Turn on thread page Beta

Why were african's always victims? watch

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Sorry about any grammatical or punctuation errors.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Genetics, imho.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    People from every continent have exploited their own people, either in the distant past or more recently. (I think)

    I didn't really read the rest tbh.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ciawhobat)
    Genetics, imho.
    Yup, in some ways I agree with you. I mean the Africans do not look economical in anyway. I mean even the Latino are starting to make progress and Asia is ahead of them and Africa only progress is south Africa and the rich part of south Africa and that not no where near the heart of Africa.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Nah, countries like Ethopia colonised parts of the middle east too. Africa wasn't always victims, the slavery you were talking about is when slavery was widespread- i.e. colourless and not specific to nationality, so you can't say africa were only victimes. Individual countries in Africa have each unique things about them and their own history (stop generalising). You need to research it. All we know is how Britain & Europe colonised these countries and after, not what they were before.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EskimoJo)
    People from every continent have exploited their own people, either in the distant past or more recently. (I think)

    I didn't really read the rest tbh.
    Well, if you did you would of realised that I gave examples on how it was beneficial, Africa’s exploitation was nowhere near beneficial as it was with the Europeans and the Asians and the Latino’s.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jonjon123)
    Throughout history different ethnic groups came to Africa and used the "Africans" as cheap labour. The Arabs used them and then the Europeans. Why hadn't the Africans ever tried to invade the Middle East or even Europe through Egypt or morocco? I mean it was the Arabs that conquered Spain? Why was it always Europeans or Arabs that have had golden ages and what not? I mean middle eastern and European history are very interesting, yes they have some exploitation but look most of the African history is very depressing. FFS, we used to exploit our own people, who does that? Most people use other people, e.g. the Arabs are using Bengali’s/Indians as builders and the Ethiopians as servants and maids. Yes, I know china does it but when china does it, it is beneficial to its economy I mean china and India are becoming developed very fast. The Europeans basically wiped out poverty and the European version of poverty is Africa version of middle class. The middle easterners weren’t that good with money BUT they do look after their CITZENS (Arabs) very well e.g. Qatar and UAE. Even the "Arab" African countries have less poverty even though some African generates more income?

    PS, I am black.

    PSS, I am talking about native Africans, you know not Algerians and Moroccans.
    Read and understand your history, do this before you think about ******* posting again. What does it matter, I'll sit back and watch this thread descend to ignorance and stupidity.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jonjon123)
    Throughout history different ethnic groups came to Africa and used the "Africans" as cheap labour. The Arabs used them and then the Europeans. Why hadn't the Africans ever tried to invade the Middle East or even Europe through Egypt or morocco? I mean it was the Arabs that conquered Spain? Why was it always Europeans or Arabs that have had golden ages and what not? I mean middle eastern and European history are very interesting, yes they have some exploitation but look most of the African history is very depressing. FFS, we used to exploit our own people, who does that? Most people use other people, e.g. the Arabs are using Bengali’s/Indians as builders and the Ethiopians as servants and maids. Yes, I know china does it but when china does it, it is beneficial to its economy I mean china and India are becoming developed very fast. The Europeans basically wiped out poverty and the European version of poverty is Africa version of middle class. The middle easterners weren’t that good with money BUT they do look after their CITZENS (Arabs) very well e.g. Qatar and UAE. Even the "Arab" African countries have less poverty even though some African generates more income?

    PS, I am black.

    PSS, I am talking about native Africans, you know not Algerians and Moroccans.
    Algerians and Morrocans are also africans... Again you know very little about Africa pre-colonisation. Just do your research , why post on TSR, you're just going to get some replies from random teenage social darwinists.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MJlover)
    Nah, countries like Ethopia colonised parts of the middle east too. Africa wasn't always victims, the slavery you were talking about is when slavery was widespread- i.e. colourless and not specific to nationality, so you can't say africa were only victimes. Individual countries in Africa have each unique things about them and their own history (stop generalising). You need to research it. All we know is how Britain & Europe colonised these countries and after, not what they were before.
    Source for the ethiopia claim? Also, africa where the largest slaves. I mean afro-turks, afro-arabs, african americans and black british.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jonjon123)
    Well, if you did you would of realised that I gave examples on how it was beneficial, Africa’s exploitation was nowhere near beneficial as it was with the Europeans and the Asians and the Latino’s.
    Hmmm, it seems like someone needs to take a trip to the library, you don't have to respond to this. High likelihood you're a moron so I know you wont.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MJlover)
    Algerians and Morrocans are also africans... Again you know very little about Africa pre-colonisation. Just do your research , why post on TSR, you're just going to get some replies from random teenage social darwinists.
    Thankyou, beginning to think I was he only sane person here.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    because of the man :mad:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MJlover)
    Algerians and Morrocans are also africans... Again you know very little about Africa pre-colonisation. Just do your research , why post on TSR, you're just going to get some replies from random teenage social darwinists.
    Listen, I said native Africans. Stop being in denial.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MJlover)
    Algerians and Morrocans are also africans... Again you know very little about Africa pre-colonisation. Just do your research , why post on TSR, you're just going to get some replies from random teenage social darwinists.
    LOL, i couldn't put it better.

    yeah look up Nubia, or search i think its In Search of Africa on BBC iplayer
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The rest of the world beat you to gunpowder.

    On a more serious but related note, perhaps the fertility of Africa(?) (ie ease of acquisition of nutrients through hunting and foraging) would mean that small tribes rather than larger agricultural communities developed. Larger agricultural communities could support an intelligent middle/ upper class who can spend their time inventing weapons rather than tracking buffalo.

    Maybe i'm talking *****. Sociological Historians/ Historical Sociologists?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vin)
    because of the man :mad:
    The man that abused us and tortured us, while building our economy and putting a stop to backward cultures.
    Offline

    2
    The Illuminati.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jonjon123)
    Well, if you did you would of realised that I gave examples on how it was beneficial, Africa’s exploitation was nowhere near beneficial as it was with the Europeans and the Asians and the Latino’s.
    Maybe that's because after exploiting each other, the Africans suddenly found themselves being badly exploited by other nations. So while Europeans exploited each other, they were then left to sort things out. If people of a different race suddenly came and took loads of people away from Europe to other continents, killing many of them in the process, they would have struggled too.
    Yes, Africans kept slaves of their own race, but I think being slaves of other people (and 'having' to sell off your slaves to avoid the risk of being a slave yourself) did a hell of a lot of damage.

    I dunno if that made any sense by the way!

    Anyway, I get the feeling you (like me) need to do a lot of reading and research.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AreYouExperienced?)
    LOL, i couldn't put it better.

    yeah look up Nubia, or search i think its In Search of Africa on BBC iplayer
    (Original post by Bishamon)
    Thankyou, beginning to think I was he only sane person here.
    Okay, then let me rephrase the "black" Africans.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Am i the only that is very confused about what the OP has stated? :lolwut:
 
 
 
Poll
Do you think parents should charge rent?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.