Was colonialism bad ?
>>1412625
I want you to go to archive.moe and read any of the 500 threads starting with a picture of the continent of africa before you shit up this board any more, please and thank you
How comes sub-saharan Africa never developped?
>>1412639
jungles are shit for civilization
>>1412625
If you were European? Hell no.
If you were African? Fuck yes.
>>1412646
Explain Asia then
Yes now fuck off with this /pol/ tier thread.
it was a clear violation of the prime directive, so sure.
>>1412646
Africa had plenty of civilizations in the jungles, so did Asia and America. The problem wasn't just jungles, it was also isolation. Africa lagged behind for the same reason Mesoamerica lagged behind.
>>1412667
>If you were African? Fuck yes.
Yeah, all that medecine and these infastructure sure were awful
After all, who need civilization when you can live a life of 40 years on average like a literal chimp in a mudhut village...
>>1412677
So you'd be fine with China invading your country, exploiting its resources, and killing a shitload of people, just as long as they built a couple schools and hospitals?
You think colonialism is required to build said schools and hospitals?
>like a literal chimp
Chimps don't have agriculture and metal-working or build cities.
>>1412686
tibetans seem to appreciate it.
>>1412686
China is a shithole, so nope
But if some superior alien civilization invaded us and upgraded our way of life in exchange of us letting them exploit some ressources we're too dumb to even know how to use, I wouldnt see that as the worst thing ever
>>1412713
Make sure you sign up so you and your whole town can be the first ones massacred or forced to work in some mines, then, since it's for the greater good.
>>1412686
>You think colonialism is required to build said schools and hospitals?
Where were all the African schools and hospitals pre-colonization?
>>1412722
There were already a few places of learning, but it's completely missing the point.
Schools and hospitals can be built and resources gotten through trade without needing forced labor, genocide, or destroying countries.
>>1412722
Can the mudhut of the village dedicated to human sacrifice count as a hospital?
>>1412731
to be fair, isn't that how europeans treated each other during the same period? Why isn't that worthy of the same posthumous ethnic rentseeking?
>>1412735
When did any of the European conquer one another and genocide each other (other than Nazi Germany)?
>>1412744
Open a european history book and throw a dart, lmao
>>1412625
Yes we should have genocided the maghrebis.
>>1412746
When did Britain annex all of France and genocide the natives?
I'm not talking about fucking over Ireland or some ethnic minorities, I mean actively seeking to conquer and rule all the other European powers.
>>1412625
bad for Africa? yes, resources exploitation and cutting off hands for missing rubber quotas generally isn't the greatest way to govern.
bad for Europe? hell no Africa was the engine the fueled the continent's conquest of the world and was the main sources for material to keep them fighting through the world wars.
>>1412731
Yes, that is true today, but that very likely wouldn't have happened then without the massive incentive for people first to go there and exploit the area and people to make a profit. The good development goes hand in hand with the bad, people wouldn't have been going to build hospitals without violent repression and building of infrastructure for resource extraction taking place first. The Scramble for Africa and its subsequent development happened because it was a chance to open new markets and integrate them, forcefully, into the global capitalist order.
>>1412625
No.
>>1412767
>he honestly thinks genocide didn't happen in colonial Africa
>laughing Namibs and Congolese
>US WHITEYS WUZ BRINGIN DEM CIVILIZATION N SHEEET DEY WUZ GOOD BOYS WHO DINDU KILL NO ONE
>>1412771
>>1412625
So far, yes. It's absolutely possible that colonialism will have long-term positive implications on African countries, but these gains haven't yet been materialized.
Africa today is worse-off than it would be if it had not been colonized. The introduction of Western values and technology was important, but didn't need to happen through conquest. Look at China, look at Japan, look at Thailand -- indigenous systems of government were not destroyed, so Westernization happened peacefully.
Colonization does not happen for the benefit of the colonized. The "white man's burden" was largely lip service to reconcile wars of conquest with Christian pacifism. Even in the 19th century, most people recognized this.
>>1412779
Why do retards keep posting this kind of screen like it's a proof of anything?
It takes 5 secs on paint to remove a (you) and 8 secs to add one
>>1412789
Why do retards keep assuming everyone who disagrees with them is a samefag
>>1412625
>Bad
Spook bro
>>1412756
The Congress of Vienna put any massive European conquest on pause; the various powers in Europe were roughly equal in might so they focused on maintaining the balance of power to prevent another massive conflict which would have highly uncertain results. Africa and other parts of the world certainly weren't equal in might to Europe and victory was a virtual certainty, so the conflicts got diverted to there, beginning with the conquest of non-European peoples. It's not a surprise that WWI happened not too long after the entire world was divided up among the Western powers.
