Should Europe reimburse Africa?
Offline
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
First a short summary of what happened
Not just for the whole colonization thing, but slavery and even before. When you think of Africa before Europe interfered I’m sure you cannot think of any impressive accomplishments or since for that matter, barring the pyramids in Egypt. Yet Africa was well on its way to development, one example is the Oyo state in the 15 hundreds. In fact at this time Europe’s production of goods wasn’t much better than similar African “empires” (they hadn’t organized into nations with borders as such at this point to my knowledge so “empires” will have to do) Yet by the colonization stage Africa was only exporting raw goods like cotton. This was because of Europe strangling local markets in Africa driving the local people to abandon (for the most part) iron smelting and making cloth etc (at least for sale etc). Kind of what is still happening now if you think about it.
But more importantly Slavery, a very conservative guess is 10 million people were captured and sold as slaves from Africa (the actual number is unknown, this doesn’t include people killed while trying to get the slaves) This further stunted development of Africa. Fun Fact European countries actually forcibly stopped Africans trading with other Africans from different areas so they would be tied to Europe economically. And finally colonization exploiting the resources etc, making them one product economies, im sure you know the story.
Should these countries that have basically forced Africa into its current state (yes most African countries leadership is currently basically a bad joke) be held financially accountable? Or is it a cause of we were and still are stronger and the stronger always will gain an advantage so stfu.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
- Login to post comments
Offline Fuck that. Bad enough having individual idiots think they are owed for what never happened to them, much worse to take such stupidity international. Are we going to sue Italy because Britain was enslaved by the Romans next? If punative measures cannot be taken against the SPECIFIC people involved, then there should be no measures taken at all. If any are taken, then all you've done is victimise another innocent group, and now you have two pissed off groups instead of one. Hardly a solution. The justice systems we have built figured this out, at least to an extent, centuries ago.
Yes i see "financiall accountable" was a bad choice of words, i hereby request it be treated as, should europe out of the kindness of there own hearts help africa in regognistion of there impact on the continent.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
- Login to post comments
Offline *insert random act of cruelty from history*
Just because the people who benefited consider these as *insert random act of cruelty from history* doesn't mean the victums do. Africa still feels the effects even now. These are important parts of africa history that shaped it into what it is today, you cannot expect people not to be pissed off about it.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
- Login to post comments
Offline I agree. Same problems flood the middle east as well. North America too actually, but the victims here seem to have a much harder time being heard than others. Still, they've occupied at least one town in Ontario for more than a year and forced the vast majority of the residents elsewhere, and I remember them taking a major road to ski resorts in B.C. about 10-15 years ago, so they're obviously still pissed too.
But the contribution to the solution must be voluntary, or there isn't a lasting solution, there's a new problem. It's unspeakable what has been done to various groups throughout history. But these things can never be truly fixed. The best that can be done is a patch. If the patch was stolen, or made of blood, or transparent, then it isn't a patch at all, it's a pressure seal. When the pressure is still rising.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
- Login to post comments
Offline Is that many of the countries that were colonized by Europe are doing far better than those in Africa, and to say that it was caused by Europe is well not really looking at all the facts, New Zealand, United States, Brazil, Argentina, Australia, Canada, Caribbean, India, Hong Kong, much of South East Asia, all these parts for the most part are doing well, even Egypt, and many of the north African countries do better than the rest of Africa. But African nations that should be doing so much better, Guinea, Sierra Leon, Nigeria, and many others due to their natural resources but corrupt governments, ethnic fighting and of course civil unrest does not help them, and that is not an issue of colonization, but of the people/government/military of those countries. So why should any European country pay? In the end they can just look at any other country that was colonized by a European country and say hey they are doing fine.
- Login to post comments
Offline Is that many of the countries that were colonized by Europe are doing far better than those in Africa, and to say that it was caused by Europe is well not really looking at all the facts, New Zealand, United States, Brazil, Argentina, Australia, Canada, Caribbean, India, Hong Kong, much of South East Asia, all these parts for the most part are doing well, even Egypt, and many of the north African countries do better than the rest of Africa. But African nations that should be doing so much better, Guinea, Sierra Leon, Nigeria, and many others due to their natural resources but corrupt governments, ethnic fighting and of course civil unrest does not help them, and that is not an issue of colonization, but of the people/government/military of those countries. So why should any European country pay? In the end they can just look at any other country that was colonized by a European country and say hey they are doing fine.
