Ok Veeky Forums fix their borders to make them not trash

Ok Veeky Forums fix their borders to make them not trash.

Other urls found in this thread:

zonu.com/images/0X0/2009-11-06-10896/Topographic-map-of-Africa-2008.png
unpo.org/article/17895
sydkab.com/tag/evolutionary-anachronism/
researchgate.net/profile/Frans_Berkhout2/publication/223033052_The_Globalization_of_Socio-Ecological_Systems_An_Agenda_for_Scientific_Research/links/02bfe50eafe10756a5000000.pdf
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socio-ecological_system
theguardian.com/world/2014/may/20/north-korea-unlikely-champion-fight-against-climate-change
greentechmedia.com/articles/read/north-koreas-solar-market-is-booming
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potato_production_in_North_Korea#cite_note-Cha2007-6
youtube.com/watch?v=jy1iudsIKa8
nknews.org/2016/12/ask-a-north-korean-how-capitalist-is-north-korea-today/
ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss2/art40/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

When I return from work I'll fix it. Time to get autistic.

t. Black African

...

PINK MAP

Can you do something about this?

Natural borders (mountains, rivers), religion, language and ethnicity were taken into consideration.

Here is the language map only.

Here is a natural borders map, but its too high res to post, and I am too lazy to shrink it.

zonu.com/images/0X0/2009-11-06-10896/Topographic-map-of-Africa-2008.png

Also my image is a large bodies of water map.

Nothing is natural about that autistic ethnic map.

I think imposing strict borders in the western sense is trash. Forcing people who are on a tribal level into nation states is stupid. I think some loose regional confederations not trying to uphold the fiction of a complete territorial control would be better for the poor areas. Taking tribal structures and needs into account, with a central authority that should mostly be concerned with protecting the territory of the confederation, mediating tribal/ethnic disputes , organizing humanitarian aid and providing a at least basic level of medical care to prevent epidemics etc.

Obviously "taxes" should be really low and a lot of the confederation government could be financed with humanitarian aid.

sure lad

...

...

>mfw I wasn't expecting anything less.

>dem niggers are too dumb for strict bureaucratic intensive proper nation states

how progressive of you

What else could you even expect? British shall rule supreme

(If correctly tells me from what that reference is, I'll give you a blowjob)

>the nation state is universal applicable across the world
The nation state in any less "Eurocentric" than Beethoven.

can't have that many microstates without it turning into pure chaos

Some of these can be cobbled together I believe as they did in the past, like some of their kingdoms ruled over different tribes without shit blowing up directly.
Whats really hard, would be to make borders after ethnic groups-ethnic groups that get along and are thus united and economic viability of a state.

nigga is lookin for some easy solutions.

>
>
>
Like structures might be a solution then?

Africa needs less borders not more. There's no reason for border checkpoint lines to be 12 hours long between Benin and Togo. Infrastructure and the economy will never develop until Benin Togo and Nigeria work together to build and maintain good roads. Etc. Etc.

You bongs are hilarious and adorable.

>Whats really hard, would be to make borders after ethnic groups-ethnic groups that get along and are thus united and economic viability of a state.
Ethnic groups don't "get along." whether Europe, Africa, Asia, the Americas or Oceania. The world is about groups fighting for resources.

You can have those small blobs be semi-autonomous within a larger state.
The goal is to ensure that you either have sea access, or have to only pay border fees once before you get sea access.

To forestall any further questions.

Each one of those micro-states are the size of Brasil.
Western Maps dont show how fucking yuge Africa is.

>muh sea access
Switzerland did fine without it.

Should quite honestly cease any outside activity in Africa and let them war with each until there's a standstill and they construct their own borders

That's what happened to the rest of the civilised world

Switzerland doesn't pay border fees, and has only one border to get to the ports.

In a strictly speaking sense, south and north germans could be considered different groups-they still "get along" as in after some war about who's gonna be the boss no tribal warfare ensued and people accepted common statehood in order to stand better against the other people around them which were even more different.

Another example is Iran, there is a reason they dont really face secessionist troubles or something like this as the many different groups are similar enough to identifie with a common powerstructure.

How about the tcechs then or Bhutan and even Rwanda. All of them may not be rich states in relation to their neighboors but they are stable and slowly improving.

So you see my point? Your not going to magically change human nature by shifting the borders. History means some ethnic groups like north and south Germans live civil enough with each other to share a viable state. That wasn't easy.

Fixed

...

Social systems overlap this. This overlaps geological landscapes and climatic regions
cannot divide an interconnected meta-system into countries, parts are nothing without the whole.
Grow up people.

