African poverty.

So don't give me this bull**** about the british causing Africas problems. Colonialism although evil has benefited many, many countries. Colonialism brought to africa knowledge, sicence, engineering, infrastructure, engineering, agricultural methods that feed the whole sub saharan africa (which was previously hunter gatherer and nomadic).

The problem with africa is africans. I do not refer to their colour, ethnicity, or race. I solely refer to sub saharan Africans in Africa when I say that they are the most incompetent, incapable, courrupt, backwards, primitive, idle, useless people on the planet. The problem with sub-saharan Africa is Africans.

I was saying that the elite averages an IQ of 100, not the wider population.

If you read what I actually said about SA you would notice that I said blacks had to seize the power they deserved... So don't put words in mt mouth you dumb tard.

1000 points for pointing out I pressed the wrong key whilst posting on my Blackberry... First you don't argue against any of my points using either facts or logic, then you point out spelling mistakes caused by slips on a small keyboard. You are turning out to be a worthy poster on here aren't you.

Don't mind him. He forgets that a few generations ago most people had a bath a year in this country if at all and were still throwing their defecations out of the window. Considering England has existed for 700,000 years, it's the weakest of gloats.

Considering you didn't answer any of mine, I hardly think you're in a position to make a judgement.

Anyway, I'll list them here in greater detail so you don't have to scroll up/requote etc. So first of all, you explain that Africans have a lower average IQ than the West. Consider that the IQ test is a test devised in the West and therefore best suited to Western mentality. As with government, just because something works over in the West does not mean it works over in Africa or anywhere else for that matter. Yes you can point to Ireland, yes you can point to Australia, Canada or whatever other colony you please to show an example of how great colonialism is but the fact of the matter is, it failed Africa and it does not work in Africa. Just because something works somewhere doesn't mean it's a universal truth.

I didn't contest that democracy may not suit Africa - if anything I expanded on why it doesn't. When people here had low IQs they weren't allowed and didn't expect a say in government. The idea that IQ tests aren't suited to Africans is tripe. IQ tests are a universal measure of how well people can learn and apply what they've learnt to the world - something the general African population finds far more difficult than the average Westerner. For instance a good dr will have an IQ of 120+, and where is lacking in drs? Africa. A good lawyer will also have an IQ of 120+, and where has a terrible legal system? Africa. Or maybe, according to you, they just aren't suited to being Western Drs and lawyers in the way China, India, America, Australia, and Europe, can?

Yeah because not like this is caused by the total lack of education and the total lack of an education system is caused by the horrendous job that European powers did at creating independence ... of course not

But the wider population in the UK does have an IQ of around 100, as for the 'elite' that extends much much higher.


I did manage to get through that incredibly articulate and poorly constructed post (and you have the audacity to accuse Africans of being unintelligent! ) and you never said or even implied blacks ought to seize the power they deserve m8?
Five minutes earlier:
'Like the poster above states, these countries cannot handle our 'advanced' forms of democracy. '

Thats why medical and law schools have compulsary IQ tests as part of their admissions procedure isn't it.

I didn't contest that democracy may not suit Africa - if anything I expanded on why it doesn't. When people here had low IQs they weren't allowed and didn't expect a say in government. The idea that IQ tests aren't suited to Africans is tripe. IQ tests are a universal measure of how well people can learn and apply what they've learnt to the world - something the general African population finds far more difficult than the average Westerner. For instance a good dr will have an IQ of 120+, and where is lacking in drs? Africa. A good lawyer will also have an IQ of 120+, and where has a terrible legal system? Africa. Or maybe, according to you, they just aren't suited to being Western Drs and lawyers in the way China, India, America, Australia, and Europe, can?

YOU HAVE ENTIRELY MISSED THE POINT

Without colonialism, without European intervention there would BE NO EDUCATION IN AFRICA.

ALL knowledge in Sub-Saharan Africa comes from Europeans, EVERYTHING that they know has been taught and told to them by Europeans.

GET THE POINT

Erm it was an englishman who invented the toilet. I am sure wherever you or your family are from people still **** in a hole in the ground and use their hand to clean their arse.

You are correct. *FUN HISTORICAL FACT* Did you know that Queen Elizabeth spoke with a Midlands accent, similar to present day Birmingham?

