Can we agree the reason why africa is shit is because black nations became socialists after gaining independance?

Not even a third of African countries had some kind of socialism, and they're not even the ones who're doing the worse today.

>The fact Africa was so backward before colonization lead to believe their inferiority steams from something else (probably closely linked to black people)
It wasn't backwards, it was simply not developed, not everywhere in the world is at the same level of civ at the same time.

Ask Lenin.

>It wasn't backwards, it was simply not developed

Actually the former-socialist African countries are doing better on things like literacy rates. Assuming they didn't spend all their USSR-bux on guns for neighbouring rebels.

if you look up african cities tours on youtube, there's plenty of buildings and skycrappers on their cities.

Even Chad cities don't look like slums.
youtube.com/watch?v=-wB5aV9TCP8

They're poor, nothing more.

you have to have gone forwards to go backwards

So are you telling us buildings weren't a think back when those countries were socialist?
Also that video does make N'Djamena look very bad 2bh

>think
thing, ofc

youtube.com/watch?v=aSjXyMa7w-Y
why do first worlders assume a materialistic point of view that being poor is equal to living in some hell?

They're not that bad, clearly equal to european post WWII in some rates like child mortality and healthcare simply because of technology.

Even the poorest african now have access to things not even the richest european had back then.

The sub-Saharan African countries which are doing the best right now (and best doesn't just mean high GDP growth) are mostly countries which have had stable, functioning representative democracies for the past two decades without too much tribal or interethnic squabbling. Just look at Botswana, Gabon, Ghana or even Rwanda, which has been a fairly stable democracy post-genocide. Dictatorships, military regimes, and socialist/communist governments have all held back various African countries, but the ones doing well have long left those ideas behind.

>Even the poorest african now have access to things not even the richest european had back then.

You mean white inventions that happened between then and now?
No shit Sherlock

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_(PPP)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_African_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

check the data pol.
any african country is better than any 1950 european nation.

wait, is OP helping trolls to derail his own thread?

What?

How do you define doing the best right now?

Explain Zaire then.

>History Channel

LOL

Combination of factors like Gini coefficient, HDI, literacy rates, political stability, crime rates, and yes, GDP per capita; I would also include GDP growth as a minor factor. It's not perfect, I know, but it's better than just focusing on one stat. For instance, Nigeria looks great from an economic perspective, but they just had their first peaceful transition of power, are plagued by crime and corruption, the police and military violate human rights, HDI and literacy are low, and they have issues with terrorism and sectarian violence.

Which factors do you think helped these countries to avoid electing people into the government that would seize power and keep it like with Mugabe in Zimzam and Mandela and his cronies in seth afreka?

In Botswana´s case it clearly is democratic or at least egalitarian tribal customs

This. This is primarily because at least in those former socialist states they were all about uplifting the standards of living which really helps development. Not supporting socialism but uplifting the citizenry first then pursuing wealth is the best option in development many people ignore.

It's Zuma's ANc that really hurt the nation. Mandela basically inherited a state deeply indebt due to the Apartheid government being forced to take out loans and managed to keep the nation calm during one of the most fragile moments that can go sour.

saying socialism is bad is as retarded as saying all capitalism is bad
it is more efficient to make things that all humans need (in a single form/not much variety in choices) owned by society (roads, water, internet, public transit)
but things humans have choices between (planes, food, books, car) should be privatized

Listen to this guy. He knows what he is talking about.

>not everywhere in the world is at the same level of civ at the same time.
That's just something backwards cunts say to make themselves feel better and you know it.

>I just watched a history channel documentary on this.
You do realize that shitposting is still shitposting even if you're trying to be funny right?

honest question, do you people actually deny that sub saharan africans have a lower intellectual capacity and that this contributes in some part to their troubles in establishing functioning and stable governments? i thought this was generally accepted and only really avoided for considerations of political correctness.

No, if anything it got worse.

What it needs is state capitalism to help it rise out of the ground

Is it?

That's good to know.

>a thinly veiled /pol/ post.
>Muh low iq, its all genetics blo blo blo

debunkingstormfags.blogspot.com.au/2016/07/with-rise-of-alt-right-far-right-neo.html

debunkingstormfags.blogspot.com.au/2016/07/debunking-more-myths-on-more-blacks-are.html

debunkingdenialism.com/2012/08/11/the-widespread-abuse-of-heritability/#more-5129

debunkingdenialism.com/2016/04/30/mailbag-modern-high-throughput-genomics-versus-race-realism/#more-89403

The elephant in the room is that Africa is shit because africans have a low average intelligence. You require a minimum average intelligence to be able to build a prosperous technological civilization, or let intelligent foreigners run things for you (like Dubai)

Nice blog links, solid sources.

Sub-Saharan Africa has literally not been shit at any point in its history except when Europeans or Asians governed things there

>debunking...
>blogspot...
>(dot)au...

wew lad

>he actually believes this

>not reading the source provided.

WEW
E
W

>implying you would take the time to read a source if it was called "aryantruths.blogspot.com"

not reading unless it ends in .org, .edu or .gov

>shitty climate and geography
>shitty cultures and nations pre-colonialism
>shitty colonial governance focused on resource extraction
>shitty half-hearted efforts by colonial powers to set up governments while they bailed out
>shitty civil wars and ideologues fight for control in the vaccum
>shitty economics dependent on the rest of the world

>shitty indigenous people

Sub-Saharan Africa is shit because:
1. Tribal hatred that goes back thousands of years
2. Low IQ
3. Primitive value systems and lack of meritocracy
4. Intelligent/successful Africans GTFO of Africa when they get the chance