There are many reasons why other countries are doing better than africa. First lets look at when those countries were decolonised. The african countries that are really stuggling are the ones that got inderpendance just after WW2, europe left in a huge hurry. Basically europe said here is a country. run it. with the arbatory border lines and the lack of skills are you suprised at what happened? The local revolutionary leaders got into power and well you know the rest.
you will notice that countries like usa, new zealand, austrailia and canda have mainly white populations and it was the white people that got into power, these people already had the skills needed for the job of running a country and also to do "skilled" jobs because they had had a good education. If you want proof of this look at south africa, the "best" (imo) African country, we are doing quite well, in 1910 when south africa was decolonised the white people (skilled people) got power and we were fine (minus the apartheid fucked upness witch started in the 1948). I would argue it is because of white rule after colonisation ended that south africa is still doing well, it was a serious fuck up on the social side of south africa. The point is people that had a proper education took over, the skilled people and the skilled people took the jobs. You are free to disagree with that, but i think having people that have had a proper education controling the place and in the jobs is what did it. (P.S. don't take it the wrong way, if the black people had been skilled at that point and got into power i think the result would of been the same)
Now lets look at other african countries that are now struggling. Yes many of the "new" leaders did have a good education (believe it or not , not all were corupt) but were left with huge problems and unlike south africa didn't have huge gold reserves and skilled people running them. The masses remained largly uneducated and unequiped to take over a "modern" economy. that is going to hurt a country expessially when they are no longer tied to a more powerfull country guiding them. As i see it it was inevitable that africa would turn out like this because of how it was left.
Now don't take this as me ignoring the mistakes that were made. Yes there is corruption, yes there is ethnic fighting and civil unrest. ethenic fighting i lay at the feet of colonisation though as much as i do at the people involved. Basically the colonial powers made totally arbatory borders and said you are now one. ruwanda is a good example of the result. If canda and usa were at war and suddenly a bigger nation took both over and made them 1 country, are the to countries suddenly going to like each other because of that? But ethenic fighting is wrong so yes it is also a self caused problem. civil unrest happens when thing arn't going well what do you expect, i have explained why i think that is a colonial problem. Corruption i lay soley at africas feet though.
If you want a better club to swing i reccomend comenting on many coutries nationalising there "natural resources" and taking them away from the skilled people in some cases. here can you blame them for nationalising them? though i cannot, would of just been economic colonialism, personally i think it would of been better to wait untill they had the skilled people to run them. BUt as i said earlier they left the people totally unequiped to run the countries, what do you expect?
you will have to excuse me for not talking about india brazil etc as i know almost nothing about coloniastion there and how it ended, but it would suprise me to find out they were left in the same condition as africa.
So barring corruption out of all the things you mentioned are partly or mainly the colonial powers fault imo. but i doubt you will agree with me except on corruption
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
- Login to post comments
Offline Brazil was left to it's own, it's fine, not perfect but fine, Zimbabwe once it had independence with Mugabe (1980 really really recent) decided that only blacks could own land and be in power, therefore all whites out, even those that had been born in Zimbabwe, disasterous results, hyperinflation and lots of unrest, however for most of it's history it had a really great economy destroyed by one hateful person. As for Egypt again left on it's own, but it's people pulled through. India left on it's own after Ghandi took over, they have pulled through, the issue is skilled labour, what no one worked when Europe had their colonies there? Yeah there is corruption, that's one major part that is stopping them from moving forward. Many nations world wide are trying to help africa start up it's economy because there is lots of money to be made, however the corruption throughout the continent hinders that. Nations around the world have tried to help african nations in regards to it's farming, it's economic problems yet the issues remain, why because many african nations still have the tribal mentality from what I have seen. Rather not help each other out (of course there are many nations in africa that would rather work together than against each other) however dealing with their ignorance, supersition, the catholic church, ancient hatred and racial problems, come on these is all strictly to do with colonialism? Brazil, India, many of the nations of south east Asia, philipines, madagascar, much of the caribbean was ruled by blacks and natives once they gained independence (your argument just goes out the door with just using the caribbean as an example)
The problems of Africa go far deeper than just colonial rule of the past, it doesn't help I agree and the effect are still felt, but they have to move forward from their past, and leave the old ways and hatred behind and realize that to deal with the rest of the world, it has to view itself as one people, not many different races. Africa has to work as one to move forward, let go of it's corruption if it doesn't want to see itself self implode the way it is now. Also realize that the white guys aren't the bad guys.
