where our economies are richer, we have more infrastructure, better education, and co-existence with different tribes and religions here. We clearly benefitted more. 2) Yes, Ethiopia was not colonized but they also took far FAR longer to get modernity, better technology and good economics and even food stability. They also have less national unity than most colonized African countries. They tried to assimilate other tribes like Eritrea and have had more civil wars than us and still have terrible national unity and their economy is less developed than ours. 3) Friend, if the British and a few Europeans had not abolished slavery, as a result of colonialism, what makes you think it would not exist here? The last country on earth to abolish slavery was Mauritania and they did it in the 1980s and ONLY made it illegal in the mid 2000s but it still exists there. Slavery was a cultural and economic institution in much of Africa and it simply wouldn't have disappeared as you like to imagine without foreign (British) influence. Final note, colonialism sucks but it is something that tends to happen in all societies, cultures and throughout history. Our Bantu group of West Africa ended up becoming the dominant ethno-group in much of Africa. is that not colonialism? What matters is he reflect on teh after-effects and based on this, those of us who had more European (British, mainly) influence ended up better than those who didn't like Sudan that was colonized first by Arabs and the black Christian population was oppressed for centuries until they split up and they lag behind us in terms of development.
    5
  79. 5
  80. 5
  81. 5
  82. 5
  83. 5
  84. 5
  85. 5
  86. 5
  87. 4
  88. 4
  89. 4
  90. 4
  91. 4
  92. 4
  93. 4
  94. 4
  95. 4
  96. 4
  97. 4
  98.  @dylangtech  This will be a long read, friend. Honestly, my base prediction is that our country will have a rough patch as we are still working on maintaining our democracy and national unity but things will continue in an upward trajectory for us. Insecurity is a huge problem, mainly in the north due to proximity to unstable countries like Niger and Chad. Our military has undergone intense modernization and improved training to combat this. So there is some hope While tribalism is still a factor here, it's not nearly as endemic as you would think. Good political leadership is what we mainly strive for. In the north, they are more cultural and tribally and religiously homogenous but also the most economically underdeveloped and insecurity-plagued region here meanwhile in the south, with more cultural and tribal and religious diversity, we are more economically strong and tend to have better co-existence among different tribes. e.g., me being Edo but growing up in Lagos. That's partly because here we got more of the British systems before the north did. Even in the East, the Igbo people are more aware of how corrupt and inept leadership is what plagues their region, rather than discrimination by other tribes. On the economic side, our industrialization is increasing and we still maintain our status as the largest economy in Africa and it is projected to only grow. The issues we need to address are infrastructure challenges and insecurity. Demographics-wise, our population is largely young and increasingly getting more skilled and educated but, again, due to economic mismanagements, this has hindered growth and development. However, even this is gradually changing. Politically-wise, democracy is here to stay as many of us simply have no desire to return to military rule or to see our country balkanize as this would screw over so many of our smaller tribes and economically ruin even the larger one. We also still maintain our national language and a more secular-ish form of national laws. i.e., stuff like Sharia law doesn't apply to all areas or even to all Muslims in the country. We even tend to maintain an unwritten power-sharing deal between the north and south and we are working towards more federalism. On the issue of religion, it is true that Christian, especially us Catholics, do tend to be targeted but mainly in the northern regions where insecurity and Islamic terrorism is a problem but they also tend to target mostly Muslims too. The future of relations between our two dominant faith is likely one of civic nationalism as there is no serious animosity between most people of both faiths, especially here in the south where Christians and Muslims tend to get along far better. Basically, to sum it up, I am cautiously optimistic as a Nigerian. Socioeconomic, cultural, demographic and political pressures are what are ensuring that we maintain some sense of stability and given how most of our tribes and people (elites and non-elites, included) tend to benefit more from our nation's continued existence, i strongly feel we will continue to exist and things will improve. Plus, given how I grew up mainly in the 2000s and saw how the country changed and improved economically and socially after decades of military misrule (2000-2014 under PDP), I can strongly say that all we need is good political leadership again and most Nigerians would agree with me.
    4
  99. 4
  100. 4
  101. 4
  102. 4
  103. 4
  104. 4
  105. 4
  106. 4
  107. 4
  108. 4
  109. 4
  110. 4
  111. 4
  112. 4
  113. 4
  114. 4
  115. 4
  116. 4
  117. 4
  118. 4
  119. 3
  120. 3
  121. 3
  122. 3
  123. 3
  124. 3
  125. 3
  126. 3
  127. 3
  128. 3
  129. 3
  130. 3
  131. 3
  132. 3
  133. 3
  134. 3
  135.  @natasharules770  I know what #EndSARS is and I also know that the social issues in Nigeria and those in the USA are several worlds removed from each other and cannot be compared. So trying to compare activism in Nigeria to activism in the USA makes no sense. I seriously doubt even you could say that the American police are half as bad as the ones in my birth country. FInally, as to your weird point that we immigrants hate social justice because we are comfortable with developed countries, that makes no sense. We don't support the majority of your "social justice" movements because they are contrary to the concept of social justice itself and seek to foster more division or create problems where none exist while ignoring real progress already made or real problems that need to be solved. For example, you guys here in BLM simply want to abolish the police, despite the proven fact that such a terrible decision would do great harm to the black community while #ENDSars has no aim of abolishing police or security. It mainly aimed to remove corrupt police officials and end the brutal clampdown tactics they use against civilians. Another example is your social justice movement regarding immigrants. Your side tends to advocate for unrestricted immigration with no vetting or due process and even offer free citizenship to illegals. In what world would you ever imagine that legal immigrants like myself would support such a movement that would disenfranchise hard working legal immigrants who obey the law and work hard to become a part of the American society? Then there is the #Metoo movement and how that one does away with the legal concept of due process entirely, the abortion debate where majority of immigrants and black people do not agree with it because of how our community has been demographically destroyed by it and for religious reasons. Basically, your version of social justice is not the same as ours and given how the majority of Americans tend to disagree with the "social justice" crowd here, I doubt I am alone with my views.