I dont really see your point.
People living under shared powerstructures they dont identifie with getting replaced with powerstructures/borders the people in them identifie with much better because the others around them are more different is still an improvement and makes for more effective governments.

Social systems overlap this. This overlaps geological landscapes and climatic regions
cannot divide an interconnected meta-system into countries, parts are nothing without the whole.
Grow up people

Why dont the africans themselves see your wisdom?

unpo.org/article/17895

Holism and systems thinking is an evolutionary novel trait that must be learned.
By nature all humans are reductionist, we see parts of the world as members of a group that are brought together by categorical similarities(like how you see these people as Africans and not as individuals), as opposed to how it really is, parts of an interdependent system that are connected through causal relationships and the environment that they share.
It's an evolutionary anachronism from our wild days, it helped us make sense of the world enough to exploit it and live.
This trait has become maladaptive and now our fundementaly incomplete worldview directly threatens our survival, we're all devo.

Here we go

Spooky m8

Some supplementary information on evolutionary anachronisms.
sydkab.com/tag/evolutionary-anachronism/
It's cosmic irony, our adaptation destroyed the environment it adapted to, making itself an evolutionary anachronism, it's DEVO.

And we are currently adapting to another environment that won't be around for long, this time an environment of our own "creation"
Just fuck our shit up famm, lmao
EXTINCTION HERE WE COME
IM WORRIED NOW
WONT BE WORRIED LONG

>maladaptive
How so?
Shit works, were not bees my fellow part of an interconnected system, ecological degradation can also be supported by people who are truly cosmopolitician but do it for casual gain, protection of the enviroment can even be tied to local identities or be part of national myths while the threat of culture ending war is more of a ressource based conflict not a tribal one.

Now a global society preaching the gospel of the great interconnected system would have to agree on how that system works, unificationism for the sake of unification seems like a much more dangeorus culprit of conflict then some people tied to their demographic strenght and a limited claim on geographical shareholding deciding their collective needs a representation and more agency.

Baluchistan is a meme born out of CIA wishful thinking as the region is so underdeveloped and feudal that the balochs have not yet developed a need for nationalism.
In fact their tribal chiefs would feel threatened by it as it would means theyd loose power over their small communities.
Dont touch afghanistan and Pakistan so casually, that is a beehive.
In the levantine area only the arab shia state minus that delicious persian coastline seems reasonable (arabs there are kinda iranified and you make the mullahs mad if you tell them to secede.)
Syria existing seems rather dedundant at hsi point as there are other ways to divide it (french mandate is reasonable) if you want and Kurdistan is greater then viable and ignores the different kurdish factions.

This map triggers me.

This balkanized shithole would be an even bigger garbage fire than the current one.

>Each one of those micro-states are the size of Brasil.

user and I being rused right now?

No user, he's right. In fact, he's actually lowballing his estimate.

Settle down buddy.

> there is less stars in the our galaxy than multiverses in our africa...

>shit works
It works but it isn't regulated
If you where to put a strain of Cyanobacteria in a culture medium inside an Erwin-Myer flask and left it to grow it will eventually use up all the resources it needs to grow and go extinct, in it natural state it persists because it's population is regulated by so plankton and it's required environmental conditions are replenished by ecological processes.

This can be seen as a metaphor for when socio-economic systems emerged from socio-ecological systems(SES)
Human society initially emerged from ecological systems, what makes human societies special is the ability to support themselves on multiple ecological systems and of ecological systems to be exploited by multiple social-ecological systems. All made possible by our adaptation for symbolic-self conscious thought(unfortunately it's reductionist)

Where it turned maladaptive is when that ability was used to monetize the products that were created from ecological systems, thus creating socio-economic systems.
Now economic systems are dangerous because value is taken from society and not the ecological systems that society depends to make that value. our ability to exploit multiple ecological systems coupled with this new connection of separate SES's made possible by the economy made it possible for an SES to destroy the ecosystems that it depends on because it can now buy resources from other SES's this means that the economy can grow unregulated by the ecological processes it depends on, that is, until there isn't anything left to exploit. And as SES become connected by an increasingly complex economic system, more and more is lost.
Giving us a delusion of prosperity while everything that supports us is eroding away.
>we aren't bees
Yet we cannot survive without bees.
Go ahead and take a look at this picture. There is not a single thing on those shelfs that is possible without ecological systems to produce it.
(continued)

Yet the creation of those products in the super market are not regulated by ecological processes, they are regulated by supply and demand.
Which is why we are rapidly running out of supply.
Supplementary material
researchgate.net/profile/Frans_Berkhout2/publication/223033052_The_Globalization_of_Socio-Ecological_Systems_An_Agenda_for_Scientific_Research/links/02bfe50eafe10756a5000000.pdf

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socio-ecological_system

>TL;DR
we are all incredibly fucked, we should all be deathly afraid, and everyone needs to dedicate their lives to solving this problem if we are expecting to survive.

