Without Colonialism...Africa would of surpassed Europe in development

Trade?

This is b8

Maybe they are, but using Zimbabwe as an example is like using Moldova to claim Europe is a shithole.
Also the quality of life in Africa is way better now than it was back then.

>why don't we just not oppress and exploit these people over here

how tho
if there's a profit in it someone's gonna do it. not like you can pass a law to prevent it when it's not even your territory.

you need resources to trade. States dont just pop out of nowhere. Further more, if a state dosent have alot of land and resources it cant even compete with larger more civilized states and it becomes a defacto colony/protectorate anyways

Europe was already ahead of Africa by like the 1300s

No one bothers to check the stats on the mass changes in the qol stats.

Some empires did pretty well at extracting valuable mineral resources, same goes for agriculture.
>it becomes a defacto colony/protectorate anyways
But OP was talking about European colonialism I believe.

>Look mom, I posted it again!

Allow me to cuck your shit up, senpai.

First, a definition: "civilization", as classically defined, simply means a society that possesses both stable urban centers and a true writing system.

Now, some starting points:

1. Civilization only ever independently developed in two places: Mesopotamia and Mesoamerica.

2. Europe NEVER independently developed writing or civilization. ALL European written languages are the direct descendants of Levantine writing systems.

3. The development of civilization directly jives with contact dates with previous civilizations. This is why South-Eastern Europe developed civilization well before Northern Europe. Rome had been civilized for ~800 years before the first Northern Celtic/Germanics EVER put pen to paper. Large swaths of Northern Europe were uncivilized until the 13th century A.D.

CONT.

Now, in terms of independently developing civilization, Sub-Saharan Africa was at a series of disadvantages, namely:

1. A smaller population (compared to Europe, East Asia, South Asia, etc.) and thus much lower population density in an area roughly two times the size of the United States. Sub-Saharan Africa didn't catch up to Europe in terms of population until about 2000 A.D.

2. A desert roughly the size of the United States separating most of Sub-Saharan Africa from the Levant, the "Cradle of Civilization". By contrast, there was no large geographic separation between Europe and the Levant.

3. Large plains interspersed with jungles, which made interior, far-reaching navigation largely impracticable until European explorers arrived in the 19th century.

CONT.

Just to make that point clear, for ALL OF RECORDED HUMAN HISTORY UNTIL 15 YEARS AGO, Sub-Saharan Africa had fewer people than Europe. Nonetheless, it has always been more diverse in terms of genetics and ethno-linguistics.

Put simply, having a small but extremely diverse population on a huge continent is not very conducive to the INDEPENDENT development of civilization. Sadly, this diversity greatly assisted Europeans in divide and conquer tactics during the colonial era and some of those policies resulted directly in genocide (as in Rwanda and Burundi). Many of these issues still plague much of Sub-Saharan Africa today and the politicization of ethnicity (i.e. "if you're part of ethnic group A, you vote for party A or you're a traitor!") is a huge problem today and directly results in massive amounts of corruption.

>muh natural resources
Many of the "natural resources that should have magically thrust civilization and wealth upon the blacks" simply weren't valuable or even known until the 19th century or beyond. I've literally seen /pol/sters cite Uranium and diamonds as would-be sources for African pre-colonial wealth. /pol/ seems to be patently unaware that most precious metals were largely disdained until Arab or European contact.

CONT.

In regards to IQ, if you subscribe to the tautological reasoning that intelligence is "what ever IQ tests measure", then there's only a 50-70 year gap between black Africans and white Europeans. Owing to the Flynn Effect, the average IQ of unselected Finnish, Danish, and American soldiers (the former two tested with a highly g-loaded test (Raven's Matrices)) shows that Europeans in the early-mid 20th century would test around 80-85 today. And even if you reject the Flynn effect's quasi-egalitarian implications (which many well-versed intelligence researchers do, as the consistency of the gap remains relatively stable), Egypt, which currently has an average IQ of ~81, was civilized for ~3,500 years before the first NORTHERN European (~100) put pen to paper.

