Imagine a place with rich fertile jungles, abundant wildlife, and as much land as anyone could ever want. As if that isn't good enough already, imagine that you discovered that beneath all
this land is TRILLIONS of dollars worth of diamond, gold, and oil.
One would think that this literal utopia would be capitalized upon and house one of the greatest civilizations to ever exist
Instead, pic related is what came of it all.
Why is this?
>another africa thread
1.25 GBP have been deposited into your account.
Its hard as shit to hunt stuff in the jungle because most stuff lives in the trees and the foliage density prevents large creatures beyond humans from existing unless they live in fresh water but on land the jungle may as well be a desert only wet.
They choose jungle islands as survival sites due to how fucking hard it is to survive in a jungle RELYING ON JUST YOUR SIGHT. Most jungle predators find shit through hearing or smell but humans are fucked.
→ #
→ #
>Why is this?
Genetical inferiority
>TRILLIONS of dollars worth of diamond, gold, and oil.
All of which is worth exactly nothing when you;re a pre-Modern tribesman trying to eke a living out of the shitty disease-infested soils that characterize much of Africa. Yes, MUH FERTILE SOIL, but fertility is only half the equation, the other is resilience: A fertile soil that is only good for one crop before you need to re-fertilize it is worth considerably less than a less fertile soil that you can plant in year after year after year.
>Jungle
>rich, fertile
Can we stop discussing food as if it was Africa's original issue?
Fact: Africans didnt starve until medecine brought by superior whites in the 19th century allowed them to survive more than their negro society produced food for
Fact: During these centuries of non-starvation, Africans stagnated at the same stage of advancement and never invented anything new technologically
The reason why Africa didnt develop clearly isnt food as staevation is a recent problem there
The reason is that they're an unimaginative monkey people
>fertile
not for agriculture
>wildlife
if you count diseased mosquitoes then I guess so
>diamond, gold, and oil
this is literally what kept every west African civilization alive
>why is this
you already know why and that's why you posted this thread
If Africa is such an easy place to live then why did so many European explorers die there? Based on your description, exploring Africa should have been a cakewalk, instead of the dangerous & unforgiving endeavor that it actually was.
>Hey , you know all of this fertile and beautiful land we are surrounded by
>"Yeah"
>The land we worship as part of our religion
>"Yeah"
>Why don't we just destroy ALL OF IT so I can have gold?
Wew, also blacks are generally morons.
This post seems to strongly imply that there was no mining in Africa prior to colonization, which is flatly wrong.
This should get you started on understanding why certain places developed at different rates.
Just because a place has the potential to be an utopia under white people doesnt mean it can't turn into hell at the hands of nogs
>Africans didnt starve until medecine brought by superior whites in the 19th century allowed them to survive more than their negro society produced food for
Actually they genocides each other pretty often t b h
Bantu expansion was like Manifest Destiny + we must establish a Bantu lebensraum combined. They really fucked over the Khoisan
So why did all those explorers die then? Seems like a "potential utopia" shouldn't have been so dangerous.
>not for agriculture
Explain Rhodesia then. It was perfect for agriculture but the natives never did so, why?
>Seems like a "potential utopia" shouldn't have been so dangerous.
If you think that, you're a retard
Do you think no one ever died in the Canadian or Australian wilderness?
I meant to imply that resource extraction wasn't the sole goal of most tribes, it was just Hunter gather tribes with minor amounts of agriculture
>One specific area of Africa has land particularly good for agriculture.
>Therefore this must hold true for the ENTIRE continent
Wew lad
Okay, but you should note that the Kingdom of Mali was the world's largest supplier of Gold for long period of time, and that obviously wouldn't be possible unless mining was going on.
diamond gold and oil has no worth before idustriliazation in europe
Dude why do you keep posting this? Don't you get tired of getting BTFO repeatedly?
>Be the world's largest gold supplier
>Greatest architectural accomplishement is pic related
If that's not enough to prove black inferiority....
Always cracks me up, shit looks like a fucking sand castle.
No it wasn't.
Great, and now that you've admitted this you can't use "but why didn't they just mine the gold" as a talking point anymore cause they obviously did.
