Youtube comments of (@orboakin8074).
-
7800
-
7100
-
6900
-
6800
-
6700
-
5300
-
4200
-
3400
-
3300
-
3300
-
As a Nigerian, my opinion on colonialism will be more nuanced than that of most westerners. On one hand, it was brutal in some ways but on the other it did play a huge role in bringing much of Africa into the modern age via introduction of modern tech, medicine, western education, and nation building. My country literally wouldn't exist without the British. For all the issues we face, most of us wouldn't ever dream of not having a country of our own.
Also, one major good it did was abolish slavery. I cannot be more thankful for the British using their naval power and economic might to suppress the slave trade in Africa. Oh, I know they partook in it for a time, themselves, but it existed here long before whites ever came to Africa. Even my own ancestors of the Edo kingdom were slavers. What makes the British different is that unlike other regional African and Arab powers, they had the cultural & religious framework, wisdom, humanity and courage to actually stop the evil of slavery even at huge cost to their economy.
2800
-
As a Nigerian, my opinion on colonialism will be more nuanced than that of most westerners. On one hand, it was brutal in some ways but on the other it did play a huge role in bringing much of Africa into the modern age via introduction of modern tech, medicine, western education, and nation building. My country and many others would literally not exist without it and most of us are happy with that. Even many people who actually lived through British colonialism in Nigeria, like my grandmother and great grandmother (before she passed away in the early 2000s) don't look at it with horror or anger. They saw so many improvements like modern medicine and better food production and they even saw their children and families rise from poverty because of the effects.
Also, one major good it did was abolish slavery. I cannot be more thankful for the British using their naval power and economic might to suppress the slave trade in Africa. Oh, I know they partook in it for a time, themselves, but it existed here long before whites ever came to Africa. Even my own ancestors of the Edo kingdom were slavers. Same with the Arabs who had a longer and more brutal slave trade here. What makes the British different is that unlike other regional African and Arab powers, they had the cultural & religious framework, wisdom, humanity and courage to actually stop the evil of slavery even at huge cost to their economy. God bless them.
2500
-
As an African (Nigerian) it is so refreshing to see a fellow African address the issue of poverty here objectively and accurately. We don't have poverty or development problems because of colonialism but largely because of government corruption, terrible socioeconomic policies (like socialism), poor institutions, and other factors like bad geography. During the independence period from the 50s till the 60s, many post-colonial African leaders made the terrible decisions of abandoning the economic, political and social models left by the Europeans here. They undid things like democratic rule, liberalism, capitalism, property rights, better education standards, and civic nationalism. This was done due to lingering resentment of colonialism and also the rabid indoctrination into leftwing ideology that many of these "leaders" got in higher education. This led to social unrest, economic disruption and loss of life due to corruption and political instability that still hinders Africa to this day. Examples are in Tanzania where Julius Nyere, an avid Marxist-Leninist, began his programs of African socialism (Ujamaa) with good intentions but they ultimately ruined the economy, caused massive poverty, and led to increased authoritarianism in Tanzania. The country only began improving once he stepped down and his policies were undone. Another example is in my own country where after our independence in 1960, we had a brutal civil war and military rule for several decades. Controlled economy replaced our capitalist model and we experienced massive unemployment, poverty, insecurity, increased debt etc. This was all ended once we returned to democratic rule in 99 and onwards. President Obasanjo and subsequent governments liberalized our economy and reformed it via privatization and this led to reducing our national and foreign debt, created many more jobs, and reduced inflation.
2100
-
2000
-
1600
-
1500
-
1400
-
1400
-
As a Nigerian, my opinion on colonialism will be more nuanced than that of most westerners. On one hand, it was brutal in some ways but on the other it did play a huge role in bringing much of Africa into the modern age via introduction of modern tech, medicine, western education, and nation building. My country literally wouldn't exist without the British. For all the issues we face, most of us wouldn't ever dream of not having a country of our own.
Also, one major good it did was abolish slavery. I cannot be more thankful for the British using their naval power and economic might to suppress the slave trade in Africa. Oh, I know they partook in it for a time, themselves, but it existed here long before whites ever came to Africa. Even my own ancestors of the Edo kingdom were slavers. What makes the British different is that unlike other regional African and Arab powers, they had the cultural & religious framework, wisdom, humanity and courage to actually stop the evil of slavery even at huge cost to their economy.
1400
-
1300
-
1300
-
1200
-
971
-
When I watch your videos, I get partly black-pilled, frightened and a little white-pilled at the end. I have no doubt the world is in for some turbulent (or as the Chinese say, "interesting") times but I have a good feeling most of us will make it and it will be grueling and hard but necessary. Heck! My grandparents and my great-grandmother, along with my parents and their respective families, made it through the colonial era of Nigeria, our civil war, military juntas, the cold war, and even I made it through the 2000s, the great recession, the SARS, Ebola, Avian flu pandemics, and much more. We humans are a stubborn and resilient species and many of us have experienced so serious stuff and I am damn sure we will survive what's coming, Amen.😊😊
939
-
923
-
895
-
892
-
884
-
875
-
860
-
844
-
801
-
Doctor Peterson, as a Nigerian I want to thank you for this video and I also want to express my condolences to the Queen's family and the people of the UK. One thing that many of us in Africa cannot deny is that slavery was ended by the British during the era of colonialism they were involved with. Heck! My own ancestors were slavers and also enslaved by other Africans and this stopped thanks to the British. Plus, despite what most assume, we Africans absolutely value the positives brought here because of colonialism like modern medicine, technology, western education systems, nation building (as imperfect as it is, it's better than what was there before), better economic and social systems (capitalism and liberalism) As a Nigerian, one thing that makes me happy is how most of the people in my country did not use the death of Queen Elizabeth as some excuse to insult or whine about grievances. Most of us just expressed our condolences. The fact is that many of us bear no ill will to her or the British monarchy. Conversely, there were many statements and hot-takes from the usual suspects who just wanted to push their stupid victimhood ideology at the expense of the Queen's passing.
777
-
764
-
705
-
695
-
672
-
668
-
665
-
652
-
643
-
618
-
615
-
566
-
555
-
551
-
498
-
495
-
489
-
470
-
455
-
440
-
423
-
423
-
414
-
408
-
401
-
384
-
376
-
364
-
357
-
356
-
339
-
336
-
336
-
327
-
324
-
312
-
305
-
297
-
293
-
276
-
276
-
267
-
I have no doubt the world is in for some turbulent (or as the Chinese say, "interesting") times but I have a good feeling most of us will make it and it will be grueling and hard but necessary. Heck! My grandparents and my great-grandmother, along with my parents and their respective families, made it through the colonial era of Nigeria, our civil war, military juntas, the cold war, and even I made it through the 2000s, the great recession, the SARS, Ebola, Avian flu pandemics, and much more. We humans are a stubborn and resilient species and many of us have experienced so serious stuff and I am damn sure we will survive what's coming, Amen.😊😊
252
-
251
-
238
-
238
-
234
-
231
-
231
-
231
-
224
-
222
-
219
-
218
-
217
-
217
-
217
-
216
-
214
-
212
-
210
-
209
-
204
-
202
-
199
-
197
-
As a Nigerian, my opinion on colonialism will be more nuanced than that of most westerners. On one hand, it was brutal in some ways but on the other it did play a huge role in bringing much of Africa into the modern age via introduction of modern tech, medicine, western education, and nation building. My country literally wouldn't exist without the British. For all the issues we face, most of us wouldn't ever dream of not having a country of our own.
Also, one major good it did was abolish slavery. I cannot be more thankful for the British using their naval power and economic might to suppress the slave trade in Africa. Oh, I know they partook in it for a time, themselves, but it existed here long before whites ever came to Africa. Even my own ancestors of the Edo kingdom were slavers. What makes the British different is that unlike other regional African and Arab powers, they had the cultural & religious framework, wisdom, humanity and courage to actually stop the evil of slavery even at huge cost to their economy.
195
-
192
-
186
-
185
-
184
-
177
-
175
-
173
-
171
-
170
-
169
-
169
-
As a Nigerian, my simple answer for why Arabs continue to fail militarily and socioeconomically is: Bad geography, poor social and economic systems, poor culture that rejects innovation, meritocracy, or modernity, poor political systems, failing legal and social institutions, dutch disease, tribalism and others. Also, the colonialism excuse is just lazy and mainly used by tribalist Arabs as an excuse. Same way Pan-Africans use it as an excuse for Africa's failings.
167
-
166
-
As a Nigerian, here's my simple answer: Bad geography, poor social and economic systems, poor political systems, failing legal and social institutions, dutch disease, tribalism and others. During the golden age of Islam, under Harun al-Rashid, the civilization was experiencing great economic, social and scientific development and Islam was moderatingbabd becoming more Secular until Orthodox pushback from Imams and others caused these changes to stop. Then, the Christian West embraced modernity and reform and advanced in all fields. The fact that Christianity abolished institutions like slavery, broke clan structures by removing cousin marriage, and stopped the ban on usary which led to stuff like capitalism and meritocracy, while islam refused to do all of this. Also, the colonialism excuse is just lazy and mainly used by tribalist Arabs as an excuse. Same way Pan-Africans use it as an excuse for Africa's failings.
164
-
155
-
151
-
151
-
147
-
146
-
140
-
140
-
140
-
137
-
135
-
135
-
134
-
131
-
128
-
This story makes me appreciate my situation as a Nigerian and respect the British more. My opinion on colonialism will be more nuanced than that of most westerners. On one hand, it was brutal in some ways but on the other it did play a huge role in bringing much of Africa into the modern age via introduction of modern tech, medicine, western education, and nation building. My country literally wouldn't exist without the British. For all the issues we face, most of us wouldn't ever dream of not having a country of our own.
Also, one major good it did was abolish slavery. I cannot be more thankful for the British using their naval power and economic might to suppress the slave trade in Africa. Oh, I know they partook in it for a time, themselves, but it existed here long before whites ever came to Africa. Even my own ancestors of the Edo kingdom were slavers. What makes the British different is that unlike other regional African and Arab powers, they had the cultural & religious framework, wisdom, humanity and courage to actually stop the evil of slavery even at huge cost to their economy.
127
-
127
-
126
-
126
-
125
-
123
-
122
-
121
-
120
-
119
-
118
-
117
-
116
-
115
-
114
-
112
-
111
-
111
-
110
-
110
-
109
-
108
-
106
-
106
-
105
-
104
-
101
-
101
-
As a Nigerian, I absolutely agree with this video. In Africa, during the decolonization of the 50s, 60s and 70s, many of our countries began to abandon the socioeconomic and political frameworks (like capitalism, liberalism,and democracy) the Europeans left us. This was partly due to many African leaders being Marxist educated and some underlying resentment for colonialism. Unfortunately, it had the adverse effect of destroying economic growth and development in many countries for decades and created instability and loss of life via wars etc. This trend only started reversing when democracy and liberalism began to return to Africa. An example is my country, where after decades of military rule and economic mismanagement via control-economy, we returned to democracy in 99 and our President, Obasanjo, liberalized our economy and we experienced much of our best growth and development from 2000 to 2015.