- Login to post comments
Offline zimbarbwe is anther example i could of used, while under white (once again white people were the ones with the skills) rule post colonialism zimbarbwe was doing fine (later with the resistance it obviously suffered), hell even when mugabe first started out it was doing fine, zims colapse is all on him im afraid. Hell my dad was born in zimbarbwe and my mother zambia. Both of those places were not bad places to live, not so much zim anymore but it is recovering, give it a decade or to and i think zim will atleast have 1 leg to stand on. In fact most african countries are not bad places to live if you have a good job, I mean they are no 1st world country but hey. Yes i agree africas problem do go deeper than colonialism. But i would argue some of that comes from outside interferance, not all though.
Tribalism, that disappears as soon as you get money, i see it, most my friends just know they are from the zulu or xhosa etc. and speak the language but couldn't tell you much more than that. But in the poorer areas yes there is tribalism.
Hey the carabean is no bed of roses, they have big prblems as well. Jamaca is no bed of roses, niether is hati etc. there are some sucssess but there are also failures there. India is no bed of roses either, same for brasil etc., i mean it aint bad but i wouldn't call it good. Lots of african countries are pulling through aswell but yes there are failures.
here take a look at windhoek in nambia (btw iv been to all these places... except the last one (not the staving children one =p ivory coast)
What about Harare in zimbarbwe, its actually a good looking place
now Abidjan, capital of ivory coast or Côte d'Ivoire as is prefered there. (sorry bad picture but im not going around looking for the best i can find)
Africa is not all just (even though it is there)
I think people sometimes forget that.
Most of africa is moving forward. it just takes time.
P.S.
"Also realize that the white guys aren't the bad guys"
LIAR, im white and im a bad guy 
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
- Login to post comments
Offline I agree with what you just said, in the end much of Africa is going to move forward, there will be hardships, but all countries experience that, it a hard part of moving forward, in Canada I have friends from Nigeria and Somalia, south Africa (some white) Zimbabwe (some white as well), all pretty much say the same thing, once money is introduced much of the tribal mentality can go away, the issue lies with the governments and military trying to stay in power by ethnic fighting and blaming the economic woes not themselves and their incompetence but on whites and foreign or local powers/tribes. India is far from perfect nor is Brazil, but they are moving towards improvement and using the local countries in their area (Argentina, Columbia, Chile, Ecuador etc, etc) to get a centralized economy to improve not just their economy but the regions economy.
As for the Caribbean , hey look at Haiti, corruption and ignorance filled with TONS of superstition and look what you get a familiar scene much like that of Africa. Jamaica had white leaders but the drugs and gangs have destroyed much of Jamaica and it's sad that has occur ed. With that said Barbados, Bermuda, Bahamas St. Tomas, St. Marten/St Martin, Antigua, Trinidad and Tobago, all of these have had fairly good living standards, many with black/native leaders. The thing is unlike many former African nations, there was no racial/tribal hatred here going on. That said as well they shared power with everyone equally for the most part. People being elected into leadership and well having people of all races into different parts of the government. Something that lacks in Africa really, that not everyone is equally represented.
With that said the influence of religion has also hampered Africa, with the catholic church's idiotic stance on condoms, and muslim influence regarding medicine from the west, it's hard to get the people of Africa to make up their own minds with so many outside influences distorting the public view.
- Login to post comments
Offline Mugabe should be shot and pissed on, then villified like Hitler. Zimbabwe was doing pretty damn well compared to the rest of Africa until the 90's, when he single handidly tossed the country into the shredder.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
- Login to post comments
Offline Ok, run me by this one more time... Why should the Strong, pay the Weak, for being weak?