/thread

Any suggestions on improving the precision of this writing?
I am desperately trying to find a way to articulate this concept to the common-stock.

>turkey still exists 3/10

fixed

Only correct post in this thread.

Oh this is indeed an interesting take to critisize our current system. But it does not completely devalue reductionist societies though (If I got that term right, im not that well learned as you in the usuage of them.)
Look at best korea:
theguardian.com/world/2014/may/20/north-korea-unlikely-champion-fight-against-climate-change

One of the reasons they still have not ditched "communism" is that they tied its legitimacy to their ethnic group. Purity of blood-blood and soil- is one of the highest ideals in north korea which legitimizes the society to its parts and while its an opressive servstate it does not partake in the destructive cycle you described.
Actually it may upgrade its relicted infrastructure to something that may be more sustainable and effective:

greentechmedia.com/articles/read/north-koreas-solar-market-is-booming

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potato_production_in_North_Korea#cite_note-Cha2007-6
>hydroponic farms

theguardian.com/world/2014/may/20/north-korea-unlikely-champion-fight-against-climate-change

Reductionist tribalism taken to an extreme (Eco Nazis) is thus a way to escape your Bacteria analogy, wouldnt it?
Dont be dismayed, the future is bright under totalitarian isolationism!

>tied its legitimacy to their ethnic group.
Yes, because North and South Koreans are such distinct ethnic groups.

>to the common-stock

Immigrants are not only taking your jobs, they are also the symptom of a worldwide unsustainable system that destroys mother earth/nature and our homeland as well!
Fuck foreigners and the jewish/banker/boogeyman worldfinace that preys on and demonizes what was an ideal and natural state of people/race/idealised ancestors living from the land in relation to its properties.
Sieg Heil/Viva el revolution/Allahuackbar!

The norks ernestly tell their population that the southkoreans may seem happier under capitalism because they are richer, but the americans use them as a tool and will mix their race/dekoreanize them.

youtube.com/watch?v=jy1iudsIKa8
Skip to 33:45

>THREAD ABOUT MAPS OF AFRICA
>MOSTLY NOT MAPS OF AFRICA.

Veeky Forums really was a mistake.

>Tons of african states fail to fullfill basic functions of statehood.
>the central state often uses what little control it has to serve a kleptomanic elite and/or wage wars
>borders are inhibiting trade and thus hindering economic progression because the borders are often unnatural and less than ideal
>Most of the authority is on a tribal/local level and way

>trying to come up with a solution that works with the given reality
>muh racist /pol/ pls leave its all the fault of heteronormic patriarchal white man's imperialism

...

silly user, that's upside-down

what is known as progressive today is actually regressive

Hope you are memeing but just in case...

But look at the consequences of "blood and soil"
North Koreas proles get a government sanctioned stipend of 700 calories a day, there are two main causes of this.
1 the inherent inefficiency of goods provided by the state
2 artificial constraints imposed on the avaliblity of resources by reductive notions of collective identity.
The blood and soil notion has reduced a system(their culture) that emerged from a relationship with the world around them to just a culture that does not stand on its own.
It doesn't partake in this destructive cycle because it literally can't as it has artificially seperated itself from the systems it depends on, which is why most the population is fucking starving.
Isolation means that Erwin-Myer flask just got a lot smaller.
And that isn't to mention the attrocities that happen every time authoritatianism comes into play,
>dissenting opinion=
Purged/work camp
>not part of majority group=
Direct/indirect genocide
Homogeneous societies are weak and incapable of adaptation to change.
>group identities
Hate to break it to you bud but it's not a group of people doing this.
It's individuals like yourself that believe in groups of people.

Per the question of how to fix it,
An individualist libertarian society with the abolition of property ownership and mutual access to resources where individuals can be individuals or come together to form syndicates to make produce from those resources and turn them into goods to be sold in a market economy, or decentralized direct democracies can use socialism to produce said goods if they are post-scarcity and incompatible with the market.
the catch that makes all this inherently sustianible is that science is used to allocate resources to the individuals, syndicates, and collectives.
That means that if a syndicate wants to produce smart phones, the means of production given to them would be determined by ecology, the land, energy, and resources to build those smart phones would be allocated using science to unsure sustianiblity at the level of what is going into society instead of what is coming out, open to the public, transparent, peer reviewed and of course the benefactor cannot partake in the science, this is free of corruption.