Very few countries were exceptions like Botswana where Seretse Khama wisely embraced and maintained and continued the policies the British left him and today, Botswana is one of the few economically and politically stable countries here.
101
-
101
-
100
-
97
-
95
-
95
-
95
-
95
-
92
-
91
-
91
-
91
-
89
-
88
-
88
-
86
-
85
-
85
-
84
-
83
-
83
-
83
-
83
-
81
-
81
-
81
-
79
-
79
-
79
-
78
-
78
-
78
-
77
-
77
-
76
-
76
-
75
-
75
-
75
-
73
-
72
-
72
-
71
-
70
-
69
-
68
-
68
-
67
-
@TheZackofSpades The borders are an issue but it is mostly due to the politicians and some really regressive cultures. For example, in my country, the south is very ethnically diverse with different tribes and a mix of Christians and muslims but despite this there is more secularism here and as a result, we tend to co-exist with each other and our region is more developed and the economic powerhouse of Nigeria. Ethnic issues still exist but never enough to cause serious rifts. Part of this is due to the fact that the British spent more time in the southern part of Nigeria and imposed their social and economic systems on the region much longer. Comparatively, in the northern part of Nigeria, they are more ethnically homogenous and culturally and religiously similar there but that region is more rife with illiteracy, insecurity (frequent incursions by terrorists/bandits of the same tribe from Chad, Niger Republic etc), rampant corruption, social disunity and underdevelopment. The reason is due to the fact that the British, despite colonizing that part of Nigeria, did not impose their own social and economic systems on the region. The traditional rulers made this deal to secure their own positions but in the long-run, it made their region worse off. The borders are an issue but the culture and the leadership in the areas plays a much bigger role.
67
-
66
-
64
-
@namso3772 Friend, if colonialism was the main factor behind Africa's long period of underdevelopment and other issues, South Asia, East Asia, Central Asia, South East Asia, South America, and even African countries like Botswana, Kenya, Tunisia, Morocco and Namibia would all be desolate and backwards places rivalling Afghanistan. Africa's problems stem from much more than colonialism. Almost every country and continent on earth was colonised repeatedly throughout history. What makes a country or a region develop is not the lack of colonisation but having good socio-economic systems, national unity, and smart political leadership. Also, the CIA is not the one who installs every dictator in Africa. Most of the time, they ceased power or people just voted for them. Please, don't try and remove personal responsibility form us Africans. Your point about Africa potentially being better without colonialism doesn't hold weight because most of Africa, prior to western colonialism was in the iron age, had subsistence farming, and we had no established nations, no modern technology, no strong economies, no unified national identities, slavery and conquest from other African tribes and Arab conquerors, no modern medicine or infrastructure etc. Western colonialism (yes, because Arabs were colonising Africa before them and doing much worse to us) was not a black and white affair. It had many negative impacts but one would have to be a fool to disregard the actual positives it did result in. For example, slavery was actually abolished in much of Africa thanks to colonialists like British.
64
-
63
-
63
-
63
-
62
-
62
-
61
-
61
-
59
-
58
-
58
-
58
-
57
-
57
-
56
-
56
-
56
-
56
-
56
-
55
-
55
-
54
-
54
-
53
-
52
-
52
-
51
-
51
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
@Dracon7601 Actually, Botswana was not "unnoticed." What made them such a better country pre and post colonialism is that their culture and socio-political style was similar to what the British had i.e. more representative form of traditional government with Chiefs having to be elected and rule via merit and good will of the people. That ensured that stuff like meritocracy and even individual rights were upheld. Also, they were almost assimilated into apartheid/white-ruled Southern Africa, especially for their diamonds, until their leaders actually asked the British to take colonial rule of their country because the British were a far better option than apartheid Afrikaans (Look it up, I am not lying). And as I mentioned, their socio-cultural way of life was already similar to what the British had and when they started imposing stuff like democracy, capitalism, etc, Botswana adopted to all of them very well compared to many other African colonies. That is why till today, they remain one of the most politically and economically stable countries in Africa.
49
-
49
-
49
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
@ladybernkastel5696 None taken. I can understand why it boggles people's minds why I would emigrate to a foreign country and face challenges rather than stay in my country. But the honest answer is I, like most immigrants, want better opportunities but more so, in my case, it's the only way I can actually improve my own life and improve my country. I have seen how many Ghanaians, Indians, Filipinos, and Israelis emigrated legally to better countries and established themselves, contributed to those countries via their work and paying taxes and setting up businesses and later used their wealth to help improve their own countries via things like remittance payments and setting up joint ventures or businesses back home to help bring jobs to their countries. That is my main goal and that is partly why I emigrated here. I want to change my country and the best way I can do so is to get enough personal capital and wealth in the land of opportunity to do so. Believe me, I still feel some sense of shame and guilt like I ran away but then I remember that I am also giving back to my parents to manage their farm business. I cannot do a whole lot now but I aim to do so much more and the only way for me is to establish myself here. That is honestly one of the ways I feel much of Africa will be fixed and developed via the expats who return with the know-how, the connections and the resources to impact real change.
48
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
47
-
47
-
47
-
47
-
As a Nigerian, my opinion on colonialism will be more nuanced than that of most westerners. On one hand, it was brutal in some ways but on the other it did play a huge role in bringing much of Africa into the modern age via introduction of modern tech, medicine, western education, and nation building.
Also, one major good it did was abolish slavery. I cannot be more thankful for the British using their naval power and economic might to suppress the slave trade in Africa. Oh, I know they partook in it for a time, themselves, but it existed here long before whites ever came to Africa. Even my own ancestors of the Edo kingdom were slavers. What makes the British different is that unlike other regional African and Arab powers, they had the cultural & religious framework, wisdom, humanity and courage to actually stop the evil of slavery even at huge cost to their economy. God bless them.
47
-
47
-
47
-
47
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
43
-
43
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
@feliz2892 Finally, to address the demographic issue you raised, yes, the Muslim population is looking to become slightly higher than us Christians but that is not really as dire as you would think. Thankfully, islam here is not nearly as regressive as Arabic Islam. You will find more Muslims here who support democracy, nationalism, capitalism, education, and abhor regressive practices. They have to in order to maintain our nationak unity with Christians. Here, culture and tribe factors more than religion. A southern Muslim is more secular and open minded than a rural northern Muslim. Also, structure of our politics and judiciary has secularism enshrined in our public affairs. For example, our military is mostly composed of Northerners and Muslims but it is barred from letting anybfaith or tribe influence it. Civic Nationalism has become more dominant over time here. So the notion of Nigeria becoming a Sharia state or another Sudan is not likely.
Also, though our largely Muslim north is still underdeveloped in terms of economics, infrastructure and education, this is changing gradually and with this change comes a more moderate culture. Look at Kano, Abuja and Kaduna. They are northern and largely Muslim but also modernized and more urban. This is making them more on par with some southern states in terms of culture and perspective.
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
As a Nigerian, here's my simple answer: Bad geography, poor social and economic systems, poor political systems, failing legal and social institutions, dutch disease, tribalism and others. During the golden age of Islam, under Harun al-Rashid, the civilization was experiencing great economic, social and scientific development and Islam was moderatingbabd becoming more Secular until Orthodox pushback from Imams and others caused these changes to stop. Then, the Christian West embraced modernity and reform and advanced in all fields. The fact that Christianity abolished institutions like slavery, broke clan structures by removing cousin marriage, and stopped the ban on usary which led to stuff like capitalism and meritocracy, while islam refused to do all of this. Also, the colonialism excuse is just lazy and mainly used by tribalist Arabs as an excuse. Same way Pan-Africans use it as an excuse for Africa's failings.
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
34
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
30
-
30
-
@second2none914 I see the points you are trying to make but rather than coming to the same conclusion I arrived at i.e. that Africa's issues are due to multifaceted reasons, beyond colonialism or racism, you seem to rather fall back on simply attributing them mainly to colonialism and racism.
First off, on the point of Congo, absolutely. Leopold and Belgium did horrible things to the people and the country during colonialism but you forget to mention the real reasons why the country is so unfortunate. Prior to colonialism, other factors hindered them. Their geography (thicketed jungles) prevented proper agriculture and human settlements and coalescing of people into more unified groups and this led to division and exploitation from their own tribal rulers via slavery and ethnic wars. Post-colonialism, that factor still hinders them, not the Belgium's. Rwanda also had tribal issues prior to Belgium colonialism, then had the tragic genocide, and now are a burgeoning economic power in East Africa simply because of good leadership. Even Botswana with less resources, a history of different tribes that united and that were colonised, is now a beacon of political and economic stability and progress in Africa. What is Congo's excuse?
As for Nigeria, our civil war happened not due to religious reasons but tribal reasons. The Igbo people felt very under-represented in the post-colonial government. Various attempts to resolve their grievances failed and thus the war happened. Should we just keep blaming the British or the inept corrupt Nigerian government that caused it? Or do you suppose we, In Nigeria, should just balkanize or actually work together for some semblance of unity? I am from a minority tribe, myself. Do you think we should break away and create our own country or just blame all our woes on the British?
Cameroon and the Francophone-Anglophone war. That is tragic but I need to ask you this, what do you think about the Ethiopian-Tigray war? Ethiopia was never colonized and yet still has inter-ethnic clashes. Are you saying both of these wars are simply due to the difference in languages? What about the fact that Cameroon has economic problems, insecurity problems and corrupt leadership? Don't you think those are more responsible for the current disunity that you are trying to simplify down to language? If tat were the case, India would have a civil war every few months given how most of the country has different ethnic languages besides Hindu.
Sorry but you may be trying to straddle the middle but it's clear that you still hold the narrow-minded view that all of Africa's problems are simply due to colonialism.
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
29
-
@second2none914 Okay, here's my response:
1. I never said the Congo lacked agriculture. I said they lacked "proper agriculture" due to geographic reasons (thicketted jungles in most of the landmass ) and the main form of agriculture was subsistence farming which is terrible for society building or economic growth.
2. My country's civil war did, indeed have a tribal issue that I didn't deny while you simply assumed it was down to religion. I stated why the Igbos felt disenfranchised due to economic reasons and lack of proper political representation by the military government and how the inept military leadership collapsed any chances of reconciliation and caused the war. ALso, unlike what you may think, Nigeria is not homogenous in all regions. The north is a mix as well. We have mainly muslims but majorly Hausa who actually get on well with us southerners and even Igbos. We also have Tiv, Kanuri and northern Christians there. It's teh Fulani minority who rule much of the north that is at fault for the schisms and you clearly disregard this reality. Even we in teh south are diverse. We have our ethnic schisms but we still manage to work together here. It's a leadership issue, not a tribe or religion issues as you blindly think.
3. On the point of Cameroon, you tried to simplify their civil war as a French-English issue, the same way you tried to simply my country's civil war as atribe and religion issue. If taht's the case, why not use that to explain Ethiopia's ongoing civil war? They were never colonized but they do have leadership and economic issues liek most of us in Afirca. SO is their civil war also due to language and tribal differences?