Seems like the whole basis is just an appeal to my relatively limited emotions >.>
What Would Kharn Do?
- Login to post comments
Offline Nature vs social convention really?
Let me ask you this, did the strong get strong by everyone doing there own thing? Or did they elect leaders and work together as countries uplifting the poor etc.? Did that benefit them? Now apply that to a world wide basis. Basically a Africa that has money to trade is benefictal to everyone involved, finantially, emotionally (no more people trying to impose cultural guilt) etc. If you don't like or agree with you being morally obligated thing here is another reason to help africa.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
- Login to post comments
I mean technically Africans also had slaves from Rome and Greece in ancient times, humans have been traded for labor for thousands of years. Even so at the height of the slave trades to the Americas it was Arabs and Muslims that were trading slaves to America, why not go after the Arabs and Muslims for facilitating this as well? I mean they did make a great deal of profit off of it.
you have a point Arabs were still at the slavery game even after the europeans and America stopped it. However the main damage came from the european countries with colonisation, kind of the final nail in the coffin of under developing Africa. Yes africans tribes sold other africans into slavery as well and as you say arabs were not blameless but if you look back throught history one thing is consistant, europe.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
Let's take the following hypothetical scenerio. A Hutu who was involved in the macheting of hundreds of Tutsis ends up having grandchildren who end up migrating to the United States. And there descendants settle in the US and are African Americans. Should they reimburse the Tutsis of Rwanda in the future. Or are they African Americans who deserve reimbursement for the slavery from European white supremacy from centuries past?
Also remember that after centuries of interbreeding, many of the descendants of enslaved African blacks are now Europeans. Should they give reimbursements as well?
How long should historical guilt for genocide and slavery last? And then, who should be the ones to fork over cash?
I am East Indian and my ancestors lived under the brutality of Muslim and then British Rule. I could claim reparations for crimes done to my kin. Then again, I live on a plot of land that was likely owned by a historical native Indian family. So while I collect from the Brits and Muslims do I also relinquish my home to the first passerby of Sioux ancestry?
I think you miss the point, it is not the people that need to be rembursed. It is the countries. Why on earh would the people get the money? There is no logical reason i can see, they were not alive back then so should get nothing for what happened. How ever European countries were formed back then and are responsible for how Africa has turned out. It is the lack of development in Africa they are reponsible for, that is the area of concern, not personal sob stories pasted down over the geneerations. The examples you give show exactly personal stuff has no place here, people will always be screwed, that im fine with, but when you screw over an entire country for 100 years and the problems still exist 50 years after you left you know you fucked up. Think of t this way, some guy beats you up for some money and you get paralised, im sure you can take some money off him in a court.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
The europeans were doing it since the greek and roman empires, i mean this is going back to 1500 BC, europe, like the rest of the world, India, Japan, africa, middle east, the america's (yes mayans and incas also had slaves as did a few native tribes) Slavery is part of human history as it was a way for cheap labor, in some cases as punishment, etc, etc, etc. However why should Western civilization be the ones to pay for it? I mean it's like making the last guy in the line responsible for something that everyone else was doing already. Hell slavery still occurs today in africa and the middle east. It wasn't like europeans where using strictly african slaves. Between the 16th and 19th century 1.2 million europeans where trades as slaves to north africa and the ottoman empire.
It was a business after all, Arabs, other africans and various nations (including the ottoman empire. russia, poland, lithuania, england, india) all had thriving business in slaves.
double post
Yes slavery was everywhere, there is no denying that, it doesn't make it right but its a fact. The differance in Africa was a the volume of slaves taken. But complaining because you got the rough end of the stick in a game you played as well is pointless. While africa did get the worst of the whole slavery thing to my knowledge that alone doesn't merit compensation, but when you add it together with factors like colonisation then I think it does. That is why I say europe and not the other places that exploited africa as well. The fact is every country has been screwed over at some point, so yeah compensation for slavery is not why i say europe. The main thing is Colonisation, slavery is just a controbuting factor. The real question here i guess is should countries be accountable for screwing over other countries to the point that they will still be suffering for it for a long time to come even if it happened a long time ago?