Barbados (~83), a black country, is one of the least corrupt and best managed countries in the Americas and currently has a high income and a high human development index (occasionally venturing into "Very High"/"Developed"). The British managed to foster a civilized culture among the descendants of slaves who were by no means selected for their intelligence. So even if there is a permanent, irredeemable gap, culture is certainly a deciding factor in the success of a society. For reference, the average IQ in Sub-Saharan Africa is ~80 (Wicherts et al, 2010).

That being said, if we look at basic societal indicators such as life expectancy, literacy rates, years of education, maternal mortality, number of universities, road density, average income, etc. almost all of Sub-Saharan Africa is at a level that Europeans reached in the early-mid 20th century, which is to say that there are plenty of people still alive when most of Europe was shittier than Africa today. Plus, Sub-Saharan African countries currently have amongst the highest growth rates on Earth and there are far fewer civil wars and violent conflict than there were just 20 years ago.

CONT.

agree, but would cape verde become colonized by Africans?

>muh headstart
When humans were migrating out of Africa 60-90kya, there were generally no more than 25,000 people on Earth at any given time. In other words, more people probably go to your local University than there were humans on the entire globe.

In conclusion, /pol/, people don't call you "ignorant" just because you hurt their feelgoods. They call you ignorant because you're genuinely unaware of human history.

>C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER!!!

You motherfucker.

>many leaders eager to modernize
yea
AFTER Europeans showed up and started fucking them up

No many before that.

Climate and geography had a bigger impact on economic development than oppression, also oppression can (and did) exist without colonialism so it is up to debate how much was due to colonialism in particular.

From the 1950s onwards climate and geography were less influential factors due to new technology, however during this period Africa was troubled by war holding back progress. Some wars like the Angolan civil war were attributable to colonialist attitudes in Europe, others were due to native dictators and warlords overthrowing newly independent countries.

Moldavia has always been a shithole; but Rhodesia was the breadbasket of Africa

source please

When you take a bunch of niggers without knowledge about farming and give them all the arable land, you really shouldn't expect great things. Mugabe and friends are nothing but powerful idiots.

Read up on the history of the kingdom of Kongo. They were a Catholic monarchy with strong ties to Portugal throughout most of the colonial era.

>omg more GDP growth than China
Blatant sophistry.
The reason they're leading in growth is that if you were to drive through with a banana loaded truck their GDP would skyrocket.

If you add 1 to 1 that's a 100% growth but you've still got only 2

Implying European influence delayed development on this continent doesn't cut mustard for shit when you take one look at either of the examples of Gadaffi's Libya or Egypt (whatever period). Being close to Europe masively expediated development not only of the regions but of the continent of the whole (Gadaffi's Pan African Golden Dinar currency, Egyptian civlisation etc). They got butt fucked sidetracked by arabslime slave trade destroyed their agri-centrics, likewise foreign religion fucking their use of cannabis rotations.

Good post over all but

>1. Civilization only ever independently developed in two places: Mesopotamia and Mesoamerica.
China, nigger. Indus valley is debatable also, and if you count meme scripts like rongorongo and Nsibidi then it's possible that other places count. I assume you're using the "literacy" definition of civilisation, if you're using the agricultural definition then there are like 12 centres of origin

sorry for the shitty cropping, but here it is

There is no reason to believe so. If sub saharans were behind the world during the middle ages, what makes you think they'd be ahead during the modern age?
Here's what would happen: Islamic civilization in the North would continue spreading downwards. Arabs would genocide niggers until there were none left and blacks become a mythical creature. Then sub saharan Africa would be on par with Arabia.
So maybe in a sense they could be developed.

>They got butt fucked sidetracked by arabslime slave trade

You do know of the Trans Atlantic slave trade.

>Arabs would genocide niggers until there were none left and blacks become a mythical creature.

What?

More like Europe was ahead of subsaharan Africa by 10,000 BCE.

Arabs castrated all black male slaves because they considered them animals, presumably they'd do the same thing

The Arab slave trade was around since like 800AD and the Atlantic Slave Trade is, if anything, an outgrowth of it. The Arabs actually extracted far more slaves than the europeans, the difference being that most slaves owned by arabs weren't given the opportunity to reproduce.