4. Finally, if you feel I am carrying water for the colonizers, that's your interpretation. The reason I don't use the excuse of colonialism to explain all of Africa's problems is because it doesn't make any sense. There are several African countres who were colonized and had less resources but had good leadership, social unity (even with multiple ethnic tribes) and were able to manage their countries well. For example, Botswana and now Zambia. WHat is their excuse? WHat Africa needs is good political leadership and economic policies; not more victimhood and blame passing or obsession over the past of colonialism. Most countries on earth were colonized by others. Teh ones who did well afterwords are the ones that focused on improving their countries politically, economically, and socially.
29
-
29
-
@Rowlph8888 friend, America and much of Europe outsourced and offshore their manufacturing to China. Does that make them beholden to China? Japan also trades heavily with China. Are they beholden to China? Yes, during our former president, buhari's, time, my country borrowed a lot of money from China for infrastructure and general loans but that's just it. He needed cheaper loans for his legacy projects, many of which failed and just indebted us. That being said, we really aren't a Chinese ally; just a trading partner. Also, there is no real threat of China seizing our infrastructure like they did to Sri Lanka. This is cause our economy can actually service those debts, but at huge cost. At the end, we are more aligned with the west due to geography, history, economic and some sociocultural ties.
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
@mr.takethingstooseriously friend, same thing could be said for most places on earth. Heck! One party has consistently won democratic elections in Japan post WW2🤣 In any society, the elites, especially political ones, get more consolidated over time. Yes, this gets stagnant but also leads to more stability. It also leads to genuine but slow change improving society compared to radical change from authoritarianism. Also, I am Edo and no member of my tribe has ever held Presidential or VP power. Why don't I, or others in my state, feel underrepresented? Because that's democracy. The ones who have means and clout to become political elites get it but they still need my vote to win. We do have democracy here, friend. It's not perfect but that is the case for most of the world. It's also better than whatever they have in Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso and Eritrea etc
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
@tomatop6754 Pal, I am not white but I can assure you that the white population in North America will never become a minority, despite what weirdos say. This is because in North America, unlike Europe, there is a high and vibrant white population that has not being undermined by leftists and their destructive ideology. Plus, they still have the highest birth-rates in their part of the world. Europe will still have a high white population but the declining birth rates in western Europe are an issue. Eastern Europe will be fine, however. Also, the majority of Hispanic immigrants tend to identify as white and intermarry with the existing white population.
If anything, it's us in the black population that will suffer thanks to a combination of factors, courtesy of the left: promotion of abortion, destroying the nuclear family, illegal immigration that actually hurts black communities, the cancerous welfare state that has eroded any incentive for cultural and demographic improvements, the crime rates and recidivism.
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
@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
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
@lupusalbus3795 Yeah, the Rhodesia stuff is one of those bitter ironies of African history. Yes, the government was pretty oppressive in some ways but under them, Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) was the bread basket of Africa with mechanized farming and increasing economic output and development. All that was destroyed when mugabe and his ilk ruined the economy and went on to brutally subjugate his own people and also stole the farmlands from the people who were actually good at farming and feeding the nation (the white farmers, of whom one's son was a friend of mine in the UK. great guy👍) I will not pretend that the Rhodesian government had no faults but compared to mugabe and his group, they were the better devils. Also, the "rice from the sky" program, is that the foreign aid food you are referring to? If so, I agree. Many of the famines here in Africa are largely due to government incompetence, rather than solely drought, and most of the food aid the international community sends to Africa usually ends up being used by those bastards as leverage to control their populations and further. Fortunately, more and more African countries are improving gradually. We are working to embrace the positives brought by the colonialists like liberalism, industrialization, democracy, capitalism, and national unity. For example, Botswana, Kenya, Rwanda, and even my own flawed country of Nigeria.
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
@scaryhobbit211 Good observation, friend. the answer for how India has managed to remain a unified country, despite the diverse ethnicities and sub-cultures within it, is simply because they are a federation (i.e. each state/province/region has some level of self-autonomy/administration) Basically like the republic United States. That is the solution to Africa's issues; true federalism/republicanism. Another thing that helps India is the fact that their civilization had an early start at coalescing its various peoples and forming a unified identity, unlike much of Africa (with a few exceptions). In fact, the British colonisation of the region actually had a positive effect of accelerating that coalescing. With Africa, sadly, due to geographic and climatic factors that limited agriculture and development of human settlements, the coalescing and blending of multiple ethnic groups into unified groups was not happening here on a large scale. As bad as colonialism was, one major effect it had, and still continues to have on much of sub-Saharan Africa, is that national identities and unity (no matter how imperfect) were created.
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
@SuperDrake85 many good and true points you raise, friend. But as for Turkey, I really don't see them making headway into sub-Saharan Africa as they are more inclined towards the Mediterranean, North Africa and the Middle East (at least the Levant and Mesopotamia). Your observations on Nigeria make sense a d my government has been ramping up military reforms and improvements mainly to tackle internal insecurity, and safeguard our coasts and land trade routes. However, more needs to be done and we are also still involved in diplomatic ties with the West (we recently had drills with France, the UK and America. So France is still present here but taking a different approach to diplomacy with us in Africa after the fallout in Niger, Mali, Burkina Faso) mainly because I think Trump and the USA aim to pull back on their massive Navy presence and simply ally with pro-western regional powers (like my country) who can potentially fill that vacuum. I do hope we don't miss this opportunity, as you point out. It can be very beneficial for us and others in the region because stability and good diplomatic ties with others, especially the West (for all their flaws), is something we need here in Africa. As for China, the only thing they are interested in here in Africa is debt diplomacy, and extraction without any serious long term geopolitical or strategic aims. We trade with them because of the economic benefits and affordability but we also know of their negative impacts like illegal fishing off our coasts, illegal mining here in Nigeria and much of Africa, terrible loans with massive interests and some really useless infrastructure projects.
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
@raisofahri5797 That is a sad and simple answer: France was not teh best in terms of colonialism. Compared to the British who tended to impart things on their colonies like capitalism, democracy, constitutionalism and civic nationalism (not to mention they actually built infrastructure), France was focused more on resource extraction and so when colonialism ended, their former colonies were less able to function as more unified or economically strong states and this led to resentment and hardships for these countries compared to former British colonies like Nigeria, Botswana and Kenya and even Somaliland. Also, the terrible diplomacy of France towards its former colonies is also to blame. While the British still trade with their former colonies, it is done on a more fair and beneficial way. That being said, choosing military dictatorships rather than developing their democracies is not a good alternative for these former French colonies. Senegal was a former French colony and instead of giving up on democracy, they just worked with other countries, maintained capitalism, got better diplomatic deals, even with France, and are doing well compared to some others.
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
As an African (Nigerian) it is so refreshing to see a fellow African address the issue of poverty here objectively and accurately. We don't have poverty or development problems because of colonialism but largely because of government corruption, terrible socioeconomic policies (like socialism), poor institutions, and other factors like bad geography. During the independence period from the 50s till the 60s, many post-colonial African leaders made the terrible decisions of abandoning the economic, political and social models left by the Europeans here. They undid things like democratic rule, liberalism, capitalism, property rights, better education standards, and civic nationalism. This was done due to lingering resentment of colonialism and also the rabid indoctrination into leftwing ideology that many of these "leaders" got in higher education. This led to social unrest, economic disruption and loss of life due to corruption and political instability that still hinders Africa to this day. Examples are in Tanzania where Julius Nyere, an avid Marxist-Leninist, began his programs of African socialism (Ujamaa) with good intentions but they ultimately ruined the economy, caused massive poverty, and led to increased authoritarianism in Tanzania. The country only began improving once he stepped down and his policies were undone. Another example is in my own country where after our independence in 1960, we had a brutal civil war and military rule for several decades. Controlled economy replaced our capitalist model and we experienced massive unemployment, poverty, insecurity, increased debt etc. This was all ended once we returned to democratic rule in 99 and onwards. President Obasanjo and subsequent governments liberalized our economy and reformed it via privatization and this led to reducing our national and foreign debt, created many more jobs, and reduced inflation.
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
As a Nigerian, my opinion on colonialism will be more nuanced than that of most westerners. On one hand, it was brutal in some ways but on the other it did play a huge role in bringing much of Africa into the modern age via introduction of modern tech, medicine, western education, and nation building.
Also, one major good it did was abolish slavery. I cannot be more thankful for the British using their naval power and economic might to suppress the slave trade in Africa. Oh, I know they partook in it for a time, themselves, but it existed here long before whites ever came to Africa. Even my own ancestors of the Edo kingdom were slavers. What makes the British different is that unlike other regional African and Arab powers, they had the cultural & religious framework, wisdom, humanity and courage to actually stop the evil of slavery even at huge cost to their economy. God bless them.
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
@qwertyasdfgh1014 Interesting comment. You are right that some privatization has led to corruption and problems for countries e.g. Shell in my country, but for you to say all of privatization and deals with western companies is bad for Africa, is just strange🤨 In Kenya, privatization of government owned Kenya Post and their telecommunications industry, led to profits, more jobs, and the creation of Safaricom(one of the most profitable businesses in East Africa). Also, regarding France and their former colonies, you are only half correct. Some former colonies like Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso are doing poorly and French policies there have not helped and this is partly due to their own poor governments and economic policies. But in others like Senegal, Cote d'voire, and Benin Republic, their deals and trade with France and privatization have led to economic growth, stability, and better quality of life. You have to be more objective when discussing this topic and not pretend it is a simple issue.
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
@mouhalo It has worked very well. If western democracy systems are bad for Africa, then how are countries like Kenya, Ghana, Botswana, Nigeria, Namibia, even Somaliland and others doing well compared to undemocratic ones like Sudan, Somalia, Ethiopia, Libya etc? Please, don't let emotional hotheadedness make you think foolishly. Democracy is a blessing to Africa and has led to many improvements here.
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
@steves1015 The curse of geography for Africa is real and simply having resources means nothing. If that were the case, Japan would be poor while Congo would be rich today. Our geography is a mix of arid desserts, dry savannahs, and thick jungles. This meant for a long time, much fo Africa was still in the iron age and human settlements and societal development was hindered and very few nation states or viable settlements or borders existed here. Most of our soil is notoriously poor for large scale agriculture. This didn't change until westerners brought mechanized farming, GMO crops, and fertilizer here. There was also the problem of diseases like malaria and Tse-tse fly parasite being unchecked here that lowered population growth.
Finally, the resources are more of a trap than anything due to our history of poor institutions, poor national unity and poor economic decision making. Rather than use them for development and improvement, they are used to accrue wealth for corrupt people or to fuel conflict due to tribalism. The few exception where this didn't happen include Botswana with their diamonds but that was mainly due to their pre-colonial culture that had similarities to that of the British and when they were colonized, they simply used both systems to properly develop their country and use their resources properly compared to Zimbabwe.