Personally i don't think europe should give africa even a dime. But that is for differant reasons. Trade is what africa needs not charity. Africa need development not a cash hand out.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
You could always balance the trade in slaves and the European
colonization with the improved infrastructure the Europeans left behind? You're welcome!
Oh, and most of the slavery was driven by rival tribes selling each other out, not Europeans wandering about rounding them up.
I'm happy if the African countries would agree to send a 'Thank You' card to everyone for our help.
Ex-pat Brit now a U.S. citizen living in East LA
How can not believing in something that is backed up with no empirical evidence be less scientific than believing in something that not only has no empirical evidence but actually goes against the laws of the universe and in many cases actually contradicts itself? - Ricky Gervais
LMFAO
oh yes thank you for leaving africa with shit. Thank you for preventing africa from seting up balanced economies, you seem to forget why what little that is there was put there... to rape the conternent of anything valuable great service there. You seem to think the oppresion of an entire contenant is balanced out with very little infustructure that didn't even benefit the continent at the time? (even now it is not offset as more balanced infustructure would easily be in place) Lets say colonisation never happened would africa of remained as it was before colonisation... easy awnser... no. Hey tell you what how about you let africa colonise america take what little america has on its own continent and then you think about saying thank you. We will even build you a few more schools... yes im sure that is something you would be thankful for. You also seem to forget in the 15th century africa was very simalar to euorpe in production, maybe a little bit worse but overly worse, then along come european interferance and what happens? Thank you? It is an undenyable fact that africa got butt fucked by the europe (and others) There is no point in denying it. leaving africa with improved infastructure is just plain bullshit. Africa before slavery and colonisation wasn't a savage wastland land im sure some people picture.
Yes im well aware of how the slave trade worked, im well aware there are no innocent parties there, but maybe you should recognise that buying humans is just as bad as selling them? But there is more, there is a reason that they sold each other out (besides the fact that they were rivals), firstly, whenever people didn't cooperate they themselves were taken as slaves. By the hight of slavery africa was forced to rely on euorpes economy (several reasons, mostly due to europes interferance with there local economies) and what was the only thing the european countries would accept in return for the things africa needed... slaves. This was before the eropean countries discovered there were more valuable things in africa, as soon as they did guess what happened, they abolished the slave trade and started colonisation.
And finally let me say this, it is not only my opinion that if it wasn't for slavery and colonisation many of todays major powers would not be in the position they are in now if they hadn't raped africa.... so how about a thank you?
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
It is up to africans to improve themselves and we all know as long as they have corrupt governments, as long as the spread of disease is rampant due to massive ignorance and superstition, and religious ignorance and superstition (looking at the catholic church here), to ethnic fighting and genocide, to high level of illiteracy, tribal and military infighting as well as a lack of central planning for an improved economy, they will remain as is. They have to want to improve their lives and be willing to move forward and stop with their own infighting, because as far as the rest of the world is concerned (generalizing here I know not EVERYONE thinks this way but in the world of politics and world view for the most part it's true) it's only black on black violence no one really cares if it's hutu or tutsi, this african tribe vs that african tribe, they are all blacks. (and yes I realize this sounds racist, but come on if it's ain't religious or truly racial fighting no one really cares, irish vs irish? who cares until they kill a non irish person, russians vs other russians? no one cared until it got religious or they attack another non russian country or person, etc, etc, etc)
As well for the history it was mainly muslim and arab traders trading black african's to the world, the tribes would bring slaves to the arabs and muslims, who intern sold them to india, the middle east, eastern and western europe and of course america. No one is denying that african was raped of it's human resources really, but if you gonna make someone pay make them all pay, the americas (as in Caribbean, brazil and america) all of europe, all the middle east and india as well. After all they all had a hand in it and the colonization was going to happen eventually due to, well the expansion of one empire or another and the natural wealth in africa. All these regions, india, americas, Europe have had improvement in their economies at one point or another, and of course now with the oil industry many regions in the middle east, and they all had slave dealings, why not make them all pay instead.
