Which African country could have remain under European rule...

Which African country could have remain under European rule? In the sense of them voting to remain part of the country instead of seceding

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comorian_independence_referendum,_1974
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Cape Verde is the only one that could realistically remain and its populace mostly want to.

CV had Portugal, the Canary Islands, Azores and Madeira all advocate for their admission into the EU. As a lusophone mixed race majority with the longest history of European cultural infusion of any colony on earth it seems like a good fit. Geographically being Macronesian I'd say its reasonable as well.

Oh and the Four Communes of Senegal, they had a seat in the French Legislature bring the only ones with that in all of Africa

>Oh and the Four Communes of Senegal, they had a seat in the French Legislature bring the only ones with that in all of Africa
What happened

Algeria should've stayed with France, I like big France

Mayotte

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comorian_independence_referendum,_1974

Gabon wanted to stay French. France forced them into independence.

Then they wanted to at least keep the French flag in a corner of theirs like Australia, but France didn't let them do that either.

Algeria

And now they have oil. France should have kept them and ditched the smelly Algerians.

White people being stupid and not wanting fully assimilated people with centuries of relations to join them.

That position was taken and given like a half dozen times.

>And now they have oil. France should have kept them and ditched the smelly Algerians.
They should have kept none. Niggers are useless and a total waste.
Because if they became a part of the country niggers would hace flooded France and drained a lot of resources to develop their shithole. This happened anyways but because French are dumb

They want to so they can have a springboard from Portugal into the rest of the EU. Goan Indians do this already where they go to Protugla then JUMP straight to the UK. They don't really do it out of love for the "motherland"/metropole but for the benefits of being part of the EU and more places to immigrate to.

Why so hostile.

>Because if they became a part of the country niggers would hace flooded France and drained a lot of resources to develop their shithole. This happened anyways but because French are dumb

Retard, movement from the colonies to France as native was impossible or nearly so.

>drained a lot of resources to develop their shithole

Because they would be a part of France. You take a place and add it to your own the people there and it's citizens can expect to be treated like French people.

> This happened anyways but because French are dumb

Bullshit

Cape verdeans are well represented in Portugal though and in the US they are very proudly Portuguese. Like in an obnoxious way proud of being Lusophone. They also having a long history in sailing migrated to Rotterdam and other port cities in Argentina and Brazil.

Goans while luso influenced have older identitiea in their land, C.V. was uninhabited and the first true Creole society (the very word Creole comes from there)

The rest of Senegal could have possibly stayed French too.

If the Portuguese weren't pants-on-head retarded, they would have abandoned lost causes like Guinea-Bissau and most of Mozambique. They would have kept Cape Verde, a small area around Maputo, Cabinda, and East Timor.

France and Portugal are really the only two colonial powers who could have realistically held on to pieces of Africa and integrate them into the mother country. Britain for the most part wasn't interested in direct rule or integration, Germany got BTFO of the continent, and Spain mostly owned worthless areas that would have been hard to keep.

Colonies are still super expensive.

Yes and being a part of Portugal would pretty much let in a flood gate of CV migrants then seen before. Also Portugal is not doing that well in it's current state right no.

Depends on the colony. Keeping Cabina would not have been a money drain, for example. The entire reason for colonialism was to get prestige and make mad profits, but usually the most profitable colonies were also the hardest to hold on to in the long run, like India or Malaya.

The "rejoin Protugal" meme in Cabinda is a meme.

Oslo why the fuck would Mozambqiue give up Maputo?

Mozambique wouldn't have given it up, since it never would have been a part of it in the first place, and Portuguese military forces would have been able to keep it since they'd no longer be getting overextended across the rest of Mozambique and dying by the boatload in Guinea.

Cabinda wouldn't be rejoining Portugal, but never leaving it in the first place. The thread is about colonies which could have remained European.

What makes you think Cabindans wouldn't want to leave?

There's d still be military strain along with the issue of people.

Having to waste money on it to develop it and it's people would cost a ton. Not to mention the inevitable independence movements after a while.

>Bullshit

So how did all the blacks and Arabs appear in France, they just popped out of thin air one day?

Weren't many of the Portuguese living in Angola living in or around Cabinda? In either case, concentrating on much smaller, more developed and profitable areas would have been easier to defend against rebel forces.

There's no reason to think independence movements are always inevitable. Just look at France and French Guiana, Mayotte, etc.

All of them, forever. We were too tolerant and merciful.

>Financially wrecked from two world wars
>many military forces depleted
>lack of widespread home support after getting tired of fighting all these wars for nothing
>colony populations starting to skyrocket up
>both US and Soviets pressuring to abandon colonies
>Soviets actively funding, training, and financing rebel groups

You're delusional if you think the whole pie could be kept.