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
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
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@jayfizz545 My guy, believe me, I feel you and I even agree with your sentiments to a degree but realistically, I don't think the nation will break apart. I am not even a northerner; I am Edo. What I see happening is restructuring. The north has been the biggest obstacle to this but after the last 8 years of buhari foolani mismanagement, and the amount of increased poverty and terrorism that their region has experienced because of their baba in Aso Rock, they can no longer ignore the calls to restructure Nigeria and two of the candidates (Peter Obi and Atiku) have made it clear that they want to restructure Nigeria. You notice I don't mention tinubu at all because I doubt he will come close to winning as APC is increasingly hated. What will likely happen is that once the insecurity problem and economic issues have been addressed after the 2023 election, there will be working on changes like the constitution and making more decentralization, especially for the army and police. Basically, Nigeria will start to function like a proper republic and if they keep putting up hinderances, it will either result in break up or serious conflict and restructuring by force. As you said correctly, the north (especially their elites and rulers) know that they need us more than we need them. They have mismanaged their own region and their people are growing increasingly resentful of them.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@MelaninMagdalene Yeah, no shit. Why do you think I don't mindlessly hate them like most people online? I like having a country, having capitalism, having democracy, and a national language and every benefit that comes with having a country and that is partly due to them. Heck! My great-grandmother, before she passed away in 2009, was alive during colonialism and she never had any negatives to say about the British and this despite her being Edo. Same with my grandma (her daughter) because both actually acknowledged the benefits that came with having an organized country where they would not be disenfranchised, even as a minority tribe. Plus, my grandma had access to better healthcare compared to what existed before, saw all her children survive childhood, receive good education, and rise out of poverty. You really need to get some perspective on how others live, friend.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@peterscotland1507 Well, as someone who doesn't currently have his nose on the ground situation currently in Nigeria, I will answer with my own experience while I was still there. It is largely due to socio-economic and political issues. Economic factors, especially during the advent of COVID-19 have resulted in hardships for many in Nigeria. This was also the case due to the short-sighted actions of Buhari our president. Political issues like limited representation on the federal level of government in Nigeria also plays a role. The two dominant tribal groups in Nigeria are the Hausa and the Yoruba. Igbos are the third (give or take) and in many developing countries and even many developed ones, this tends to result in friction. To also add to the economic factor, youmainly hear of secession during times of economic hardships. When Nigeria's economy does well, you rarely hear of it. Much was said about the oil wealth generated by the Igbo regions but these days, that is not the only means of economic wealth in my country. The seaports of the southwest region in places like Lagos, the agricultural output of the Northern states also contributes significantly to Nigeria's GDP. Plus, oil deposits are not solely limited to the Igbo regions.
All these aforementioned points have resulted in dissident voices calling for secession and trying to sow unrest in my country. It is similar to what we are currently seeing in Ethiopia with the Tigray conflict, or what we saw in Spain with the Basque and Catalonian secession movements or in the U.K with the Scottish referendum or the Quebec citizens in Canada. The thing is, when actually polled more Igbos want to remain a part of Nigeria and so do many of us smaller tribal groups. I am Edo and we are not a huge tribal majority like the Igbos but we certainly do not want secession from Nigeria because we know how it will disadvantage us economically and socially.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@obajuluwaoluwatomisin3883 Friend, I never said the lack of development is a curse. it is our geography that is the curse. Yes, Africa is lucky that our geography protects us from things like earthquakes, tornadoes, and tsunamis but there are other problems. I mean, Botswana has bad geography too with less arable land, land-locked, less resources and less rain than Zimbabwe but they are more developed and stable because of good political, economic and social systems. This proves that many of us in Africa are not too conservative that we refuse to adopt modern things and concepts. It is usually a matter of political will, social stability, and culture. In our case in Nigeria, we have managed to rise to the top of Africa economically and are certainly more developed compared to pre-colonial times or even some other countries here. We still have many MANY problems due to political and social issues, like insecurity, corruption, and poor infrastructure but we have shown that with better leadership and management, they can be solved. Plus, the issue of geography for us can be solved with good leadership and culture. Places in the north have this problem but exceptions, like Kaduna and kano and Abuja, show that poor geography doesn't stop development with good leadership, economic policies and culture.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
Honestly, I see that his art is more liked due to the underlying social commentary and his activist underpinnings more than anything else, not to mention that it was during the whole neo-expressionist artistic movement. I have no doubt this kind of art has its fans and was insanely popular for its time but like all new and radical art movements, it fell out of fashion and is now only appreciated by a very niche group and really doesn't stand out currently and any deeper meaning cannot usually be conveyed at a first glance; it has to be literally explained to the viewer what the artist was to trying to say. This comes off as a case of the artist and their backstory being more interesting than the art and that is not how art should ever be viewed. I never knew who Andy Warhol or Van Goh were but their art pieces, like the can of Campbel soup and Starry Night, were always referenced in media I watch in Nigeria as a a kid. He would have been better trying with realism, photo realism, symbolism or early expressionism. All could have worked to convey the social message he was trying convey and those art styles would have been more memorable.
All this been said, I get it. Art is subjective and he wanted to make an art style all his own, which he did for its time. But in our current era of modern and "progressive" art, this stuff by Basquiat is really not that different from what I see from other "modern art" hacks who make scribbles and say it is about a deeper message or social commentary like some weirdo who did a painting of Trump with feces or some lady who was twerking in an art gallery for BLM. Yeah, saying all art is subjective has virtually removed any and all objective standards and virtually mad art meaningless.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
I'm not even American (I'm Nigerian) and even I know the US dollar isn't going away anytime soon. For starters, no other country can match the USA's economic, cultural and military might. Second, most of the other competitors, like China, artificially control their currency rather than let it flow on the market like the USA. Third,to become a global currency requires massive investment and spending that America did over many decades and that China, Indian or Russia will never do. Finally, most countries, even BRICS members, depend on and trust the US dollar more so than their own currencies and their crippling socioeconomic issues are another hinderence. It's not going away.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@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
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@Chigo-nr8jg Friend, your dating is correct and I made a mistake with some of my dating but you are wrong in saying I am lying for anyone. First off, abolition of slavery started in 1688 when British Quakers began to condemn slavery in the British empire. Then, several slave revolts i the late 1600s to early 1700 (long before industrial revolution) made European colonialists aware of teh inhumanity of slavery. Later, in the mid-1700s, as the enlightenment was underway and Christian groups (like the Quakers) and political reformists, like early Liberals and Christian theologians, began to widely gain more influence in politics and British society and even in parts of North America, condemned the slave trade as inhuman and expel slave traders from communes and even small territories within the British empire. All this led to the eventual official full-scale abolishment by the British in 1838. So, no. I am not "lying for Britain." They began abolishing slavery long before the industrial revolution and long before the 1800s. If I am wrong, please correct me but don't lie about my points.
5
-
5
-
5
-
@nickuvb This will be a long read.
Sadly yes. You are right that the attacks against Christians in sub-Saharan Africa is largely due to an ever present anti-Christian agenda. But it is also mainly due to regressive and archaic cultural systems in many muslim dominated regions/ countries. For more clarity, in the south of Nigeria where I am from, we have a huge population of muslims intermixed with the largely Christian population but we also have an overlaying culture of secularism (due to the British imparting that upon our region in the early days of colonialsim) in the south which we all adhere too and which helps us co-exist well together. This is also the reason why the south is the most economically well-off, literate, tolerant and has more infrastructure compared to the north (where the British controlled but never imposed their systems and culture upon them) where they are more ethnically and cultural homogenous but adhere to more traditional fundamentalist social structure that spurns western education, upholds sharia, and also rejects free market economics. As a result, the majority of the population is destitute while their elites maintain power through the use of regressive islam and tribal ties. The muslim population even suffers more at the hands of terrorists yet they refuse to hold their religious and political leaders accountable. Thus, they frequently take out their frustration on Christians or other non-northern tribes. One major source of contention is a group of nomadic northern muslims called Fulani who graze their cattle in areas and have frequently been illegally inhabiting farming areas and nature reserve areas in the south and they also use guns to attack local villages, kidnap people for ransom and other acts of wanton violence. Some northern politicians tend to support them due to tribal ties and to also use them as a militia against political rivals.
If I had to predict the future, I would be cautiously optimistic because of historical precedent. In 99 at the end of Nigerian military rule, a civilian government was elected and our country was in much worse straits but within the first 4 years, the government turned the situation around. The current administration led by buhari (a muslim) and his ruling party has become so unpopular even in the north, where he had massive support, due to his economic mismanagement and the worsening insecurity problem. Now, a growing number of northerners (mainly moderate muslims, young people and Christians) are looking to vote for the opposition and it is hopeful that much of the fallout will be addressed once a new government is elected.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@mr-mr-101 I see your point and I agree to an extent. But a few things i will point out out:
-Some colonial systems =\=good administrative systems as history shows in the case of places where the British colonized versus places where the Spanish, Portuguese, Arabs and Germans colonized. This usually is determined by other factors like geography, climate, time period of adaptation and ethnic makeup.
-I never said that the colonialists (even the better ones like the British) left all those good systems in place out of altruism. I mainly said that it was for their own benefit and it later on went to benefit their former colonies. For example, Botswana was a country colonized by the British but after the end of colonialism, the leadership of the country under Seretse Khama actually kept and modified the infrastructure, economics systems and administrative processes and trade connections left in place by the British in order to further develop and improve his country. Today, Botswana is one of the most economically stable, politically stable and least corrupt countries in Africa. This would not have been the case without the British systems and his leadership.
-Your point about improper transition methods after colonialism is also a correct one. With much of Africa, there was largely no coalescing of peoples into larger societal units that eventually transitioned into proper nation states. this was largely due to climate and geography. heck! Most of the people's living in many African countries only began interacting and forming national identities as a result of colonialism, because prior, no national languages or binding forms of national identity existed. That is also why there were many separation attempts post-colonialism. That being said, these flawed models the colonialist left us with here are better than having nothing to begin with. What we need to do in Africa is work with, and improve on them rather than tear them down and invite national disunity and multiple socioeconomic problems.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@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
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@commonman9782 no, it won't. It would simply adapt like most other world religions tend to do. Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, and others already adapted and are still strong religions. Islam clearly adapted in Turkey, Malaysia, Indonesia, Armenia, Ethiopia etc. It is you Arabs and your culture that refuses to change or adapt and you are failing because of this socially, economically, and politically.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@ThermicLight Yeah, i know the British empire had slavery. And so did the Sokoto Caliphate, the Benin empire, The kingdom of Dahomey, Ottoman empire, Greater Zimbabwe etc. The British empire was the exception in that they ended slavery by force or diplomacy. They could have continued it like all the others but they didn't. I also know they didn't end slavery solely out of humanitarian reasons. So what? The fact that they ended it despite no serious moral reason, makes them better than every other empire or kingdom or place that practiced and still continues to practice slavery today. If you want to waste your time virtue-signaling or campaigning against slavery, why not focus on China, the middle east, north Africa etc, instead of wasting time talking about the British of the past?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
22:20 As a Nigerian, I couldn't agree more about the British. my opinion on colonialism will be more nuanced than that of most westerners. On one hand, it was brutal in some ways but on the other it did play a huge role in bringing much of Africa into the modern age via introduction of modern tech, medicine, western education, and nation building. My country literally wouldn't exist without the British. For all the issues we face, most of us wouldn't ever dream of not having a country of our own.