The best part is that this can be accomplished without political arbitration as this system can be created to function within a free market, using the anarcho-syndicalist tactic to aquire land and post-production/consumption resources , sell the goods to the outside economy and use the profits (100% profit because self sufficient) to aquire more land and resources.

I am only half memeing, North Korea is an awful place to life in and the result of a paranoid elite clinging to power, but with some modifiction it could become a truly selfsustaining society defying the mechanism you fear by means you might not like but work and which might be deemed appealing by some states in the future should what you fear become more evident in painful ways.

>inherent inefficiency of goods provided by the state
They already ditched communism but sometimes gulag a northkorean company (yes, those exist now) if it gets powerful enough to develope agency on its own.
nknews.org/2016/12/ask-a-north-korean-how-capitalist-is-north-korea-today/
(strg and minus and you'll ignore the paywall.)

The dispensation of goods isnt that efficient anymore, it is simply tied to what is needed to sustain the humongous military and some arms of production, if they make good use of the new agricultural technologys which are dabbed into worldwide now, they might even be able to feed their population in the future.
Until then, anyone that dies does so that the flask-trap does not applie to the state.
The bacteria in your flask started to kill their own kind in the flask after strict rules and use their corpses nutrients which are handed out to the bacterias that run the system more so then to the others in order to sustain themselves.
You were talking about an evolutionary trap that might harm our survival as a culture bearing species, not about ethics.
A homogenous society means less factions you need to appease everytime there is a social or economic challenge.

We give Africa to the Belgian people.

If it can be created that easily without political arbitration how has it not happened yet?
Are there groups or thinktanks who think about doing it at least, who propogate the idea or did the groundwork for an example (lets say a self sustainable production chain/syndicate for textiles in Nepal) that could be put into reality right now if only enough participants would volunterr for the experiment.
If I understood you rightly you need some organisation to get the scienteists together, the believers who accept restricted living standarts for a sustainable future, the guys who call out someone if he breaks the restrictions the scienteists/geologists gave to him or uses force and bribes to make them forget a certain recommendation.

How is force and faith(force on the mental level.) not needed or inferiour if used to hold it together?

But where's Israel, Jerusalem can be trusted in no one else's hands as they'll block the others from visiting

*dispensation of goods isnt that inefficient anymore

>Its not a group of people doing this
Hate to break it to you, but "the common stock" believe deeply into groups of people so you better find a scapegoat in a way that does not end in killing if taken to its conclusion in reality.
I still have trouble to relate how you cant believe in groups of people and how they affect you, im too much of a believer to wrap my head around how to abandon that concept as its a concept born from belief that makes itself powerful in the same way all hierachy does.
Giving it up seems like a nice way to make yourself prey for people/groups that did not so.
Hierachy and differenciation between people to a reasonable extend isnt bad though, its why I can type this instead of living like the Khoi-san.

A homogeneous society also means that there are less modes of living and therefor less solutions to be offered to solve social and economic problems when they do arise.
Here the concepts of reslience and adaptive capacity can be applied to social systems.
If the algae are killing their own based on a set of rules, they will be emliminating their own diversity and will be left with a homogeneous culture that will not be able to adapt to change by adopting new life habits that are favorable to survival in the face of change.
ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss2/art40/
And factions are not created simply by the presence of different systems, but by conflict between those systems, usually caused by arbitrary controls made by one faction and forced upon others, compition between groups for scarce resources, or idenitiarian politics.
All this can be avoided by a society that sponsors individualism, where people see themselves and others as individuals who are defined by themselves and not what group they belong to.
Instead of everybody being the same, I believe it is more benifical for everyone to view themselves as different, so group identity never happens in the first place.
Parts of a whole, not members of a group.
This can be accomplished through education that comes along with participating in the society.

We have the internet today and globalized communication, you can look at another socities way of being and use this to reflect on your errors rather then having to invite them into your midst and observe them there or listen to their objections.
Education usually comes from a source-in your case the faction of nonfactioness so to speak- and if it has an eroding effect on tribalism this can sometimes lead to a backlash.
We will see in the near future if the social experiments that have been started work out or not, if the greater whole or the smaller wholes are more convincing.