Do you genuinely believe that the average Senegalese person was "fully assimilated"?
Perhaps the political and economic elite were assimilated, but the average person was still an African peasant.

Rebel stuff still happens. As long as there is a will there is a force.

Mayotte split from Comoros because it wanted the benefit of being a French territory and the money, Comorros thought otherwise. Same with French Guiana and currently Suriname is beating it. The benefit of staying with France wasn't really noticeable.

>The benefit of staying with France wasn't really noticeable.
Other than the EU space program.

I wouldn't want the British empire 2.0 where white workers die of hunger on the streets of London while all the taxes are used to feed random niggers in Africa. Fuck colonialism.

>Do you genuinely believe that the average Senegalese person was "fully assimilated"?

The number of assimilated was super small. not to mention assimilation was the equivalent of some nerd doing ANYTHING to join the cool kids.

Even the"assimilated" faced a lot of difficulties in their lives. It was a losing game to really try to be assimilated because you were between two worlds where you got little of the benefits of the groups you assimilated to and the cultural loss and divorce from your own people had a toll. Not to mention mass assimilation was something that would hurt the colony pretty quickly.

You realize it was the other way around during colonialism, right?

He's imagining what would've happened if colonialism continued until today

No, it wasn't. There were railroads and hospitals built in random African shitholes while people in England were dying of medieval diseases. The only white people who benefitted from that travesty were the ultra rich, the common worker got fucking shafted.

That's not how it really happened edgelord.

Jesus Christ what?

No if it were to even last to now that is how it would've happened.

Holy shit people really are this stupid. Yes, European countries literally invaded countries halfway around the world out of the goodness of their hearts and in the name of charity, and Europeans didn't benefit at all from the huge creation of capital made available, the deluge of raw resources for their industries, and massive new captive markets to sell their goods to.

Tell me again how did the poor worker in Leeds benefit from his tax money being spent on building fucking schools and hospitals in Kenya, other than having his labor devalued to shit thanks to the niggers on the other side of the planet willing to work for a basket of bananas.

Again dumbass, the only whites who benefitted were the tycoons. Is this so hard to comprehend?

You realize standards of living in Europe by and far improved during this time, right?

Yeah especially in countries like Germany and Italy that hardly had any colonies.

Underclass people benefited from the new factories and shops created in the cities to supply the market demands of their colonies and elsewhere, hence why so many people moved from the countryside to the cities for employment.

People benefited from the huge amount of capital made available for loans and investment. Part of which capital went into creating their own railroads, schools, hospitals. Tell me again how you think some colonial school in fucking Kenya was better than the equivalent in Britain?

Do you honestly, seriously believe that the hospitals in the colonies were better than in Europe?

tell me again how manchester cotton mills became the defacto producers of cloth in india and britain while craftsmen in india where the cotton was from starved?

German colonies were mostly prestige to appease their autism, not economic ones. Only Togoland turned a profit.

Nice job shifting from England to Germany

>you think some colonial school in fucking Kenya was better than the equivalent in Britain
Don't care if it was better or not. The point is the British had no business spending their people's money building schools for Africans to start with.

Exactly my point. Colonies were a drain on the economy and the success of German economy totally blows the EUROPE GOT RICH THANKS TO COLONIALISM argument apart.

ITT both nig nogs with victim complex and /pol/tard Cecil Rhodes wannabes get triggered over the fact colonialism was shit

>there people's money
which they got by exploiting colonies for resources you stupid chav.

>muh explotashun
The common worker was still poor as fuck. The fact wealthy capitalists lined up their pockets moving monkey shit and dried elephant cocks from A to B doesn't mean the working class benefitted.

Individual colonies were money sinks.

Colonialism as a whole was a huge fucking money-maker. You think India was the crown jewel of the British Empire just for shits and giggles? No, Britain made fucking mad amounts of money from India and squeezed as much wealth out of it as they could. That's why they were so fucking paranoid about the Russians or any other power threatening it.

African colonialism was a mixed bag, but much of it revolved around better securing your important colonies. It's easier to defend and secure India if you control East Africa and the Suez canal. It's worth subsidizing unprofitable colonies if it means keeping the insanely profitable ones.

There were also a few profitable African colonies mixed in, like the infamous Congo. Then after France and Britain decided on the best and biggest chunks, others like Italy and Germany tried to jump in because of how insecure they were about their penis sizes. The fact that most German colonies were unprofitable is irrelevant to how much money Britain made off of its Empire.

...

This. People tend to forget that many colonies were held for strategic purposes of denying a rival a colony that could put your profitable colonies at risk.

Compare Eastern Europe, which was mostly exploited by others, to Western Europe, which mostly exploited others.