Thanks for providing a fine example of Community College Activist Rhetoric.
I bet people avoid you at dinner parties, don't they? You remind me of Rik from The Young Ones.
Jog on, son, eh?
How can not believing in something that is backed up with no empirical evidence be less scientific than believing in something that not only has no empirical evidence but actually goes against the laws of the universe and in many cases actually contradicts itself? - Ricky Gervais
And this is the best you can do? If you are going to attack at least do it properly. Well if this is as relevant to the topic as you are going to get then "Jog on, son, eh?"
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
Well this is actually quite correct i think, lets just say some country was on a guilt trip and wanted to "make it right" or whatever, what would be the point? Until Africa sorts itself out no amount of money is going to fix it. But some african countries are well on there way another 50 years and i think Africa will for the most part be ok, not rich but not the worst place in the world to live.
The thing is beating countries with the slavery club is pointless, the people in africa had no problem with slavery, they bought slaves and sold them, its hipocritical to to bash other places with it. But yes if i was arguing europe should pay for slavery then yes i would have to say the arabs should to. While slavery did controbute to under development it was european intereferance with african economies witch really did that. strangling there markets and colonisation are some good examples of that. Some african "empires" actuallyu grew inspite of slavery so yeah slavery not a good tool to bash other countries with
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
Aren't you being a little ridiculous? While at the same time admitting that certainly no one left living in Africa, or on Earth, has experienced slavery or colonization as they have been practiced, you suggest that some countries of Europe, repay African nations for the effects of colonial era policies, politics and colonization? That's ...increadible! Should this not apply to every conquerer, colonizer and slaver into antiquity regardless of their continential, or national, origin? Just think a moment about what you're saying.
You say, 'these countries', but who alive in those countries could ever have had anything to do with that past? Why should such reparation be downloaded onto prodgeny like some kind of original sin? Why should the people of those countries, whose money funds their countries, be responsible to repay African nations for the effects of a past they are as dislocated from as ...black Americans are from slavery (though further still).
BigUniverse wrote,
"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."
Yes this is exactly the question should countries be accountable for things they did in the past. Well considering colonisation ended for most african countries in the 1960s I say that isn't to long ago for compensation. 50 years isnt really that long a time.
Should americans etc pay to the natives... well yes, if they didn't benefit from it in the long run or short run, "non native" americans now benefit from what there ansesters did so yes they should compensate. I am held accountable for apartheid even though my parents didn't even live in south africa during apartheid. But i recognise i have to be put in the back seat to the victums of apartheid, yes it can be annoying but it is nessicary. It is the same for the european countries, they are currently doing well because of what they did, so they want the benefits but not accept the responsibility. Yes they cannot do anything to change what happened before they were born but they still are accepting the benefits.
Bascally what im saying is if you benefit from something you had no control over you have a responsiblity to help reduce the suffering that "something" caused. Morally we have a responsibility to stop suffering
I don't know if you read my later posts but im actually against europe paying africa money, but it is for differant reasons.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
Do you comprehend how ludicrous what you wrote sounds? Read it again.
Are you really suggesting that these nations should only be morally obliged to offer reparations (of whatever sort) to African nations because of their current success? If you want to go that road, then quantify what measure of their success can be owed directly to the enslavement of Africans and the control of African territory. Keep all things in perspective. What could the potential of those affected African nations be without those European nations' interference? Or admit that this hypothetic is really poorly conceived. I'd prefer the later.
BigUniverse wrote,
"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."
I just went straight to insults and ridicule. You were too nice, Thomathy.
How can not believing in something that is backed up with no empirical evidence be less scientific than believing in something that not only has no empirical evidence but actually goes against the laws of the universe and in many cases actually contradicts itself? - Ricky Gervais
I don't want europe to help finantially at least in the form of charity, africa needs to sort out its own (self caused) problems first, if they dont, help is pointless. Trade not charity.
Well firstly i prefer it to people geting off scott free. If you benefit from something you are morally obliged to help, yes i think so. I dont think that is ridiculus, expessially when doing so will cost you almost nothing.