Also, one major good it did was abolish slavery. I cannot be more thankful for the British using their naval power and economic might to suppress the slave trade in Africa. Oh, I know they partook in it for a time, themselves, but it existed here long before whites ever came to Africa. Even my own ancestors of the Edo kingdom were slavers. What makes the British different is that unlike other regional African and Arab powers, they had the cultural & religious framework, wisdom, humanity and courage to actually stop the evil of slavery even at huge cost to their economy.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@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
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
My first time reading the book was in 2006 in Nigeria. I was a 13 year old boy and my dad was taking us on a visit to one of the few book stores in my area that sold western novels and I saw paperback edition of Frankenstein and given how I was already familiar with the character via cartoons like Scooby Doo and parodies in movies, I was interested and asked my dad to buy it for me. Well, when I got home, I began reading it and expected it to be some action-horror story of defeating an evil monster but as I kept reading it, the story was absolutely different from anything I expected. First off, I had no idea the name "Frankenstein" was that of the scientist who created the monster! I always thought it was the monster's name😲 and due to my young nature, I was almost bored with reading it but my dad told me that since I had asked for it, I had to read it because it would not be proper to reject something he bought for me. So I continued reading it and as I went on for several weeks, I began to enjoy and even be surprised by how deep the sorry was and the characters. I never expected to view the monster in such a human light and actually end up disliking Frankenstein but afterwards, I am so glad my dad bought it for me and that I read it. In Nigeria, I always had a penchant for reading and I still have it. Reading Frankenstein helped me expand my love of reading fiction, especially classics of English, and it also made me appreciate deeper literary themes and focus more on characters.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@kowishto Well, yeah, some imperialism is. The nature of history is like that; grey. Also, it largely depends on who is doing the "imperialism". I mean, can you honestly tell me that places like Hong Kong, Nigeria, Kenya, America, Botswana etc who were colonized by the British didn't get infrastructure and inherit their socioeconomic values like democracy, capitalism, liberalism and common law and this has helped all those countries be more developed compared to many others? Compare that to countries that were colonized by say the Arabs, Dutch, French, Spanish or others.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@atheistbushman Hi friend. Sorry for the late reply. As to your questions, ethnic relations here are far from perfect but they are much better than in the past and, especially, compared to some other countries in Africa. The socioeconomic rifts between the north and south still exists and even within both regions, inter-tribal schisms can linger but over the decades, civic nationalism and a more conscious National identity has been taking root here. Hausas and Fulani have their issues. Same with Igbos and Yoruba but for the most part, most people get along well. The main things causing tribalism to flare up are the economic problems brought on by poor policies and decisions of our current ruling party since 2015 and this leads to other secondary issues being brought due to this.
Regarding our military, yes, northerners who are mainly Hausa and some Fulani (Fulani are not nearly a large segment of our population as people think) do constitute a large portion of it--followed by Yoruba and Igbo people--but this is mainly due to demographics, not some tribalism issue. The same reason why the US army is made up of largely white people since they are the largest segment of America's population. For the longest time, our armed forces have been established as secular and national, not regional/tribal. Even our constitution and various military edicts forbid any religion or singular tribe from using our military as a proxy.
Finally, on the Biafran war, it is not forgotten but it is also not as majorly focused on these days. The fact that Igbo people still emigrate and settle successfully in other regions/states in Nigeria in the north and south-west, is proof of this. There are still secessionists elements in the south-east (as they are in other parts of Nigeria like Yoruba separatists and Haus/Fulani separatists) and while they call for separation and frequently use the civil war as a rallying cry, they are a loud minority and not supported by the majority of Igbo people on that topic. The fact that some of these groups like IPOB and ESN tend to use extortion and criminal/terrorists acts against their own people in the region, sours many against them. They are basically like the radical Sikh separatists of the Punjab. There are still legitimate issues facing the south east, especially economic ones but these are due to political inaction and ineptitude within their own region rather than discrimination from the federal government.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@jacklaurentius6130 my words? You mean pointing out how Christian reforms were wisely done? Friend, you do realize that prior to social and religious reforms the Church did, stuff like debt slavery, chattel slavery, and low proliferation of science and innovation was sanctioned by ruling monarchs and social elites who used the church as their bulwark to suppress these things. It is thanks to more enlightened minds and their philosophy, in line with the tenets of traditional Christianity, in the church who made it possible for better reforms to come. I mean, you do know that the scientific method was created by Sir Francis Bacon (a devout Christian). The censorship from monarchies after th invention of Gutenberg's printing press was a failure partly due to the Church's earlier stance on promoting literacy among common folk via them reading the bible. Basically, Christianity came to a conclusion that God created the natural world and in order for us a his creations to be closer to him, we must study the natural world; something Islam rejected. So, again, how exactly did you infer from my comments that I believe Christianity hindered science or anything else?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Barnabus007 Yes, illegal immigration does become a serious issue for the west and any country that allows it. Lord knows my own country has porous border issues that have become a plague on us. But why should the majority of of us immigrants (who tend to be legal immigrants) be blamed for this? Is it not politicians who allow illegal immigration? Speaking of which, I emigrated here when Steven Harper was Prime Minister. So if a conservative government found me eligible to emigrate here, that shows I worked hard to earn it. Immigration is no one's right. It's a privilege I, and other immigrants, had to earn and still have to earn to repay the countries that grant us said privilege. It's the same in my country where Lebanese, Afrikaans, Indians, Chinese, British etc all work to improve our society, culture and economy. Plus, the majority of us aren't taking anything from your system, and instead work to contribute to it.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@manmaje3596 Oh, I do, believe me. But I keep it civil. He and I do not agree on many things (the same way he and his father didn't) For starters, he supports the MSM, BLM, and the establishment left (he literally calls Trump a white supremacist and tries to dissuade me from liking him and conservatives because CNN said so but at least he is heavily critical of obama) That being said, when he raised me in Nigeria, he really did a good job instilling conservative values in me like abhorring victimhood, embracing hard work, being an entrepreneur, having national pride and Christianity. It's only after we emigrated to Canada and I got older that he started sharing more of his youthful ideological leanings. I have learned to humor him and he has learned that I will not budge on my beliefs.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@obajuluwaoluwatomisin3883 The curse of geography for Africa is real and simply having resources means nothing. If that were the case, Japan would be poor while Congo would be rich today. Our geography is a mix of arid desserts, dry savannahs, and thick jungles. This meant for a long time, much fo Africa was still in the iron age and human settlements and societal development was hindered and very few nation states or viable settlements or borders existed here. Most of our soil is notoriously poor for large scale agriculture. This didn't change until westerners brought mechanized farming, GMO crops, and fertilizer here. There was also the problem of diseases like malaria and Tse-tse fly parasite being unchecked here that lowered population growth.
Finally, the resources are more of a trap than anything due to our history of poor institutions, poor national unity and poor economic decision making. Rather than use them for development and improvement, they are used to accrue wealth for corrupt people or to fuel conflict due to tribalism. The few exception where this didn't happen include Botswana with their diamonds but that was mainly due to their pre-colonial culture that had similarities to that of the British and when they were colonized, they simply used both systems to properly develop their country and use their resources properly compared to Zimbabwe.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@AboSaad-q8n firstly, thanks for the kind words for me and my country. Appreciate, friend. Also, as to the population issue, I don't see it as a major thing cause Arab-Israelis already live in Israel and have high birthdates but also are fully enfranchised citizens and contribute positively to Israel. This could also be done for Palestinians so long as they drop the radicalism. Also, the white guilt thing is unlikely. That mainly tends to be in regions and countries with very little existential threats and the weird postmodern leftist ideology that promotes it. I mean, in Nigeria, my ancestors of my tribe, and those of others, had history of war, enslavement and conflict with other tribes yet none of us has any "white guilt" sentiments cause it's something all our ancestors did and we also real issues and problems here to dwell on the past. so the ideology has no root here.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@derikuk2967 Wow, good for you being able to escape from there, friend. Also, yeah, the issue of most modern countries in Africa created after colonialism and disparate tribes is true, even in the case of my country. However, in our case, we were colonized by the British and the frameworks they left behind (political, socio-economic, and others) are what have helped us form a stable, yet fledgling national unity. Plus, Ethiopia was never colonized and yet hey have had more civil conflicts than us and failing national unity. It all comes down to the political leadership and the social, cultural and political frameworks said country was built on. South Africa was built on poor frameworks and is suffering because of that and poor leadership while Botswana (another colonized country) was built on better frameworks and is doing fine despite also having several different tribes.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Rodario10TUNISIAN thanks for sharing and I do agree that some countries were negatively impacted by colonialism but this was mainly due to the colonial powers and the systems they used. You mention your country, Somalia, and the history of colonialism from the Arabs and Italians certainly did not leave your country in a great state but what about Somaliland that was colonized by the British and is the most stable and economically sufficient part of the region? Also, here in Nigeria, our federal government owns the majority of our oil and gas, not any foreign companies as you think. We simply let foreign companies do business here because we need more trade and development and isolating our economy will not help. The countries in Africa that tended to be colonized by the British usually ended up with better socioeconomic and political structures compared to others because the British had a habit of instilling those principles and foundations on them. That is why places like Kenya, Botswana, Ghana, and others are more stable and doing well. Finally, regarding Libya, NATO was not the only reason that country fell. Gaddafi regime was already oppressing some of his population and this caused the civil war. NATO definitely messed up by helping the rebels but they didn't create the rebels.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@mansamusa8410 Oh, believe me, I never once assumed that muslims created slavery. I know it has existed in all human societies (from nomadic to sedentary) throughout history. My main issue when it comes to how modern people view the subject of slavery is that they tend to over focus on the western world's relatively short phase of partaking in slavery and even revise history to make it seem that they were the only ones responsible for it, especially with regards to Africa. They completely ignore how it was largely because of the Europeans that the Arab, trans-Atlantic, and African slave trades were ended or at least greatly diminished. Plus, unlike the Arab world and, unfortunately, some parts of Africa, the Europeans admitted to the errors of slavery and their own part in it and were the main group who worked more than anyone else to abolish the evil of slavery. Much of the Arab world rarely condemns it and even tries to justify the practice of it, even to this day.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@mr.takethingstooseriously honestly, it is really not as difficult as we think. India achieved their federal and democratic system mainly for a few reasons: They had the sociocultural and political foundation laid by the British during colonialism, same as we have. They even had previous instances of ethnic tensions and schisms like the Sikh-Hindu clashes similarly to our own civil war but due to the aforementioned sociocultural foundations, they worked to reestablish national unity rather than expunge the side that lost, same thing in our civil war happened. They also had a growing economy and increasingly young nationalist population that identifies more with India than their individual tribes. Finally, there is inertia and conscious effort to keep India united. The elites and populace there are to dependent on the economic security and political stability that a unified India brings and most want to maintain this. They might be problems but not enough to undermine the nation. They will simply work to improve their issues by necessity. This is the same that we also see in Nigeria. We already have a growing national identity and language. Many of our institutions, like the military, are becoming secular and avoiding divisive agendas. I mean, it is forbidden to classify our military as Muslim, Christian, or tribal. It is Nigerian. Most of us want to maintain our union, especially the elites. Even the secessionists in the North, South, West, East etc, don't have much weight anymore and most of us depend on the economic security and political stability Nigeria affords us.