>Islamic civilization in the North would continue spreading downwards. Arabs would genocide niggers until there were none left and blacks become a mythical creature. Then sub saharan Africa would be on par with Arabia.
There is literally no way that would happen. Wht would happen is probably something like this: certain West African kingdoms would gain favourable trade agreements with Euros, and would expand and bloodily conquer their neighbours until larger and somewhat more stable states would exist. I would guess some Yoruban state, Ashanti Dahomey, Sokoto and a few smaller ones, though warfare would still be common and world powers would probably be proxy fighting there until the alt-history UN stops it. Modernisation would come slowly, first through the ports and trade infrastructure, then to the major urban and political centres and gradually out to the countryside. As the kings modernise slavery would be outlawed as would other things distasteful to Europeans and Americans.

East Africa would probably be better off, Ethiopia could conceivably thrive and modernise comparatively easily, as could the trading cities of the east coast.

Southern Africa would probably be similar to the west.

All in all, Africa would still be a shithole, but probably not as shitty as today. Also, this is assuming that gommunism never throws a spanner in the works and ruins everything, which is always a possibility

>t. Rhodesiaboo

Lol the Atlantic slave trade actually beat and at the lowest estimations Arab slave under a considerablly shorter time span.

REMEMBER RHODESIA!

youtube.com/watch?v=QVCzYLxBK74

describe why the great geniuses of science tend to be white males more so than blacks?

it wouldnt not becuase
>muh white people are superior
but becuase europe and africa have massively different conditions.
Resources like iron or bronze are scarce , the food crops native to africa arent the best either, or at least dont allow for rapid groth in population.
the distances are hilariously large and the climate donst make it much easier

but they are.

Isaac Newton= a white man

Gallileo Gallilei= a white man

Shakespeare= a white man

i can go on and on

Bring near other states that you can exchange knowledge as well as promote institutes of education and trade with tends to help speed up academic progress a ton. You can also restate you statement as "why do white males do well?".

XD

>progress a ton. You can also restate you statement as "why do white males do well?".

Europe was already ahead of Africa in scientific progress during the middle ages before Islamic contact...

and Islamic knowledge was based on Greek (WHITE EUROPEAN) knowledge

The fuck are you on about?
Atlantic shipped 12.5 mil niggers, with a mortality rate of 10%, while the lowest estimate for the Arabs is 20 mil, with a mortality rate of 70%

white guilt knows no bounds my friend

If you went on you'd notice all of them are from the same 4 or 5 countries, not from every white region. It's not like it would make sense for a whole people to be represented only by it's elite anyway.

Lmao, no. They might be better off in terms of having stable rule and a controlled population growth, both of which they seriously lack today, but they would be worse off in terms of economic development and world relevance.

But that's the point, even if you take the new nigger elite they're nothing compared to the white or asian

anything to try and diminish white achievement i see what you are doing

Those guys aren't better then other people because of their race. To proclaim that as such is to reduce their achievment in its impact or the efforts and discovery.

This is literally a reverse version of "x person did something great despite being a member of some other group the person disdain or has a hate bones for".

But blacks can claim Ancient Egypt?

Arab is 10 to 18 million while Atlantic was 10-12 million but the former happened over a millenia and that later 3 centuries.

Not true. Africans, and Nigerians in particular, are one of the smartest diaspora. See pic related en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigerian_Americans#Education
>Nigerian immigrants have the highest education attainment level in the United States, surpassing every other ethnic group in the country, according to U.S Bureau Census data.
>According to census data, almost 40% of Nigerian Americans hold bachelor's degrees, 17% hold master's degrees, and 4% hold doctorates, more than any other ethnic group in the nation

That doesn't even.pertain to what I said.

So where are all those African theories and inventions? Where are all their great thinkers and philosophers?

Also I accidentally wrote new elite but let's leave it be

Yeah, of course
They didnt evolve past wooden spears and mudhut until the mid 19th century without Western inteference but obviously if colonisation hadnt happened from the mid 19th century to the mid 20th century, they would be colonizing space right now

You are a dipshit. Pic related.

Oh wow.

A slightly larger mud hut.

Truly these boys were shooting for the stars

Looks to be carved out of that rock, desu.

They had iron and steel though and many places did have buildings that weren't mudhut and utilized other materials.

...