Hmm somehow i think hundreds of years of cheap (not free as they still had to feed slaves) labour helped alot or maybe that is just ridiculus? Maybe organising africa ( and others) production so that they exported only raw materials to there respective countries to be proccessed didn't help at all? yes i wouldnt put there sucsess all down to raping africa (and others) but to deny it had a large part is ridiculus, they are still benefiting to this day, most african countries are still just exporting the raw mateials to other countries. europe far more developed than africa t the start of slavery in some ways yes but in production of goods no, slightly better yes not well better though. It was through interferance that that happened. But i agree the what ifs are pointless but let me say this about the potential of africa... look how much europe grew from the start of slavery to now, what was stoping africa from doing the same? slavery? colonisation?
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
Shows what your arguements were worth then eh?
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
I demand reparations for all prejudice and exploitation for the past 50 years then. For ethnicities, sexualities, nationalities, everything.
I mean, homosexuality was considered a mental disorder until what..the 70s? That is within the past 50 years.
What about gays not being allowed in the military? Gay marriage being banned? These will most certainly be things that will be resolved in the future, so should everyone be preparing for reparations now for the pain and suffering caused by couples that needed the rights granted through federal recognition of marriage?
What about the exploitation of cheap labor in other nations that do not have a minimum wage? Or the service industry in the USA paying below-livable wages? Reparations!
We can't let society get away with this!
Theism is why we can't have nice things.
Is it just me, or whatever Britian touched seemed to collapse into civil war.
Palestine, Sri Lanka, India etc...
I think you Americans had the right idea of fighting them off early on.
Oh and for the record, I wouldn't have been able to vote 100 years ago, I want my slice of the pie.
Hey when your own countries screw you over thats very differant and not what im talking about. But yeah let me answer anyway. This is a personal problem unlike the underdevelopment of africa. It may affect a large number of people but it hasn't caused you to starve or lack a job etc. should you get something for it.. if you have been denied a job because of it then yes, if you have been denied any fundimental human rights because of it then yes. Personally if your state ever allows gay marrige then yes i think you should and even if they don't, The state denied you somthing based on sexual orientation that is discrimanation, and so far as i can see, for no reason. So yes if the state discrimanates then yes i think they should pay, but because they do they won't.
The differance between you and pineapple is you are affected by this (assuming you are affected by it), women got the vote way before she was born so i don't see how that has affected her. She has all the oppitunities any guy has she just has to work for them like any guy.
But really what im talking about is international screwing over of entire countries witch is quite differant imo.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
Sorry Tapey but the idea of any kind of reparations to Africa for anything is just silly. In your perfect world there might be a universal code of conduct that all nations are bound to follow. But it likely won't happen on Earth anytime soon. And what would the statute of limitations be on various parts of your Code of Conduct for Nations of Earth? Why should I or anyone else living today have to contribute toward reparations for something that happened in antiquity? My skin is white but I come from a long line of poor white trash. The only thing I have in common with the slave traders of old is my skin color. Is that enough to make me complicent? And you should realize that anything paid out by your or my government is actually being paid out by us...
Seriously, if you want to get worked up over how fucked up it is in Africa then do something to help them overcome all the bad shit you yourself listed that is holding them back now. If you want to be worked up over slavery, get worked up over ending it in the here and now. Slavery is alive and well in 2009...
Respectfully,
Lenny
"The righteous rise, With burning eyes, Of hatred and ill-will
Madmen fed on fear and lies, To beat and burn and kill"
Witch Hunt from the album Moving Pictures. Neal Pert, Rush
Have two slices of pie as you shouldn't be allowed to vote now.
Seriously, jk.
Respectfully,
Lenny
"The righteous rise, With burning eyes, Of hatred and ill-will
Madmen fed on fear and lies, To beat and burn and kill"
Witch Hunt from the album Moving Pictures. Neal Pert, Rush
That was Cologne in 1945:
That is Cologne today:
Africa's problem isn't her history, or that Africa wouldn't already get a lot of help. Africa's problem are her corrupt and incomptent governments. And I never heard that you heal corrupt systems by putting more money into them.
-----------------------------------------------------
Who asks me inappropiate questions also has to live with the answers I may give.
