Why did sub-Saharan Africa become so undeveloped compared to the rest of the world?

hmm yes this is proven by the great civilizations of the ice age

Are you being intentionally retarded?
The ice age encourages that development, it doesn't just make it pop into being instantly.

Those areas actually were reasonably advanced but they didn't reach the heights of other northern civilisations because of extreme isolation and lack of resources, also the fact that it stayed cold as fuck.
All those people actually migrated out of siberia as well afaik.
How do you explain the success of the northern hemisphere?

user civilizations started in places like mesmo america indus/nile river i dont think you call those places cold

>Now as far as nother developing their own agricultural systems

There is extensive archeological evidence for sub-saharan agriculture since 6000

In parts I didn't think op was talking about Ethiopia or western Africa.

Both are part of Sub Saharan Africa... I don't get what you are trying to prove here.

>become so undeveloped

They didn't become undeveloped , in the contrary they DIDN'T become devloped.

Literally correct.

A biological nature which is more physical and driven by the body compared to the more cerebral nature of other races. The evidence in their indigenous cultures is overwhelming not to mention what they have become in the west.

>Those areas actually were reasonably advanced

What? Show me the great cities of Greenland...
The sedentary empires of Siberia... Where are you getting this info from?

???

Chiefly isolation, technology took a long time to reach Black Africa, but once it did it was adopted as widely as it was elsewhere.

More like held back.
Any development made just stopped and shit was like a time capsule until independence and essentially having to start from the mid-late 1800's worst nation of West Europe at best (Portugal maybe? I heard it was very awful for the common folk there as Europeans) in the then modern 1960's and still growing is a huge ass gap.

You know parts of the south back then 20th century where industrialisarion and modernisation didn't reach it and those areas were like development wise far back?

I'm not trying to prove anything I figured that OP was trying to talk about the parts of Africa that didn't develop.

This structure is supposed to be impressive or something? The only time white/asian/brown people built things like that was when they were stuck in some of the coldest parts of the world. African's by contrast had relatively fertile land available to them and this garbage is the best they can do?

>>African's
Gah
>>Africans
Fixed.

because they have such giant dicks they didnt need to overcompensate like dickletts from europe and asia

> they were stuck in some of the coldest parts of the world
Ah yes, Egypt, one of the coldest places in the world. Just like Athens and Babylon. All very cold places.

>relatively fertile
Most tropics are infertile as fuck buddy.

What the fuck is this?
>a primitive town as imagined by a white man, ie, >European architecture with a few Africans >scattered around.

Living in countries that aren't even real makes it kinda difficult to feel united.

>didnt need to overcompensate

developing civilization
overcompensating

Thanks Tyrone

>European architecture
No it's african architecture dumbass

For anyone not understanding this map, the red yellow and green soils, which are most common in sub-saharan africa, are very infertile.

>Africa is infertile

Nice damage control

>Scientists originally thought that the heavy vegetation of tropical rain forests would provide rich nutrients, but as rainfall passes through the litter on the forest floor the rain is acidified and leaches minerals from the above soil layers. This forces plants to get their nutrition from decaying litter as oxisols are quite infertile due to the lack of organic matter and the almost complete absence of soluble minerals leached by the wet and humid climate.

>No it's african architecture dumbass

Ha ha! You're not fooling anyone Tyrone. Those illustrations were based on 18th century Benin, long after Arabs and Europeans had got there.

>According to this United Nations Report 60% of the world's arable land is in Africa. However, Africa only uses about 20% of their arable land capacity. This capacity is also used extremely inefficiently. I calculate in my book that if we assume that Africans have the same access to food as all other humans. African farm productivity is only about 25% of the farm productivity of the rest of the world. This is clearly not so, therefore African Farmland productivity is even worse than 25% of world farmland productivity.

>The key reason for these failures is traditional African Farmland ownership and utilization traditions - And Africans with a few exceptions, seem incapable of learning from others and adopt their better techniques.

>arabs in western africa
>European conquest before the 1800's

Sure user sure.