Can't you read? I said a few generations ago our elite was in the exact same position as Africa's. They had average IQs and were trying to control a population with very low IQs. I also pointed out our elite had the added benefit that they could create our system, rather than importing a system that was created over centuries. I also pointed out that they were trying to control a population hundreds of times smaller than Africa's elites have to because the West has helped it swell with its advances in science (which came to us one by one, rather than all at the same time - so our population expanded at a sustainable rate rather than going from 1 million to 70 million in a few generations).

Why do retarded liberal idiots like yourself focus in on the FACT that Africans currently have a far lower IQ? All I was saying is that they are us 100 years ago, but with all the problems modern society brings - huge populations, guns, internal strife etc. Sorry for offending your pathetic sensibilities cry baby.

Indeed. They didn't even have a written language when we got there. They hadn't even figured out how to farm properly.

A few months ago there was a thread about something to do with Africa, can't remember the details but one theme kept coming up and that was that most of Africa's problems were caused by colonisation and various atrocities committed by European nation's.

Now is this really still a relevant way to explain many of Africa's problems?

Take the Congo for example. Belgium left the country in 1960 that's more than half a decade ago. Would it still be relevant to blame problems like the civil war an the violence on colonisation?


Also can much of the poverty we see today still be linked to European empires exploiting their colonies?

Could you expand on how it's a universal measure? Also, I disagree that people who have a low IQ here should be denied a say in the government. IQ tests are just one way of measuring intelligence and, in any case, if a decision affects a person, that person should have a say in that decision.

Erm no. He invented the modern lavatory with a flush. It was actually documented as being in existence as far back as ancient Egypt and Rome. Regardless let's not dwell on such a gross topic. My point is: why is the clown bragging about superiority or higher culture when most English people for most of English history were low IQ peasants?

And for what it's worth my family is a) clean and b) clean. But then I don't expect a strong response from someone who relies on a troll account to state their bold and contravershul opinions. Elipsis.




Nah. But I do now.




I can read. Certainly. What I can't do however is decipher bull**** disguised as an argument but I'll give it a go if only for the craic. The "elite" that you refer to weren't chosen because of their IQs or towering intellect. They were chosen because of their family backgrounds and aristocratic connections. And what are the trappings that come with blue blood if not the lowest of IQs? Not these so called ''average'' IQs that you are deluding yourself with.

Can you also name me 10 colonial pioneers that were "common men done good"? I'm not convinced. The elite of the elite and the very people who brought feudal democracy to Europe -- the Hapsburgs -- are dead because they were so degenerate and retarded. The same dynasty that created the royal families and kingly courts of Spain, Germany, France, Hungary, Austria and a few other proms. But whatever. This isn't my point and not your point either.

I am more interested in your claim of ''advanced forms of democracy''. Was it the English that invented democracy? If not, why did it take so many thousands of years for the English to take up full democracy from the Greeks if they were so "advanced"?




I think it's funny that you call me "liberal" when I am most likely more conservative than you.

I didn't contest that democracy may not suit Africa - if anything I expanded on why it doesn't. When people here had low IQs they weren't allowed and didn't expect a say in government. The idea that IQ tests aren't suited to Africans is tripe. IQ tests are a universal measure of how well people can learn and apply what they've learnt to the world - something the general African population finds far more difficult than the average Westerner. For instance a good dr will have an IQ of 120+, and where is lacking in drs? Africa. A good lawyer will also have an IQ of 120+, and where has a terrible legal system? Africa. Or maybe, according to you, they just aren't suited to being Western Drs and lawyers in the way China, India, America, Australia, and Europe, can?

The elite I refer to are the upper-middle classes, rather than the purely upper classes. Look at the cabinet now - almost all Etonion descendants of Lords and the like - almost all of whom have IQs of over 120.


I didn't claim that colonialists did good on a single level, but rather they provided all the things needed for an advanced economy to flourish - roads, railways, educational establishments, farming techniques, and rule of law, to name but a few. Indeed India today is still using our railways, educating their children in the imperialist schools we left behind, and ruling using the parliament we set up.

The English weren't advanced at least until the late 1800s/early 1900s, that system devloped over hundreds of years, and from having no idea of anything but tribal governance Africa is supposed to just get it? They didn't even have a written language, or for that matter a very expansive spoken language either. I do not know why you are getting so offended by me stating that the majority of the world is currently superior to Africans is beyond me, I'm not even saying they are superior on a fundamental biological level.

And with all your crying I very much doubt you are more conservative than I am, indeed debating with you whilst trying not to offend your sensibilities is proving impossible. It's like having an argument with the Guardian in human form.