    3
  136.  @srelma  Well, the simple reasons why my country is still, unfortunately, a shithole (I won't disagree with you there) is mainly due to our government and terrible government policies that have hampered our infrastructure (especially electricity) and eroded law and order; both of which are critical to attract economic investors and give rise to economic development and growth. No, seriously, that is just it. The corruption, the hesitance of foreign companies to further invest in the country is mainly down to our government; especially our current one since 2015. After 1999, when civilian rule returned, our economy was being remodeled and improvements were happening. Privatisation of many public monopolies was been done and our national debt was greatly reduced. Foreign investment and our middle class was rising up until 2015 when we elected buhari, a northern Nigerian, whose policies and incompetence have undermined much of the socio-economic progress, national unity and development our country made and resulted in many economic problems and worsening security crisis. One major issue with Nigeria is that when the British colonized us, the incorporated many different ethnic groups and tribes into the entity that became Nigerian republic. This is broken into the north and south. The British stayed longer and incorporated the south; fully pushing their social system, economic models and democratic process there and as a result, even before our independence, the south became-and remains-the economic power house of Nigeria and is also the most literate, and most developed and most secular region in Nigeria. However, with the north, the British did not fully incorporate that region. They conquered them but struck a deal with the ruling muslim elites to let them continue their social and political structures with little British influence. Thus, the north is more homogenous ethnically and culturally but lags developmentally and culturally behind us in the south. After independence, our union had to be maintained and many compromises were made like a national police force, a national electricity grid among other things. It was done with the aim of centralising power and helping the less developed regions catch up but it has been such a problem. Our country is a federal republic but federalism barely exists. Many corrupt politicians (especially in the north) have been abusing our federal system to embezzle public funds for their own enrichment without improving infrastructure and they also use the cover of "adhering to tradition" as an excuse, especially in the muslim north. In the south, we have our corruption too but the more established economic infrastructure here provides an incentive to said corrupt politicians to ensure that things function.
    3
  137. 3
  138. 3
  139. 3
  140. 3
  141. 3
  142. 3
  143. 3
  144. 2
  145. 2
  146. 2
  147. 2
  148. 2
  149. 2
  150. 2
  151. 2
  152. 2
  153. 2
  154. 2
  155. 2
  156. 2
  157. 2
  158. 2
  159. 2
  160. 2
  161. 2
  162. 2
  163. 2
  164. 2
  165. 2
  166. 2
  167. 2
  168. 2
  169. 2
  170. 2
  171. 2
  172. 2
  173. 2
  174. 2
  175. 2
  176. 2
  177. 2
  178. 2
  179. 2
  180. 2
  181. 2
  182. 2
  183. 2
  184. 2
  185. 2
  186. 2
  187. 2
  188. 2
  189. 2
  190. 2
  191. 2
  192. 2
  193. 2
  194. 2
  195. 2
  196. 2
  197. 2
  198. 2
  199. 2
  200. 2
  201. 2
  202. 2
  203. 2
  204. 2
  205. 1
  206. 1
  207. 1
  208. 1
  209. 1
  210. 1
  211. 1
  212. 1
  213.  @colinfrederick2603  Saying starting a "family=women's interest" is not sexist despite what current year progressive culture asserts. By that logic, you might as well say "men=providers and protectors" is misandrist. Not all men and women want to be, or should be, parents but how exactly is me pointing out a general trend and fact regarding most women sexist exactly? Don't women generally tend to have more nurturing and motherly instincts? Doesn't this also reflect in their choices of careers which focus more on people than things, unlike men? Your point about men needing to take part in raising of kids is also valid and I agree. I just don't agree that men should work less and women spend less time away from their kids because whether either of us likes it or not, the optimal way to raise a family is with a more involved mother being present for the child's formative years and a father being available but ensuring resources and means are provided. That's why even career women take time off or refuse higher demanding career advances because it cuts into their time with their children. As to my point that having kids later is causally linked to mental health issues, I am referring to the proven fact that the older a woman gets (usually past 25) the greater the difficulty in having successful pregnancies and the increased risk of cognitive issues developing in the baby like down syndrome. This is due to her eggs not being as viable and chromosomal issues developing. It also happens with males and sperm but ours is delayed because biologically, we are more viral for a longer period than women. Regarding your "Pareto Optimal setup" and build back better, what makes you so sure that will work, especially when the USA already has a lot welfare funding, family funding, nd increased public spending that has not really solved any of their intended problems that reducing poverty, reducing illiteracy and has even contributed to further destabilization of family units, especially black communities like mine? As for your mentioning of WW2, that was an extreme situation so it made sense to involve women in the war economy. But do you really think all women wanted to continue with that state of affairs? war, possible forced conscriptions, rationing? Finally, where am I saying women should be trapped in the home? No one is saying that. But more so, how is that notion different from you demonising women at home while glorifying women only working behind cubicles and nothing else?