>Portuguese sailors reached Cape Bojador in 1434 and Cape Blanco in 1441. In 1443, they built a fortress on the island of Arguin, in modern-day Mauritania, trading European wheat and cloth for African gold and slaves. It was the first time that the semi-mythic gold of the Sudan reached Europe without Muslim mediation. Most of the slaves were sent to Madeira, which became, after thorough deforestation, the first European plantation colony. Between 1444 and 1447, the Portuguese explored the coasts of Senegal, Gambia, and Guinea. In 1456, the Venetian captain Alvise Cadamosto, under Portuguese command, explored the islands of Cape Verde. In 1462, two years after Prince Henry's death, Portuguese sailors explored the Bissau islands and named Serra Leoa (Lioness Mountains).

Dude, don't, really it's embarrassing.

Yes you're answer would be perfectly fine if we had been talking about modern day Africa.

We aren't though. We are talking about historical africa

war stifled development

>Islands
>Islands
>Islands
Yeah Europeans didn't really start going inland till the 1900's

>Capitalism, a society where one of biggest >problems is people getting too fat.
LoL. Especially in Spain with Greece where ain't jobs.

thelocal.es/20150630/nearly-a-quarter-of-spaniards-are-obese-world-health-organization

Give it up dude.

The attempt to make blacks appear the same as whites and Asians over the last 50 years has been completely futile.

Literally niggers.
Now watch leftists get triggered and trying to defend their false God "Equality".

I critique you for giving me a modern answer while talking about historical africa

And user tries to refute me with yet another example of modern Africa.

>historical Africa
>modern Africa

Spot the social construct

Yes and? Time is a social construct aswell. How is this fucking relevant. This is Veeky Forums, we talk about times gone by and as you have noticed, most of the thread has been talking about Africa from before the 1900's.

Africa itself is a social contstruct as well by the way, just like Europe, France, Britain etc

>become
they never were in first place

>How is this fucking relevant.

You don't understand the hypocritical and contradictory nature of your own left wing ideology. Now you wish to discuss something 'real' about Africa prior to European colonization. 'Africa' as a place was created by other races as they came into contact with that continent and the creatures that inhabited it. There was no Africa until Europeans arrived with their science and literature.

>Time is a social construct aswell
no it fucking isn't

>Time is a social construct aswell
>>>/leftypol/

something to do with lack of neanderthal/denisovan DNA in the native population

it is neither climate - as comparable temperatures can be observed in south america and south-east asia, nor it is geography as trade routs were present for exchange of ideas and goods, it is not the flora and fauna as africa is diverse enough to provide different starting conditions

so in the end what is left is the people inhabiting the continent

god damn Madagascar was settled about 2000-1800 years ago by god damn south east asians - it was right next to the africans for few hundred thousand years of homo-sapians history and they never bothered to settle it

africans are inept

>mfw lack of neanderthal/denisovan DNA and racial inferiority of Idahoans makes them poorer

It just makes sense!

1. Isolation
The Sahara being the biggest geographic barrier discouraged trade in large volumes beyond the North African coast. Yes there were caravans that would cross the desert to trade with Timbuktu and other trading posts, but not in a large enough volume as the Mediterranean region enjoyed.

Next option other than crossing the desert was sailing along the African coast, again not many people did this in large enough volumes to make a huge impact. With trade with other regions of the world restricted, there were fewer exchanges of ideas and goods.

2. Bad native crops
Most common staple crop in Sub-Saharan Africa is Sorghum, which is fine but it doesn't grow as easily or provide as many nutrients as Wheat, plenty of civilizations in the area didn't see cultivating sorghum as even worth it and continued being hunter-gatherers.

3. Navigability
Africa has a lot of barrier restricting contact between people-groups between the Desert and the African Rainforest, where making the trip to other cities/states was both long and very dangerous. So small regions tended to remain isolated as trying to cross from, say Nigeria to Kenya involves crossing the rainforest where disease would likely claim you before you get there.

It also isn't to say all of Sub-Saharan Africa was cursed with this. Ethiopia managed to benefit from trade up and down the Nile River. The Swahili states along East Africa enjoyed healthy trade and development with the Arab world, albeit not to the same levels as Mediterranean Europe.

Niggers.

Thanks Jared.

the americas did not trade with other places for the majority of their history and still developed sophisticated civilizations so, in both isolation and navigability africa is similar with the americas yet, lacks behind them

as for bad native crops, seeds and knowledge to plant them was available to africa via trade routs for few thousand years - compared with the native amercans who developed agriculture on their own and cultivated half of the worlds edible everyday plants

Mali Empire was developed

>150.000 years of homo sapiens
>be late to the industrial age by a few hundred years
>muh DNA
>tfw

They like to keep to themselves unlike some continents.