They have to depend on other states roads to move their stuff around. They also have none of the benefits of being near water.

If you are landlocked you better hope to god that your neighbors infrastructure is up to par as well as being in good relations with them.

Fuck you can just walk to another nation easily.

You know tribal level makes no sense. Considering many groups that are called tribes many are urban majorityhand have high populations calling them tribal you'd have to call Swedes or Finns tribal.

Well, only two people really know about it, my cousin and I. there are similar groups that I wish to connect with but have key differences in the way sustianibility is established. I have just got to the point where I can begin to easily articulate my ideas and haven't really the ideas worked out in entirety, let alone set an agenda.
In the mean time while I work on it, I have become a farmer, doing work in Aquaponics, algalculture, permaculture, and pasture cropping, currently planning on doing work in clandestine fine ceramics, thermoplastic recycling and molding(to build photobioreactors), energy generation, and about a billion other things. So I am basically working on acquiring a suitable self-sufficent resources wealth of my own and being able to articulate what it is I want to do more easily.
I plan on finding the right people when I have the ability to fund research.

The thing about force or faith.
Political force is always going to piss someone off, putting unwanted entropy into the system, and faith must be believed in.
Both force and faith are doing the same thing, placing constraints on the system.
Constraints are desirable has they are what gives the system function. We mold the pot with clay but the emptiness inside is what we use.
Using force or faith is undesirable because that is constraining the system by arbitration, meaning it is fallible, a crack in the pot.
The system ought to be constrained teleologically, by controlling what is going into the system instead of what is coming out, using objective science to match these artificial constraints with the real constraints that actually regulate us, that way we do natures job before we have to suffer the consequences.

Even if societies don't interact with eachother on a social level, they are still connected through the environment that they share.
That is why they must be able to interact on a social level, because what happens in North Korea happens to the entire planet.

Groups of people exist, just not as closed systems, they are groups of individuals that share simularities, that doesn't mean that those simularities are what connects them, it's casual interaction that connects them.
And all human interaction happens on an individual level, that is why I don't belive in groups, because humans cannot think in hiveminds.
All humans are connected to eachother through casual interaction, it's just the degree of connection and the directness of interaction that "seperate" social systems.
Even if I never talk to jim from North Korea, he still effects the environment that I live in.

This post is pure /pol/ autism, nothing he said made this response make sense.

>giving the Italians anything
>seceding that much of West Africa to the Portuguese
>still allowing British Eritrea and The Gambia
Nah senpai.

jesus what is this a color blind test?

I am sure just about everyone would find this reasonable, once refined.

Not claiming to be a superexpect, just throwig out some ideas, stop me if I'm wrong but rearranging borders would probably just destabilize the power structure that has taken 20 years to settle (in most places at least) after the end of the cold war and cause more tensions. It might be better to resolve border related issues by convincing states to "release the steam".

Let's say country A has a minority X while country B's majority is X. A believes B supports the X minority and its guerrillas, they probably do. They might fear concessions will be seen as weakness and won't appease their rivals, they may be right. Maybe their cause is just, maybe not, maybe they are both wrong. Regardless the cost of antagonizing each other for years and years outweighs the benefits. Deontological ethics and micropenis overcompensation is a luxury here, utilitarianism unfortunately is the main consideration if you are growing bored of all the sob stories and impoverished children.

Some of A and B's positions are not negotiable such that if they were facing total defeat they would not agree to them. Since they are not locked in a brutal war with each other we can assume they don't intersect.

They can negotiate and change, but it has to be done in a careful step by step process, kind of like the opposite of "tit for tat", tat for tit maybe, and by introducing the prospect of economic growth as a bargaining chip and the support for cooperation by friendly nations you can help break the deadlock and initiate plans for peace and growth.

THIS.

Its like anotha shoa

user I'm not sure if you've heard but most of these countries don't exist anymore

...

This map triggers me so much

The only two countries that need to be split and partitioned are Syria and Iraq, you can leave the rest alone.

This map makes me want to commit a hate crime.

>tuareg
>its literally just a bunch of sand

>not lumping indonesia and bangladesh with the middle east
>not lumping mexico in with south america
>not lumping australia/NZ/europe/america
>lumping in bhutan with india(wtf)
>japan and korea being lumped with china and not each other
this guy is posting like he knows what's up. sad!

No point, they won't listen.

The Italians were surprisingly good at managing Tripoli so maybe they would have done a good job with their East Africa

Brirtish djibouti would have been strategically good because it is opposite Aden and would have allowed even more defense of the Suez