2
-
2
-
2
-
@mr.takethingstooseriously well, friend, I can't argue with that. Nigeria's success is indeed Africa's success. Also, the thing about democracy is that it is very malleable and can be modified in various ways but it tends to maintain some core aspects. Democracy in France, after their revolution and Napoleon, was and is still unitary i.e majority rule while in America, it is Republic democracy (the kind of democracy we are trying to establish here) which is not the kind of democracy that was in the west for a long time. Britain still has Parliamentary democracy. So, western democracy is not one simple thing and democracy can be applied to any place, not just the west. That is why when Botswana gained independence, they kept democracy and other things from Britain mainly because their culture had similar systems like consensus building, chiefs being elected, property rights etc. Democracy can, and has, worked in Africa because it can adapt and change easily.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
You know, I'm gonna give a take that will be controversial: This corruption scandal and any corruption is bad and should be prosecuted but, as a Nigerian, one thing I keep realizing is that places like Japan and other first-world countries have corruption that works, unlike us here in Africa. What I mean is that even though first-world politicians take bribes, they at least focus on making sure that infrastructure, jobs, businesses and the overall economy is improved and maintained. I mean, Lockheed still sold planes to Japan, despite the corruption and that likely provided jobs and improved the local economy. Here in much of Africa, our kind of corruption is just some incompetent fool in political power just takes a bribe but never even tries to build infrastructure or improve the economy.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@jaybee4577 okay, I'll give you credit for being objective on this topic, friend. Most people who tend to support buhari are not nearly as open to discussion like you or objective analysis and some who criticize buhari are too overly emotional as you correctly point out. Plus, you are right in criticizing PDP for their own flaws (like slow infrastructure build up) while still being critical of buhari. I will admit that there things he has done that are positive like the new port in Lagos or the Niger bridge or Star link coming to Nigeria. I am still critical of his over borrowing, poor handle on insecurity, and most of his economic policies, especially during the rebound of oil prices post 2017 that should have benefited our economy. But since we can't walk back the projects and some policies, what we can do is hope the new administration, come February, will mitigate the negative impacts, properly tackle insecurity and implement better economic policies to make said projects actually benefit Nigeria.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@libertaslibertas5923 I agree that unhinged and unrestricted capitalism is absolutely a bad thing (any ideology put to its extreme is bad) but given how muh historical perspective we have, socialism (even in small doses) has been proven to be dentrimental to any society that implements it. As for teh comparison between Denmark and the USA, that's not a very good one. For one thing, the USA is almost 100 times the land mass of Denmark. It's economy is also bigger and its population is larger. So comparing them on social systems and economic systems doesn't hold up. Then there is also the fact Denmark, like much of western Europe, uses a mixed economy with more focus on capitalism but with a heavy welfare state system. They were socialist at one point, like other European countries but they reversed that after it was hindering their economy. Even today, the USA spends far more on its own welfare system, entitlements, and public spending far outpaces that of Denmark and much of western Europe due to aforementioned larger economy and population. ALthough, given Denmark's immigration issues, I think their welfare state might be under increased strain.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@klauslunde Oh, you are not wrong. Food scarcity and poor agriculture is a factor in Africa's poverty issue. The problem is a geographic one. Africa has a mixed kind of geography i.e deserts to the north, savannah grasslands, and thick jungles. Due to this, in the past, and sadly sill continuing in some pars today, subsistence farming is what most of us Africans have used and that is not very sustainable for feeding a population or even for export and trade. It was ironically during and after the advent of colonialism that stuff like mechanized agriculture, biologically enhanced crops and animals, animal medicine against tse-tse flies, and fertilizers were introduced here and that help improve agriculture yields. Sadly, poor government policies and economic mismanagement still continue to make agriculture poor here. heck! Most African countries still import fertilizers rather than make them for themselves.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Followers_of_Tawheed How so? Only Muslim country with strong economy, industrializing, manufacturing, good demographics, political stability, good trade, liberalism, secularism, strong military, good global diplomacy and geopolitical credentials, good food security, good climatic and geographical conditions, and positive outlook. Why do you think they are not exceptional? especially compared to the vast majority of the islamic world?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@pauljrechezona3126 you make good points, sir. And if you read my initial comment, you will see that I clearly stated the colonial actions of the British were brutal so I already acknowledged that.
As for slavery, the simple and sad fact is that it already existed across our area of west Africa long before they ever came and likely would have continued much longer. The best ways we have seen in history to abolish slavery is usually when a stronger power enforces the abolition of it. This was how Menelik II of Ethiopia did it. It's how the Americans also did it.
Finally, the issue of various self-sufficient tribes being forcibly assimilated is also not as new as you think. Such kind of colonialism and assimilation was already happening before the British. The Sokoto Fulani caliphate did this to the Hausa, Tiv, Kanuri and other northern tribes and they even made several attempts to assimilate some of the southern tribes. My own state of Edo also did this during their expansion and had it done to them by other tribes. The Oyo Kingdom frequently fought the Dahomey kingdom for territory and slaves with both sides winning and losing. Ethiopia (that was never colonized) also did this. Menelik II subjugated several tribes to create their modern country and this still causes division and tribalism there as seen in their various civil wars (they even tried to colonize Eritrea brutally) So, this forced assimilation you decry was already happening here. If the British or Europeans hadn't done it, it would have happened to us and likely not by a better power (either the Sokoto caliphate or some other Muslim power)
At the end, I am not calling the British a perfect or kind or angelic empire because Nonsuch exists. I am calling them the better option compared to what else was available that time. And if I may ask, would you prefer that we go back to pre-colonial times in Africa? Should we in Nigeria break up and have tribal enclaves instead of trying to work with what we have?
2
-
@pauljrechezona3126 Again, you make good points, friend. Also, respect to you for being cordial and objective during this discussion (unlike many Africans I deal with)
Your point on most of our tribes being dysfunctional and assimilated post-colonialism compared to the north, is true but it is really not unique to the British empire. Also, you should consider how our two regions differ today. Yes, the British didn't push to far into the north and so their states were more intact and allowed to keep their traditionally institutions while we in the south had ours reduced. But the British also spent more time in the south transferring their sociopolitical, cultural and economic values and systems (capitalism, democracy, modern education, industry, etc) onto us. That's one of the major reasons why the south today is the economic power house of Nigeria and also is more developed in terms of infrastructure. We are also more secular and get along better with other tribes (despite tribalism, we do) and less prone to instability compared to the north where despite their ethnic and religious homogeneity, they are plagued with insecurity, corruption, illiteracy and underdevelopment. Same thing with Botswana, India, the southern part of Ghana and Hong Kong compared to the rest of China. So, in retrospect, we got a better deal post-colonialism.
Finally, regarding the issue of exploitation, yes, that did happen, as it did with much of their colonies and that must be condemned but one thing people tend to forget is that colonialism was not a cheap or free venture for the British or most Europeans, and that is not me defending the practice, just showing more objective viewpoints. Keep in mind that they had to built up the infrastructure, political systems and finance all of that resource extraction. In the end, they lost more money on colonialism in Africa than they ever got. if you want to see a truly exploitative empire, look at the Spanish in South America, the Japanese in East and South-East Asia, or the Arabs in Africa during their colonialism. Ironically, it's teh same system foundations that many of our countries are still building on to develop i.e. we still use democracy, capitalism and industrial manufacturing to grow our economies. So, my main points overall are that colonialism was brutal but not as black-and-white as most assume.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
As a Nigerian, here's my simple answer: Bad geography, poor social and economic systems, poor political systems, failing legal and social institutions, dutch disease, tribalism and others. During the golden age of Islam, under Harun al-Rashid, the civilization was experiencing great economic, social and scientific development and Islam was moderatingbabd becoming more Secular until Orthodox pushback from Imams and others caused these changes to stop. Then, the Christian West embraced modernity and reform and advanced in all fields. The fact that Christianity abolished institutions like slavery, broke clan structures by removing cousin marriage, and stopped the ban on usary which led to stuff like capitalism and meritocracy, while islam refused to do all of this. Also, the colonialism excuse is just lazy and mainly used by tribalist Arabs as an excuse. Same way Pan-Africans use it as an excuse for Africa's failings.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@SuperBadadan Yes, for the Muslims. Let's just say throughout history, any major caliphate has benefitted them but for only a short span and in the long-run, it always fell apart due to infighting, economic, cultural and geographic issues. But mainly due to the fact that islam is meant to be a dominating force rather than a moral guide and this makes it incapable of adapting or changing when it has to, as other world religions do. Heck! during their golden age, their ruler, Harun al-Rashid, was making progress at reforming islam via Mutazilism and they were the pinnacle of scientific, religious, philosophical, economic and societal advancements, especially compared to Europe and Christendom but a backlash from ultra-orthodox sects and religious elites, stopped these reforms because it threatened their status and power. Islamic civilization began to regress after that. Thankfully, Turkey saw wisdom in reforms and is benefitting today because of it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
As a Nigerian, here's my simple answer: Bad geography, poor culture that rejects meritocracy, innovation, modernity, poor social and economic systems, poor political systems, failing legal and social institutions, dutch disease, tribalism and others. Also, the colonialism excuse is just lazy and mainly used by tribalist Arabs as an excuse. Same way Pan-Africans use it as an excuse for Africa's failings.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@chestnutters9504 Biafra war happened because a rougue Nigerian soldier Chukwuma Kaduna Nzeogwu and several others killed some of our prominent founding Nigerian leaders. This then led to reprisals and ethnic clashes. Then rather than surrender him for his crime, an Igbo man, Gen. Ojukwu, sheltered him against the advice of other Igbo people and plunged the east into a civil war that many Igbos didn't want. After the war, reconciliation happened. As for Boko Haram, you do know that most of them are islamic insurgents from neighboring Chad, Niger, Mali, Burkina Faso etc, right? They are not just limited to Nigeria and our military has gotten better at dealing with them. Finally, on the issue of religion, what exactly makes you think the majority of Nigerians don't co-exist, despite our faith differences? Or do you just think social media is representative of all reality here?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@karinasnooodles_ no. We are not worse and if you don't believe me, feel free to book a trip to South Africa and Nigeria, then walk the streets of Durban or Johannesburg and Abuja, Lagos, or Kaduna. Economic inequality here has been decreasing, our demographics are better, AIDS epidemic is not present here, we are gradually industrializing and our economy is diversifying, we are not among the worst countries for rape, robbery and homicide like South Africa and we are not famous for killing Africans of other nationalities or foreigners due to xenophobia. We have issues in Nigeria but if you seriously think we are worse than South Africa, you're confused sadly.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@reggie69. Friend, it's funny after reading all this. First, you say natural gas and nuclear are not cheap or efficient compared to solar and wind? How, exactly? In terms of initial costs both are expensive but very cheap in terms of energy production, distribution, and maintenance compared to solar and wind or coal and they yield more return on investment. Not to mention the reduced environmental impact both have since nuclear waste is easily stored and not in high amounts and natural gas usage and fracking leads to less dependence on heavier and dirtiest hydrocarbons like crude oil. The inputs used in creating natural gas plants and nuclear reactors is also more easily recyclable and less environmentally harmful compared to the mining and pollution used to gather rare earth minerals for batteries and solar panels and the high amount of fuel burned to transport, manufacture, and maintain them Again, compared to wind and solar which affect animals and geographic areas overtime and are also less efficient in terms of maintenance, transportation, distribution, and also due to geographic and climate location issues that limit them. Can you put a solar farm in Alaska or a wind farm in the Congo with thick jungles and Mountain ranges?
