Why do historians use this term "Scramble for Africa" as if its a treasure or object without any self-determination or will of its own to manifest via the peoples who inhabit it? No, the continent Africa, and its exploitation and enslavement, has been resigned to the status of "the last box of pizza pops in the frozen food isle" and not one person seeks to change that
I resent it
>>1353736
who cares, they certainly didn't.
there were different values and goals during their time period that are anachronistic to your own, so don't try and pervert it because it makes you feel bad.
>>1353736
>as if its a treasure or object without any self-determination or will of its own to manifest via the peoples who inhabit it?
Because that's how it was viewed by the people scrambling for it, and how they documented their doing so?
The self-determination and will of Africa is overrated anyway. Good government > Self government when the choice is between Rhodesia or Zimbabwe, and I say that as someone who spends half their time campaigning for the self-determination of his own nation. (because mine demonstrates the ability to withstand foreign exploitation instead of collapsing into coup after coup after coup.)
Because it was valuable land and resources in the eyes of colonists. The "scramble for Africa" sounds like a fight for goodies because it was a fight for goodies as they saw it.
It's fucked up, but welcome to history. If we don't remember the mistakes of the past, how are we to learn from them? The name isn't the issue, the mindset it refers to is the bad bit. Teach people the history and point out the errors, simple as that. It's all we can do without misrepresenting the past.
>>1353736
Because it was a scramble.
For Africa.
By the colonial powers, who recorded the events historically. Whether they were sympathetic to the colonialists or opposed, the same phrase adequately describes the actions.
If you're in favor of colonialism it emphasizes the competition like elements of staking territory that the powers.
If you're against it it adequately summarizes the brutally rapid rush to callously conquer indigenous peoples before other powers could.
Don't get #triggered because they didn't choose to call it 'The Super Sad Really Unfortunate Awful Scrimmage for Africa/'
>>1353736
Africans couldn't fight back because a massive Rinderpest outbreak caused the worst famine in African history.
>>1353736
lmao who cares nigger
>>1353736
Why do we call the Sokoto Caliphate a Caliphate when it was a brutal self-serving autocracy?
>>1353736
Name one other continent with as much unclaimed territory as Africa in 1880.
There's a hell of a lot there to scramble for. Even along the coast.
>>1353825
No, they couldn't fight back because they were vastly outnumbered, outgunned, and outmaneuvered. Europeans, at that time, were better than Africans in every way.
>>1353736
For a 19th century European mindset, more land = more prestige = more happiness.
Africa has a lot of land ripe for the taking; 19th century advances in medicine and logistics made its conquering possible and expedient.
>>1353811
>I say that as someone who spends half their time campaigning for the self-determination of his own nation.
What nation?
Rhodesia government is hardly what you can call food government so it's more like shit government>shittier government.
>>1353736
Pretty sure it's the term europeans of the time used.
>>1353982
I'm not saying this from a equality pov but the policies are very self-harming in the short and long term.
>be small nation
>see massive continent
>filled with 'lesser-peoples'
>not ripe for the taking
R UH RETARTET
>>1354003
Considering the huge issues and burden on the state it was a mixed blessing at best.
>>1353736
That is a terrible map.
By 1913, the areas that were actually controlled directly by Europeans were about as small as in 1880; most of it was controlled by deals with local warlords; and the rest was simply independent, but drawn in a European colour on European maps. The French were actively conquering the Sahara in the Thirties, for goodness sake.
Also
>conquering Africa for Europeans from Africans was cool
>Japan is evil for conquering places already conquered by Europe
>conquering Africa was good for Africans
>ignore that Africa has been shit since colonization
>>1354007
>burden on the state
It's okay, the idea was that the taxpayer subsidize private adventurers in making their personal fortunes. Most colonies were burdens on the GOVERNMENT, and so the taxpayers, but were profitable for the STATE, which, of course, includes businesses, and so the upper or moneyed class got paid.
>>1354054
Ehh the way a place is ruled with it's policies and laws highly effect it's development, cultre and situation.
It's interesting to see how each country turned out.
>>1354054
>ignore that Africa has been shit since colonization
and worse since decolonization, save for Botswana.
>>1354212
Yes, the path that colonization set them on has resulted in them doing worse over time.
Before the continent was colonized, before the slave trade began, it was progressing in the same direction and at the same rate as Eurasian civilization.
>Egypt is part of Ottoman empire.
In name only. Thanks Europeans for not letting Muhammed Ali leave fully.
>>1354222
No it wasn't, it was stagnant and never could only improve as fast as food production improved, which was slowly.
>>1353736
Fuck You Faggot
WHY CABT WE JUST FUCKIBG ACCPET THAT THE STRONG ABD SMART COBWUER THE WEAK ABD DUMB. DUCKIBG WESTERB PHILDPHY HAS RUINSD US ESPECIALYL ITS STIPID MORALYIKU FFS, CHINKS AE CPLONSIE AFRICA. AND WE CABT VECAUSE 'mMUH MORALS MUH NIGGERS R PPL" HOLY FUCKING SHIT WE ARE LOITERLLY GIVIIBG KURBFFUCKIG FAME TO HEM BECAUSE WE BEGECT BASIC TRIBALISM FFS INB4 POL BUT YOU BUYS ARE MORENYXJIHF CONCEREND WITH HIGH HORSE THAN FUCKING GETTING SHIT SINE ABD NNAKIF EUROA GREAT AGAIB FFS . PROVE ME WRONG CUBTS
WE GSVE AWAY FUCKING EVERYTHING
>>1354270
That's the rate at which every society on Earth developed, as fast as food production improved.
Africa was a few thousand years behind, after a few tens of thousands of years of developing independently. So a few percent slower in development, overall.
>>1354295
We still take all the resources from african countries and engineer coups there
We've given away explicit political control, but we still pull the strings. This way allows us to sit on our high-horses, collect all the resources we need and exploit the natives, AND let the natives take the blame for poor administration instead of ourselves.
Far from giving away everything, we have given away all of the duties while retaining all of the rights.
>>1354301
>Africa was a few thousand years behind
Not really. That varied heavily based on the region and simple exposure to other cultures and knowledge heavily accelerates it.
That's how a lot of Europeans saw the world a object and the nation with the most colonies was the greatest thus the saying "out of all the colonies great nation's boasts Great Britain holds the most"
>>1354414
Who cares about how great a nation is if only a few elite people get to benefit from it?
>>1354054
Agreed. De facto maps deserve more attention.
>>1354054
>>ignore that Africa has been shit since colonization
Africa was always shit
>>1353736
I would assume because it was a scramble. For a place called Africa. Or am I being too racist for you?
>>1353956
They were outgunner and outsmarted by superior whites but not outnumbered
>>1353736
>I resent it
that's nice anon
>>1353736
>as if its a treasure
There were great treasures to be had in the form of resources.
>or object without any self-determination or will of its own
That is how it was seen - a weak, backwards place with no strong nationality and ruled by dominant tribes.
>>1354054
>ignoring that it's been shit since forever
>>1353736
Because it basically was a scramble for all Europeans to rush in the dark continent, plant their flag, draw a map claiming it yours and telling others to GTFO?
>>1353736
>Ethiopia got bigger
>>1353736
can we keep topics out of politics. this shit is getting facebook tier.
>>1358180
nah we neo-/his/ now.
>>1354212
Ghana, Nigeria and Angola are doing pretty well.
>>1353736
go back to tumblr carl
>>1358358
Lagos is doing well. Nigeria isn't.