>>1412625
>Contemporary flags on that map
Delete this thread.
>>1412797
Doesn't contradict what I said. Europeans already had the concept of "balance of powers" and so on and generally didn't have any aims of conquering other colonial powers. Yet somehow colonialism, conquest, and genocide is the only possible way they could have interacted with weaker nations.
>>1412803
*supposedly the only possible way
>>1412775
>Congolese
Literally one crazy guy's fault.
>Namibia
Because unsuccessful rebellions worked out well for Europeans
>>1412791
>Nignog
Thanks for confirming that you're some /pol/tard. Can't you make retarded threads like this on your own board? Or better yet just read the archive. There is a thread about this every day.
http://archived.moe/his/
Anyway whatever. Considering the popularity of threads like this I'm doing a fairly futile thing. Either I'm complaining to a bunch of /pol/ shit-stirrers intent on fucking up a once fairly interesting and insightful board or the resident population of /his/ actually enjoy committing suicide by repeatedly making and commenting in threads about the same repetitive shit.
>>1412826
So you've gone from "there were no genocides" to "ok yeah, well those don't really count for arbitrary reasons". Let's see where you move the goalposts next time.
>>1412639
define development
>>1412847
Inventing the wheel
>>1412803
But they probably did have aims of conquest, it was just put on pause. Look at the fear of Russia and Germany among the British and the rivalries. Balance of powers doesn't mean that you don't have an intention, somewhere down the line, of beating your rivals once you've gained the strength to do so; it's just not realistic in the short term.
>>1412833
That was my first post ITT
>>1412744
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrying_of_the_North
>>1413157
Something that started centuries before colonialism and has nothing to do with one colonial power completely conquering and exploiting another.
>>1412625
Ethiopia was conquered by Italy
>>1413163
Wut?
That was basically Western France colonizing and exploiting England
In the time of Richard I, centuries after the conquest, England was still used by Anjou as a source of resources and manpower in a very similar way to how 19th century colonies were
>>1413554
Is English not your first language?
I'm talking about colonial powers specifically not conquering or annexing one another, what you linked happened centuries and centuries before that period. Neither medieval France nor England were colonial powers.
>>1412798
the one and only answer
Yes but ending it was even worse
>>1413174
For like 4 years
>>1413174
t. Luigi di Fetuccini
m8 Italy couldn't conquer Ethiopia even with illegal WW1 chemical warfare tactics
Africa colonization is a great example in favor of the prime directive
>>1413850
>what is 1936-1941
Lad...
>>1413826
Ending it was always gonna be fucking messy as hell and you'd have to be a total idiot to believe otherwise.
>>1412625
Not nearly as bad as they make it sound.
>>1414141
Wrong
>>1412639
Because not only did they live in jungles and shit deserts which were bad for adapting a civilization, but they virtually had no outside contact with europeans until much later on. Ethiopians were just as dumb and they were the only African country to not be cucked
>>1413891
that's not "conquering" that was occupation lad
>>1414182
right!
>>1413163
>ask about Europeans conquering one another and genociding each other
>gets a reply
>umm that was pre colonialism
>>1412625
Yes and no. The dominance and inherent aggression of pursuing colonial policy and denying self-rule is clearly immoral. It can't be denied though that by a lot of measures, colonial masters created better societies than those who replaced them in many cases.
>>1412625
it depends
>this fucking thread again
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
>>1412639
No population. The continent only had 90 million as late as 1880 while Europe had 400 million.
been through this dozens of times, here is my bagirmi cavalry pic that I like to post in these threads and a brief explanation that is hopefully free from both /pol/'s and reddit's taint
>>1412625
>Was colonialism bad ?
oppressive colonial governments were unjust (though no more unjust than native tyrannies and it is kind of naive to expect anything else in those times), technology is good but colonialism wasn't required to spread it around (in b4 civilization was a mistake meme)
>>1412639
>How comes sub-saharan Africa never developped?
geographically unfavorable position and civil wars and instability during the cold war, some of which dragged on into the 90s and early 00s
>>1412672
Kek
>>1414142
westernization
>>1412852
So whites whites developed? They just borrowed the wheel
>>1412677
None of that needed to arrive through conquest. Look at Japan.
>>1414142
No, it's naive to suggest this
>>1413850
>>1414193
>>1414401
there was a neat cavalry festival in Nigeria(?) recently
>>1416661
post more pics anon i'm intrigued
>>1418138
They did it on their own terms though
>>1414401
>colonialism wasn't required
You think we gonna do this for free?
Sheeiiit, even back then niggers still being gibsmedat.
>>1412731
>trade
and what good developed resources did they have to trade other than muscle and blood?