>people who think conquering Africa was no true accomplishment
>people who think the real work in the conquest of Africa happened in Berlin
>people who think that the post-Berlin borders represent facts on the ground
Tbh not that bad looking. A sand city could be cool
*Yes it was
It was a massive genocide that left most of the khoisan decimated
I don't know what's wrong with me. I can't stop. It's just so funny. It gets 100+ replies every single time. I wish I could stop but it's just too easy. I can post an outline of the continent with no context at all and it'll devolve into a 300 post shitfest within hours.
It is extremely bad looking, modern art tier
On the thumbnail it can somehow look great, kinda like the British parliament
But then you click on the pic, and the genetical difference between the white and the black man hits you right in the face
I love these threads because of triggered negroes/leftards
The best part is that, no matter how hard they try, they get BTFO everytime
Simply because African inferiority is an obvious objective fact
Left them pressed against the coast. Then the European colonists killed them as well.
You would agree that the Bantu and Boers killed most of the Khoi-San between them?
also
>yfw khoi-san are more closely related to semites than other africans
>! ! !
I don't know man, I kinda dig the aesthetic. Imagine being an explorer and being the first white man venturing into the fabled sandcastle city...
Maybe they should've built it at a lower resolution then upscaled it, that would've solved the problem
I'm usually confused with their arguments, which usually consists of posting pictures of skyscrapers in african cities built by westerners.
Yeah, but when a race's single greatest building is this....well
Yeah it's a shame what happened to South America
It generates a mi of shitposting, which is randomly good, and discussion, which is randomly good.
There are stupider things to ask about here.
Why Africa no into moon landing is a good question. You all should read Guns, Germs, & Steel, it's about this very question.
Oh sure it's vastly inferior to what is found pretty much anywhere else in the world save for Australia, but I just think it looks unique.
>European colonists killed them as well.
Nowhere near the level that the Bantu did, it's barely comparable.
The people they killed were... less dead? They land they stole was... less stolen?
>barely comparable
You /just/ directly compared them.
>nowhere near the level the Bantu did
You are at least not saying that European settlers didn't kill natives to gain land for themselves. That's just historical fact.
Khoi San were assimilated.
>Arable jungle
No
>Abundant wildlife
Not really
>As much land as
Desert and eroded jungle, yippee
>Diamond
Worthless until DeBeers bullshitted everyone with marketing
>Gold
Not as much as the rest of the world
>Oil
Owned by post-colonial foreigners
why do /pol/ think we are defending niggers when we try to justify why they're shit
sure each race is different and there might be a gap in intellect compared to everywhere else but that's such an easy cop out rather than a full explanation
How is it a copout?
Samefag
Assimilated by who?
>>Diamond
>Worthless until DeBeers bullshitted everyone with marketing
Bears repeating far more often than it is.
DeBeers execs should probably be arrested, DESU.
Most of Sub-Saharan Africa was either pastoralists or farmers in the Iron Age thanks to West Africa, Bantus expanding throughout Africa, and East Africa. Hunter-gatherers like the Khoisan were a minority.
Only the Khoikhoi are, as they left Africa then came back thousands of years later. As a whole, the Khoisan are fucking ancient, they're actually closer to Pygmies than other Africans.
Don't bother. These idiots honestly don't know anything about history.
>Hunter-gatherers like the Khoisan were a minority.
They became a minority because they were genocided.
>rich fertile jungles
how many of those shitholes could be said to really "exist" as states you can mark down on a map like that
>Explain Rhodesia then. It was perfect for agriculture but the natives never did so, why?
Because the Euros had to use modern agriculture techniques to pull it off which the Africans didn't have. It's like Africa is a high level but Vidya dungeon. A civ which leveled up properly to a high level in another area could pull it off, but try to level up from the start there and you are fucked.
On the left, all of them existed in some format. It's absurd to demand they all act like European style states.
On the right, they're just marking claims, it's not a good map of what is happening on the ground.
Imagine you could exploit all those resources and didn't give a single shit about anyone else living there.
Yep, that's what happened.
>fertile
>that pic
kek