>everything that ever happens can be explained through oppression just like the Marxist professor in my post-colonialism class said
>what is the industrial revolution
>what is the distribution of wealth
>what is western European countries that didn't have vast overseas colonial empires (Switzerland, Sweden, Austria, Italy, etc)

W E W

It's also mind boggling how a country with a massive colonial empire like Portugal was backwards as fuck, right? No it isn't, since the only reason for that was them not going through the industrial revolution, you fucking gobshite.

>>what is the industrial revolution
You mean the industrial revolution that largely depended on the huge surplus of capital available in Britain thanks to colonialism?

GDP per capita greatly rose, which means even the average schmuck was making more money, even if it wasn't evenly distributed.

Eastern Europe as we know it now didn't exist back then.

Poland, Czechia, Hungary, Slovakia, Croatia etc were part of western European empires, the Balkans were a part of the Ottoman empire and Russia certainly wasn't "exploited by others", if anything they were the exploiters.

It's an oversimplification, like about everything in history or economics. If you want every detail gone over then read a book, not a Veeky Forums post. The industrial revolution that gave Western Europe and America so much more wealth was itself fueled by the capital and resources exploited from colonialism. Without easy access to capital, the industrial revolution would have been stunted.

>what is the distribution of wealth
Average standards of living and average income rose, even if the upper classes benefited the most like they always do. The huge growth in total wealth which allowed this was greatly fueled by colonialism and all the new captive markets. Again look at India which not only provided many valuable resources, but now a massive population which was only able to do business with your own industries for the most part. YOUR companies and YOUR workers build many of the final goods which go to India or Malaya or other captive markets. Which means employing your own citizens in your own factories, which again is tied to the rising incomes.

>muh Switzerland
You realize Switzerland was poor as fuck for most of the 19th century right?
>Sweden and Austria
Colonized and exploited their neighbors, even if they had negligible worldwide empires.

>etc were part of western European empires
And exploited by them.
>Balkans were a part of the Ottoman empire
And were exploited the fuck out of especially.
>if anything Russia were the exploiters.
Yes, and is part of why there was more wealth in Russia than in its immediate neighbors it exploited.

Morocco wanted to join the EU at some point,

I personally wouldn't be against Tunisia and Lebanon being parts of an extended Europe (as provinces).

if the EU will never let Turkey in, they sure as hell wouldn't accept Morocco. Lebanon and Israel would be interesting, though.

>Austria
>colonized
Austria didn't have colonies except for some Artic shithole somewhere populated only by seals and polar bears. All the Austrian crownlands were legally equal to each other.

Compare the central Asian khanates before and after Russian colonization. Russia greatly improved them all.

Austria benefited from ruling over Croats, Slovenes, Italians, etc. While they were not colonies per se, they were still areas of economic benefit.

Yeah and California benefits from taking water from its neighboring states, that doesn't mean they are Californian colonies.

Perhaps they improved in the long run after Russians killed a shitload of people there. I'm sure the people getting killed or their families didn't see their lives improved much.

Russia's expansion into the East was just as strategic as it was economic. While there was money to be made in the fur and timber there, as well as in the increased connections to China and Pacific ports, there was a huge amount of military interest in stopping the constant raids from hostile Central Asian states once and for all, so it wasn't necessary that they be profitable.

Morocco was rejected, but Turkey hasn't, their application is just being dragged.

They were living in a medieval type economies with literal slave trade and ruled by Genghis Khan's direct descendants. They pretty much didn't change since Timur was around.

You are bringing nothing to the conversation.

How long has it been, 20 years or so? Even though it was never officially rejected it'll never happen. Especially now with Erdogan seizing even more power, and with how many European groups and countries are feeling with current immigration. It will simply never happen, or if it does the EU will cease to exist afterward.

>I personally wouldn't be against Tunisia and Lebanon being parts of an extended Europe
Maybe 20 years ago. Right now they are just Islamic hellholes.

South Africa because it's the only nation that was uninhabited before Colonialism.
>inb4 there were a handful of tribes in a few regions
It was basically uninhabited.

Only the Cape area was uninhabited, and a lot of the arid north-west sparsely inhabited. The entire rest of the country wasn't just sitting empty waiting for white people to show up.

Canarias is still part of Spain.

Canarias is 93% Spanish and have nothing in common with mainland Africa

Gabon is a French puppet state anyway.

Bump

One of many. France may topple Ali Bongo and install Jean Ping. Liek they did in Ivory Coast. The thing is how long until Bongo says something (good or bad for Gabon as a state) that triggers France?

Also some.of the uglies girls imaginable

T.guy from Rotterdam, they are everywhere here

You forgot that your citizenry get free shit and massive favoritism in your colonies if they decide to move abroad.

The four communes were very different than the rest of Senegal and the degree of Eurafricans exceeded most of West and Central Africa.

You don't know what you're talking about.

You are blind or assume the beautiful onces are half dutch half Surinamese or Aruban.