Another strange thing you mention is how despite India and China being the current highest emitters compared to the west, it is still the fault of the west because both countries produce stuff for the west? This is really strange🤔 So by this logic, Russia and Ukraine are not the highest green house gas emitters even though they are the largest food producers and exporters on earth. It is actually us in Africa because we import so much grain and fertilizer from them😕 Very strange arguments all around.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davidbengtssonasgarali9391 I can see your point, friend, but to add a rebuttal, "Education and community funding are associated with less crime" is a causal fallacy i.e. it may sound correct but it is not true in reality. Cities like Baltimore have some of the highest levels of government funding in public schools, welfare, community housing, food stamps, and other forms of benefits yet these communities have some of the highest levels of poverty, crime, and illiteracy especially among us black people. Conversely, look at black communities in the past all the way back in the 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s. There were low rates of welfare and public funding but literacy rates were higher, crime rates were lower, welfare dependency was lower, single parent households and out-of-wedlock births were lower and income levels were also rising. The current issues facing black Americans have less to do with "Government signing us free checks" and more to do with our culture. Asians have historically never received much of the recompenses or funding that we have and yet their demographic does better socioeconomically than ours. That says a lot.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@treeismyusernamewhyjustwhy thanks for sharing but I gotta correct you, friend. First, the way the British did colonialism is miles different. Look at their former colonies for yourself. The British ones tend to be more politically, socioeconomically, and Nationally stable compared to French ones. They also tend to have better relationship with Britain than France's colonies do. Second, colonialism is not something you Europeans invented and has always existed throughout human history, either via conquest or cultural infusion. It's is, sadly, a fact of human history, whether we like it or not. What matters more is that the colonizing force is one that actually brings stability or better social, economic and cultural values to the new lands and in Britain's case, they were just that. Look at what they did: Abolished slavery that predated European colonialism in Africa, established national identities (flawed but better than what existed before), left the frameworks for things like capitalism, infrastructure and democracy in much of Africa, and helped bring modernity. Heck! Botswana literally asked the British to make them a protectorate/colony in order to avoid being subsumed by apartheid South Africa and Rhodesia. They chose them because they were the better option compared to others and they shared similar sociocultural beliefs with the British. So please, tell me why we shouldn't be thankful for the British in Africa.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Crysalis-bd9so you are right that Islam is one factor but I don't view it as a major one, rather, culture is a bigger one. Turkey is largely Muslim but their culture was one that embraced modernity, liberalism (to a degree), democracy, capitalism and tolerance. That is what has made them one of the few Muslim countries that are doing well economically and socially and politically and have good future prospects. The middle east, on the other hand, continues to regress socioeconomically, culturally, demographically, and has instability because of their culture.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@maxboiiyeeet1041 okay, for the wheel it is true that some of Africa did already develop it (mainly in northern and few Eastern African places) but most of sub-Saharan Africa didn't develop the use of wheels. Also, I think you're wrong about the agriculture topic. Much of sub-Saharan Africa, west Africa included, has and still has poor soil types and geography with thick jungles or wide savannah. This, coupled with erratic rainfall, meant much of our soils had low fertility and thus our people could only use subsistence agriculture. So, yes, you are right that we did already have agriculture but you ignore that it was not the type that was capable of sustaining large populations. Also, there is the fact that much of our cultivated crops like millet, sorghum,roots and tubers, etc, were not capable of providing high yield nutrition. The Green revolution and introduction of foreign crops here, especially grains like maize and wheat, changed all that. All of this changed with the advent of mechanized farming and fertilizers from the Europeans. Am I wrong?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tadeajao3344 India once penetrated Nigeria? Interesting....When did this happen? we have had diplomacy and ties with India but not as much as we are currently having with them. So how did they penetrate us, as you claim? Also, yes, India has similar problems to us but also has a vastly larger economy, better management of resources, better infrastructure development (they literally have better electricity production despite not having much petroleum like us) and they are also global leaders in pharmaceuticals, IT, and light industry/manufacturing. Why wouldn't we want to have closer ties with them for our own development? Indian manufacturing may not be as cheap as China but it is more reliable. And on a final point, strange how you think India always takes over businesses in Africa when they are many examples of china operating illegal farms, mining operations, or smuggling resources out of Africa and even engaging with war lords and slavers here. Why are you not talking about this? Has India done any of this here? And you winder why our country wants more deals with them🤔🤔
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hlengiwemasondo2858 Also, on the issue of tribalism, it's weird that you claim my country's tribalism is somehow worse than that of most African countries. Yes,it is sad we have that division but you really can't compare us to some others like say Ethiopia and Sudan for example. Both are.more culturally homogeneous and yet they are having civil wars with brutal acts like rapes, beheadings, and torture. I am grateful my country doesn't have any of this. We may have tribalism here but our national unity is better than in many other African countries but if you feel safer elsewhere, please take a trip to South Africa, Sudan, Congo, Ethiopia, Libya etc. You'll see what tribalism really is.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@iwatchDVDsonXbox360 Yeah, this just further proves my initial comment. China was a trade rival with the UK. They had more of those raw materials and luxury goods you listed (porcelain, tea and silk) and traded them with Europe. The British, under the British Raj (India) didn't like this competition and wanted either control or destroy it but couldn't just declare war on China. They started to sell opium because it was a cheap drug and they knew the emperor would try and sop it and that would give them cause to declare war. Also, despite what the letter says, China was not self-sufficient in all things. They still imported stuff from Europe e.g. machinery, vehicles, steel, weapons, etc. The only difference was that they had a trade surplus because they exported more stuff, mainly tea, silk and porcelain.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@gsomethingsomething2658 In my opinion, my country will never fully get rid of corruption, no more than most first-world countries like America or Japan can completely remove corruption. What we can do, as the former have successfully done, is mitigate corruption and make it less viable (or as my father once told me, make it work for our country the way it works for the west). And it can be done. For a while prior to 2014-15, our corruption rating was actually improving with our country becoming less corrupt (compared to other countries in Africa)
For starters, we will need political reform and economic reform. Our constitution states we are a federal republic but we don't have complete federalism here yet but growing calls and political will are making such reform more likely now. This will help decentralize political institutions and make states more autonomous in economic and social decision making.
Another issue is our government's tendency for overspending and not enough economic diversification. For the longest time, we have even had a fuel subsidy that has increased our debt but also functions as a way for members of government to take oil revenue for their own ends. That subsidy will be ending this year and more economic reforms are also likely to be on the way. This will help further reduce the incentive for corruption.
A final suggestion would be for us to strengthen our private sector. Even though we are a capitalist economy, our public sector is outweighs our private sector and excessive regulation hinders private sector growth here. It was different during our previous economically liberal government (PDP) but changed under teh current left-leaning one (APC). With our upcoming election next month, this will likely change afterwards.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@notahotshot Correct friend. However, i see you left out a few others vital facts:
-British transatlantic slavery did start in 1562 but it only got facilitated due to the pre-existing African and Arab slave trade for centuries earlier.
-In 1688, Quakers (Christian sect) in British colonies in the Americas and Caribbean condemn slavery and call for its abolition -In 1760s, They successfully convince members of the British administration to stop slave trading
-In 1783, They form the Committee to Abolish Slave trade.
-In 1807, British Empire officially abolishes slavery across all of the empire. Mainly starts in the Caribbean, Canada and South Africa.
-In 1808, West African Squadron established and tasks with patrolling the coasts controlled by British and arresting slavers, ships and freeing slaves and they succeed but also lost over 2000 British lives and millions of pounds to do this. No African or Arab power even cared to abolish slavery to this level.
The simple thing is that I, as an African, don;t care about slavery that took place over 200 years ago. I care more about ongoing slavery here in Africa and in the Arab world😥😥. The British and Americans acknowledge their role in slavery and have done more than anyone to make up for it. The British abolished it earlier than anyone, used money and British lives to stop it. The Americans fought a civil war to stop it and still condemn to this day.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@NaSaSh1087 UK, America, Canada, Japan, Taiwan, Germany, France were all authoritarian during their industrious stages? Okay. Also, yes, China does have far worse socioeconomic issues compared to India: Demographic crisis, soaring debt, declining manufacturing and exports, trade war with several countries, growing military hostility, food insecurity, water insecurity, housing crisis bubble and others.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
6:30 As a Nigerian, i see your point. After our independence, we had a democracy here but tribal tensions led to coups, a brutal civil war and decades of "strong-man" military rule (mainly dominated by northerners) and centralization. In 99, we returned to democracy and have been increasingly adopting fedralism as our government model. It's still in progress but even a breakdown of our country by regions shows how it's better. The South of Nigeria, where i live, had more British presence and influence and decentralized leadership. We also have more of capitalism, modernity, infrastructure, secular culture and political stability while the North that maintained more of its traditional aspects, centralized rulers and culture (Hausa and Fulani) lags behind socioeconomically, has poor security, low education, poor development and less upward mobility.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@test-ot1fz Yes, Libya was "richer" during Gaddafi but it was also not politically stable or economically equal for all citizens. Plus, it fell quickly into civil war after he was killed. Not a very well built country.
Iraq's military being strong is not a very good indicator. he couldn't even beat Iran. Their economy was still weak, corrupt, Saddam oppressed his own people, invaded other Arab countries and plunged his country and the region into chaos.
Also, what makes you think all of teh west and Christendom supports LGBTetc? If you have any sense and actually talk to westerners and Christians, most of us don't support it. We certainly don't hate them as you do in your part of the world but we respect their rights as citizens. We just don't support their lifestyle.
Finally, you secularism means no more Christianity? I suppose you also think Turkey has no Islam anymore too😕😕Secularism simply means tolerance. Considering you people in the middle east still have infighting, despite being Muslim (Sunni versus Shia, Ahmadiya discrimination, Wahhabism and Salafism extremism, Mutazali repression etc) you guys are not as united as you like to imagine.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jaybee4577 hmm, interesting points you raise. First, my problem with our current infrastructure projects is how terribly implemented they are and how poorly financed they are.