    1
  214. 1
  215. 1
  216. 1
  217. 1
  218. 1
  219. 1
  220. 1
  221. 1
  222. 1
  223. 1
  224. 1
  225. 1
  226. 1
  227. 1
  228. 1
  229. 1
  230. 1
  231. 1
  232. 1
  233. 1
  234. 1
  235. 1
  236. 1
  237. 1
  238. 1
  239. 1
  240. 1
  241. 1
  242. 1
  243. 1
  244. 1
  245. 1
  246. 1
  247. 1
  248. 1
  249. 1
  250. 1
  251. 1
  252. 1
  253. 1
  254. 1
  255. 1
  256. 1
  257. 1
  258. 1
  259. 1
  260. 1
  261. 1
  262. 1
  263. 1
  264. 1
  265. 1
  266. 1
  267. 1
  268. 1
  269. 1
  270. 1
  271.  @emanuelsadu263  honestly, the issue with French versus British colonialism is for the following: The British were more selective than the French. They mainly colonized coastal areas or areas that could facilitate colonies. The French mainly just went for massive territory and were not as selective. Also, the British had a habit of instilling their socioeconomic and political structures and systems onto their colonies. This is why many former British colonies were quick to embrace and maintain democracy, capitalism, liberalism and civic nationalism even after the British left. The French mainly focused on maintaining control and didn't nearly impart more beneficial systems like democracy or capitalism and liberalism, plus the pre-existing poor geography and social issues in their colonies made it difficult to impart these values and systems. Finally, the British, for all their flaws and bad actions, actually did more good in their colonies like building infrastructure, creating economic development, modernity, and also abolishing slavery (which the French also did) The British also had a more humanist viewpoint as time went on with how they related to the colonies. A European journalist once asked some British administrators in Kenya why they were teaching the local Africans administration, democracy, economics, engineering etc. He wondered why since they would just use it to gain independence. The administrator responded that because it felt right and that the Africans were essentially part of the human brotherhood.
    1
  272. 1
  273. 1
  274. 1
  275. 1
  276. 1
  277. 1
  278. 1
  279. 1
  280. 1
  281. 1
  282. 1
  283. 1
  284. 1
  285. 1
  286. 1
  287. 1
  288. 1
  289. 1
  290. 1
  291. 1
  292. 1
  293. 1
  294. 1
  295. 1
  296. 1
  297. 1
  298. 1
  299. 1
  300. 1
  301. 1
  302. 1
  303. 1
  304. 1
  305. 1
  306. 1
  307. 1
  308. 1
  309. 1
  310. 1
  311. 1
  312. 1
  313. 1
  314. 1
  315. 1
  316. 1
  317. 1
  318. 1
  319. 1
  320. 1
  321. 1
  322. 1
  323. 1
  324. 1
  325. 1
  326. 1
  327. 1
  328. 1
  329. 1
  330. 1
  331. 1
  332.  @user-dn3fn3bg4l  Sub- means below, beneath, or bordering on. In this case, we in Nigeria are "sub-Saharan". there is nothing wrong with this term, friend. As for your view on Nigeria, I absolutely agree that we need radical reform but I disagree that we need to split as a country. What we need is constitutional reform and for more federalism and also increased economic liberalism. As for the north, yes, their political class is largely corrupt and inept when compared to ours in the south, in terms of modernity and democratic rule. That being said, we have our own inept and incompetent and terrible leaders in the south and middle too. Also, the north does have some very good and competent politicians and statesmen and people overall too, as we do in the south. Was it not Yar'Adua (a Fulani) who improved on the work of Obasanjo (a Yoruba) and made Nigeria one of the fastest growing economies? And was it not during his tenure that national unity was increasing, security and standard of living were improving? Finally, even if we did split, how would unity be maintained among us in the south? And would other regions/countries like Togo, Benin, Cameroon, and Ghana even be willing to engage productively with us? Average consensus among most Nigerians is that we don't want to split as a nation. Nigeria can work because it already did. Post 99 after democratic rule returned and economic reforms by Obasanjo came and fixed many of our problems like high debt and inflation, our national unity increased. Once buhari and APC are gone and better people come into power, the good times will come again.
    1
  333. 1
  334. 1
  335. 1
  336. 1
  337. 1
  338. 1
  339. 1