You're clearly not interested in an intelligent debate, so I'll play your retarded game and stop answering from now on.
Black Science Man, Reggie Jackson, Prof. Samuel Massie Jr, Philip Emeagwali, Percy Lavon Julian (look him up btw, he's underrated), Patricia Bath, Norbert Rillieux, Mae Jemison, James West, George Washington Carver, Garrett Morgan, Ernest Everett, Emmett Chappelle, Dr. Daniel Hale Williams, Charles Drew, Louis T. Wright, Jane C. Wright, Granville Woods... They're amongst the greatest contributors to our society, and I could go on for ages as well.
Meanwhile the best you can do is move your fat ass to the next room to refill your soda cup.

>that pic
How many times must you negros be told that filing a patent =/= inventing it

Locks have been around for millenia the fuck is that pic about?

Well no shit the African diaspora is unusually intelligent, the only people who get out of that black hole are the best and brightest. Brain drain is very real.

Nope
They didnt exist until WE ARE Martin invented it in 18KANGZ

We wuzism of the highest order, all those on the list are blacks that filed patents for the items, and dumb niggers like him think it means they invented them

Apparently he patented the improvement, but mentioning it wouldn't have matched the list format.
>Martin's lock consisted of a cylinder and spiral spring, coiled around a metal pin. It was the forerunner of modern door locks.

>George Washington was black

Black revisionism at finest

Why is Imhotep and Ancient Egypt on there?

>the african elite is retarded
>"not true, look at how well they do abroad
>yes but it doesn't count, it's the elite
Hm.
If you exclude former Belgian colonies, your average French-speaking African high-school student does better at math and science than your average European/American person anyway.

Cuz dey wuz kangz

Holy shit didnt notice
Fucking nog revisionists man

Apparently you cannot read
>George Washington CARVER

Never said that the elite was retarded, merely that they pale compared to the white or Asian elite

Well apparently the glorious white master race was too dumb to patent their shit

>leaders that wanted to modernize

You mean glorified feudal warlords that got rich by piracy and trading slaves and ivory and actually got pissed when Britain banned slave trade because it was their main source of income?

>typewriter
>1885
lolwut? but typewriters had already been around for almost a century before that and the first successful american one entered the market in the 1870s.
the rest of that shit looks dodgy as fuck.

>fuggen whitey they stole rock and roll from us
>damn whitey be dumb why didn't he patent it

>mfw black people's Washington was a carver

>Menelik II was fascinated by modernity, and like Tewodros II before him, had a keen ambition to introduce Western technological and administrative advances into Ethiopia. The Russian support for Ethiopia led to the advent of a Russian Red Cross mission. The Russian mission was a military mission conceived as medical support for the Ethiopian troops. It arrived in Addis Ababa some three months after Menilek's Adwa victory,[70] and then the first hospital was created in Ethiopia. Following the rush by the major powers to establish diplomatic relations following the Ethiopian victory at Adwa, more and more westerners began to travel to Ethiopia looking for trade, farming, hunting and mineral exploration concessions. Menelik II founded the first modern bank in Ethiopia, the Bank of Abyssinia, introduced the first modern postal system, signed the agreement and initiated work that established the Addis Ababa-Djibouti railway with the French, introduced electricity to Addis Ababa, as well as the telephone, telegraph, the motor car and modern plumbing. He attempted unsuccessfully to introduce coinage to replace the Maria Theresa thaler.

Why?

Of course it is, you only need to look at
>saddle
>mop
>lock
To see the bullshit

>ancient Egypt

WE

>2000 years behind
>implying the development of societies is linear
>implying you can compare two societies in two geologically and climatically opposite parts of the world and still remain objective

>I do not understand the concept of improvement

But it doesn't say improvers, it says inventors, you mong

>If you add 1 to 1 that's a 100% growth but you've still got only 2

It's whether the trend continues that's important. If you add 100% to 2 you've got 4, then 8, etc. Have you ever heard of the idea of whether you'd rather have a penny that doubled in value every day for a year or a million dollars that didn't? Obviously an extreme example and not directly comparable to Africa's GDP growth, but it's meant to be seen as a trend over a longer period of time.

No
also
>would of
shit thread

But it's assuming that the trend will continue upwards, and at that pace as well, which is pure foolishness

Inventors of the improved products, it's supposed to be obvious the saddle or the mop weren't literally invented in the 1890's.