Excessive use of debt financing, especially borrowing from China and taking on too many projects have led to many or them being underfunded and incomplete, N11 trillion being owed to contractors and our debt profile rising. Also, as the video pointed out, simply building these things without proper systems and institutions and ready investors will not make them productive or profitable immediately and we will be using any profits/revenue to service our new debt.
Next thing you bring up is PDP and I will agree that they are corrupt but I also know that they have better economic policies than buhari and APC. Obasanjo, Yar'Adua, and GEJ all had low debt profiles while in office and Yar'Adua's policies kept our economy insulated during the 2007/8 global recession. Our current economic problems started under buhari even before COVID and the war in Ukraine. What is your excuse for him?
As for insecurity, I dare to tell me that current state of insecurity in Nigeria is better than what it was from 2000 to 2014.
After 99 our significant debt from military rule and mismanagement was reduced in relatively quick time thanks to them. Growth rate was steady and inflation was low while standard of living was improving. Though their infrastructure plans were slow, they never caused high debt or inflation that destroyed jobs and actual sustainable economic growth here. E.g. sachet water was N5 for 16 years of PDP but increased by over 50% under APC.
You label those of us who criticize buhari and APC as emotional. No, we are simply realistic and not swallowing lies of convenience.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This happens becauese of post-modernism and progressivism. Both are leftist ideologies and all leftist ideology is fundamentally about undermining and deconstructing all objective standards in a society. In western society, this manifests in making men effeminate, weak, undecisive, lazy, submissive and stupid. And for women, it involves making them unemotional, loud, rough, toxically masculine, overachieving to the point of parody, uncooperative, un-nurturing, and mean spirited. Basically, this is all by design i order to push a new set of standards.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Respect to Americans and to Trump, from Nigeria👏👏👏Simply put: Trump and the right ran on socioeconomic issues while Kamala and the left ran on useless identity politics😕The western left will ALWAYS lose with men because they fundamentally offer nothing of value to men. They oplose meritocracy, honor, courage, industry, capitalism, defense, family, hard work and national pride. They have also spent so nuch time attacking all men. That's just one reason why Trump gained more ground among men. As for diverse racial groups like Hispanics, not really hard to see why. Hispanics are culturally conservative. Plus, most of them are in America legally abd don't care for illegal immigrants. They also don't like radical leftists and woke culture.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@karunama3771 Um, if it's a religious issue, can you explain why any of these other societies and their dominant religious institutions never could replicate Europe's and Christendom's development of the scientific revolution? Why didn't China, India, ancient Greece, post-golden age Islam, Pagan Rome, etc? I know most religions are social institutions but not religions are the same. For every Copernicus and Galileo, you also had the Church supporting as bad promoting medieval Christian monks like Georges Lemaitre who proposed the Big Bang theory, Gregor Mendel who practically created the field of genetics, and Roger Bacon who revolutionized optics, astronomy, and mathematics. These aren't the only examples.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@@sincronot Again, you don't live here nor do you seem objective or level-headed or open to any sort of discussion. It's black-and-white for you. I only mentioned the countries that are regressing to be objective and show that I, and most Africans, are not ignorant of our own continental reality. We know we still have many issues here and the countries I listed are proof but, as I also stated, we are not stupid (as you are) to pretend that no progress has, and is been made here. You claim by 2030 my country will regress without any proof or objective statistics and yet I am the one "coping"? Funny, Elon Musk literally chose Nigeria as teh firs country in Africa to receive Star Link instead of his own birth country of SA, yet you think my country will fail in 2030? about 7 years?🤔🤔 Look, you think what you want to think and bluster all you want. Reality is reality, not what we like to pretend it is. We know our reality in Africa and how much we need to improve and also how much we have improved. You can look it up if you want or take it from someone who actually lives here or just stick to your convenient narrative😒😒
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jeffersonhassan4558 did you not read my original comment or any of my replies where I acknowledged this? Of course I know we have high inflation, cost of living and unemployment. I know our economy has not been well since 2015 when APC took over and ruined things but you do also know that our GDP and economic forecast are among the best in Africa, right? Plus, as terrible as the effects of Tinubu's reforms are, the improvements they will bring down the line are undeniable. Also, here's a simple fact: A country's economic hardship doesn't mean they are not doing well. America, Canada, China, Brazil, etc all are facing high levels of inflation, cost of living, and unemployment but I doubt you are going to call them failed economies.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This was inevitable. Animation maybe some parts art but it is still a business and should be operated as such. The moment these animation studios went all in on "artsy" and ideology driven instead of focusing on good stories, marketability and profits, they were doomed. Sure, Adventure Time and Steven Universe (the main culprits) had a lot of fans (in the wrong unintended demographic) but they also were largely unable to merchandise those shows and you need money to keep making shows, regardless of how much of an "artist" you are. I don't blame Zaslav at all. WB is in dire financial straits and has been for decades. What he is doing is necessary. Sorry to those who lost jobs but I blame the idiots who messed up the animation sector before they came. If we get more stuff like OG Ben 10, Hey Arnold, As Told By Ginger, Jimmy Neutron, etc (shows that were well written, had good moral themes and messages, and were marketable) western animation will be in a better place than where it has been for a while now with lazy ideologically divisive Cal-arts derivatives.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@pauljrechezona3126 You are right that it would have been better had the derivatives and benefits of British colonialism come via trade and diplomacy rather than conquest but, sadly, history has shown that this is not the way it happens. Even much of modern Europe was established during the colonial expansion and brutality of the Romans (Celtic genocide and British subjugation, etc) but as part of that, these places got much of their later nation building and culture from Rome. It's a sad aspect of human nature and history😔
Also, to be fair, what matters with regards to a country's economic development has more to do with culture and value systems rather than if they were colonized or not. Mongolia was not colonized but they are also no where as rich or developed as places like Korea and Vietnam that were colonized. Also, believe me, the Mongolian empire*was not a good empire* by any stretch😨 As for Ethiopia, I wouldn't put much stock in them as an example of what could have been for us in Africa considering how despite no colonialism, they have the same (if not more) problems as most other African countries do (famines, dictatorships, civil wars, tribalism, economic mismanagement and corruption etc)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Pakilla64 And that is one of it's greatest flaws, especially Arab culture and Arab islam. Due to this, it is slow, sometimes impossible, for it to make any reforms and necessary changes for the betterment of itself and society simply since the social, religious and political elites want to maintain their status at the expense of everyone else. This is basically why during their golden age, they rejected the reforms of Harun al-Rashid and declined subsequently in economics, politics, education, philosophy, science and technology compared to the west and Christendom. Good thing Christianity and even Turkey never had this weakness.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@BESTINTHEWORLD0007 Yes, you are saying that but it is clearly not accurate. Secularism is defined as a policy of separating religion from public affairs like politics, economics, education, industry, and civil law. Christianity didn't lose to secularism. It evolved with secularism and modernized, like many other religions like Hinduism (India) Shinto and Buddhism (Japan), even Islam in Turkey, Azerbaijan, Malaysia, Senegal, Indonesia and few others modernized and have elements of secularism. That is why their politics, economies and judicial systems are not hindered and stagnant like the Arab world today. That is also why they have true national unity and stability while you Arabs continue to fight and have unstable countries.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
TheGhost-kk7jj when I mentioned bad geography for the middle East, I mean the deserts, lack of sustainable rainfall, poor soil for agriculture and building (they literally have to import sand for concrete😮💨), lack of other resources besides oil, and many of their countries are land-locked. All of this has led to severe issues like poor urbanization, poor infrastructure and development, food and water insecurity, border skirmishes, terrorism, demographic issues, and economic hardship. We have problems in Africa with our geography but not to the level of the middle East.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@minestar2247 so the Nile and Fertile Crescent are enough to feed the entire arid middle East? Is this not the same Egypt, Iraq, etc that depends on Ukraine and Russia for grain?🤔
Only Israel, Lebanon and Turkey actually practice capitalism and liberalism. The rest of you don't. Property rights are not strong, sl*very still exists, you have low industrialization and manufacturing. Your economies are largely state-owned with no innovation or diversification.
The tribalism and atomization wasn't caused by the US. It has always existed. Sunni-Shia schisms. Repression of minority tribes like Druze and Yazidis and Ibadis. Suppression of Christians, Berbers etc. always been there.
Dutch disease has also been there from the start. Before oil, most of your societies were focused on spice, gemstones, pearls or other single commodities. Oil just replaced all that. If you were truly capitalist, you would have diversified your economies🤔
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kenwood2682 Hmm, Botswana after independence, embraced capitalism and democracy and used it to develop their diamond industry where they attracted foreign companies for investment, job creation while Zimbabwe embraced socialism and dictatorship and destroyed their country.
Somalia and Ethiopia under communism and backed by the Soviet Union, experienced dictatorships, famines, civil wars, ethnic cleansing and worse. Ethiopia has somewhat recovered after embracing democracy and capitalism. Somalia, not so much.
Nigeria (my country) was under several years of dictatorships and socialism where our economy suffered and only recovered after 99 when we returned to democracy and liberalized our economy. Same with Ghana.
China that you mentioned literally abandoned economic communism and is now a largely capitalist economy. The Soviet Union fell and Cuba has gotten worse. while Chile, a capitalist country in Latin America, is thriving.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This happens becauese of post-modernism and progressivism. Both are leftist ideologies and all leftist ideology is fundamentally about undermining and deconstructing all objective standards in a society. In western society, this manifests in making men effeminate, weak, undecisive, lazy, submissive and stupid. And for women, it involves making them unemotional, loud, rough, toxically masculine, overachieving to the point of parody, uncooperative, un-nurturing, and mean spirited. Basically, this is all by design i order to push a new set of standards.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Whenever i hear someone say "Islam will take over the world", the reality of the middle East and the history if the region tells me otherwise😕 Any region, culture, religion tribe that rejects modernity, rationality and stability will never be stable or widely viable. There's a reason why the only Muslim regions/countries that tend to do well are Turkey, Indonesia, Oman, and Southwestern Nigeria because their cultures people promote tolerance, education, secularism, entrepreneurship, modernity and industry which the Arab world rejects and will always reject.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lukewarm6369 Things with insecurity are bad but not largely due to religious tensions, I assure you. There are extremists on both sides but it is not so black and white. Christians, in the largely Mulsim north, are victims of islamic bandits and terrorist but the majority of the victims tend to be Muslims. Even in the largely Christian south, violent groups tend to target Christians and Muslims indiscriminately. Overall, our country tends to adopt a more secular view with regards to religion and politics mainly because we have no other choice and it's the only way to maintain civic nationalism here. Plus, thankfully, our armed forces, which has a slight Muslim majority, has been doing a decent job of pushing back islamic terrorists and maintaining neutrality in terms of religion or tribe, but they need to do more to reduce insecurity.
1
-
1
-
1