...was right again

>Hadn't invented the wheel
>"be late to the industrial age by a few hundred years"

>be chimp
>Invent brilliant termite stick technology
>be maybe 1000 years away from african civilization
>muh different species
>mfw

do people actually think africans are advanced? When Europeans got into Africa they hadn't even invented the wheel yet.

I don't hate them. That's the biggest straw man of all time. "oh you said they're undeveloped so you HATE them! no h8!!!" No I just acknowledge that they aren't as developed as everyone else because they simply aren't smart on average.

Every other race of peoples figured out this civilization shit. Arabs, Asians, "white" people, brown people, you could even say native americans had it figured out to an extent.

And then there's Africans. Completely fucking retarded since 2000BC. Even the Egyptians thought they were dumb as hell.

The worse issue (in my mind) is their inability to apply the wealth of new knowledge/information into Africa and create an even semi-developed nation (like Asia and S. America)

>Time is a social construct

>Even the Egyptians thought they were dumb as hell.
this is hilarious, I'd love a quote on this

first post best post

The Nubians were basically their Mexicans (minus written language)

what the fuck are you talking about

that has nothing to do with his ideology

are you this fucking dense that you truly believe everything you disagree with must be some dirty leftist trick

you're probably the faggot who blamed the entire thing on niggers at the start of the thread like the retarded social darwinist you are

personal opinion is that isolation from other peoples and the lack of tools to use the literal fuck tonnes of resources they were sitting on is why sub-Saharan Africa is undeveloped

if you actually read any history journals or even a fucking book you'd know that this shit comes up every few volumes and there's a wide variety of opinions that build upon each other

but no just blame race like the little bitch you are. I bet an abo stole your crush or something

SAAMI MASTER RACE

youtube.com/watch?v=gLOvdgXSy_Q

Colder but not cold enough to literally not be able to ever grow food

Euros hit that moderate sweet spot in every way

well you got us there. How are rightists right at every turn?

That nig just looks so damn smug in that picture. Like, "I know we continue to fuck everything up, but here you guys are anyway giving us shit to keep us going."

Europe is way more diverse climate wise than I think you know. Andalusia has more in common with Tunisia than Copenhagen.

Is there anyone who genuinely believes the following to be true:

>everyone, no matter criteria like race, gender, etc., has the same IQ distribution as a population, even given all of the different physical characteristics

I want to know what makes a person believe this. I can understand varying degrees of belief in the significance but an outright belief in total equality just sounds like madness to me.

>Replying to him
Dude, don't, really it's embarrassing.

I never claimed otherwise

That's why I think European civilization began in the more temperate southern regions and progressed northward as technology allowed for their population to begin to boom and move

No. Most people believe that IQ is only useful for judging current populations' intelligences, and is largely ineffective for judging HISTORICAL populations' intelligence. I mean, unless you have data for the average IQs of the ancient Egyptians and Romans and such.

You forgot the nutrients drained, overfarmed and very low top soil in many places to mention.

fpbp
>Time is a social construct
/leftypol/ get out

>why are niggers poor thread number 2376439

It is absolute madness, most people only believe in it because they never state it outright like you just did.

You know little about agriculture user if this is what you post and interpret from the fucking un report.

xD

Why do Africans trigger people here so much? Like the posting style is extremely evident if a triggered person.

Just be glad that one user hasn't shown up.

You mean the infograph one?

The one that types out every sentence all weird and capitalizes descriptions like
>they are LITERALLY WILD SAVAGES

melanin warrior was right, this board is just a bunch of butthurt white supremacists

one black tripfag managed to shut down discussion on the whole board for hours just because he thought black people were superior

>because niggers!! teehee i hate niggers lol! dont you hate niggers OP??? when i was a little boy my mommy made me share my nintendo with the neighbor boy but the neighbor boy was a nigger so i smashed my nintendo to bits so i didnt have to share! because nigger!! haha! nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger xD

Its the XD tumblr faggot again
go away

The only people that don't believe that men should be treated equally are usually fedora-wearing twats that stopped believing in God because they didn't want to be judged for holding their ass-tier beliefs, i.e. (You)

>when the FP is also the BP

>The only people that don't believe that men should be treated equally

You don't believe that either.

I do.

If you believe all people are equal you're an idiot

...