You just conveniently forgot that you want people who 'benefit from something you had no control over' to bear some moral obligation to help? Incredulous! 'Scott free'! You're amazing.
BigUniverse wrote,
"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."
slavery is not what I get worked up about, it is just what people have focused on here even though it is the smallest part really, the only reason i mentioned slavery is because of its side effect of underdeveloping africa and sending africa into technological regression. It is not because they took people away from africa that i think compensation is justified (although pointless atm) it is the side effect of underdeveloping africa. Yes im fully aware anything governments pay out comes from the people but i think his is something "people" should be happy to pay for. I could ask an unfair question like what would you rather have 100 dollars/ pounds more or a stable africa? But i won't because it isn't that simple and wouldn't at all be fair and propbably wouldn't get a stable africa.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
History didn't lead to what is there today... funny argument (joke).... but i see your point other places have over come being recked why cannot africa but in all seriousness yes you are 100% correct the corrupt and icomptent governments are a huge problem and well for the most part not caused by the outside world but it is the main reason i don't think africa should just be given a sum of money.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
Well you sort of did ask so please allow me to retort.
Seriously, I would love for Africa to be a healthy, thriving and wonderful place. But not at the expense of my wallet and definitely not as punishment for what some rich people did a long time ago.
Your frustration is very plain to see all over this thread. You will never, ever get a nation to make reparations and as you very clearly observe, it wouldn't change anything anyway. So figure out if there is anything YOU can do and give that a go. Whatever you decide to do may make very infinitesimal difference in the grand scope of life on Earth. But you'll have the self satisfaction to know that you are at least trying to help things...
Respectfully,
Lenny
"The righteous rise, With burning eyes, Of hatred and ill-will
Madmen fed on fear and lies, To beat and burn and kill"
Witch Hunt from the album Moving Pictures. Neal Pert, Rush
If you want to, although i have said many times charity is pointless for africa atm
Why thank you but amazing isn't what i would call it and im sure neither do you
poor choice of words il admit but either way it doesn't hurt my agrument that there i a moral obligation to help. You have already agreed that everyone has a moral obligation to stop people suffering (if im remembering correctly) so europe does have a moral obligation to help africa but not because of what happened in the past? correct (sorry that bit is just for my benefit to see where you stand on that)
Technology spreads regardless (dispite europes best efforts during history) Hey if it had gone down that way i would say europe etc was the good guy. but "might" is pointless better to stick to what is, for all we know africa could of had some miricle and out developed the rest of the world it "might" of happened.
yes but you benefit far more from expoting manufactured goods. instead africa exports the raw materials and imports those same materials just with "skill" added at a higher price that doesn't make for a successfull economy. since you are confused about what canda exports here
http://www.investorsfriend.com/Canadian%20GDP%20Canadian%20imports%20and%20exports.htm
There is quite abit that is not raw materials. over half isn't raw materials as i count.
Fair enough, it is a common misconseption, where i get my info from is a book called "Europe and the roots of african underdevelopment" very good book actually i recommend it (warning marxist book alert
) , but as i cannot just upload it as i have the hard copy this will have to do. btw i said "slightly better yes not well better though." e.g. europe had better production just not far better like you said.
I have already admited that in some way yes europe was far better than africa and you have named but a few of those ways. lack of coherent nations and empires... you are going to either explain what yo mean by that or back down on that one, there were quite a few. how about benin? ashanti? kongo? zimbabwe? yoruba? to name a few. these were "empires" and "nations".
Perhaps not writing as we know it but hey there was something
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Writing_systems_of_Africa
I really don't know anything about philosophy in africa in pre modern times so il have to conceed there.
ask yourself what is science.
Well i do suggest africa would be better off if it hadn't been for slavery and colonisation (not in terms of technology) it would be simalar in technology terms though, tech has a nasty habit of spreading weather through trade or good will or domanation of an entire continent. I just wish it hadn't ben the last one. But the point is we don't know what could of happened but we do know what did happen. but really i don't want to argue with you, its fine that we disagree really, it gives me what i wanted from this topic
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
I realise that, no not from my wallet is always goping to prevail. but if it were me who dictated everything i would say say trade not charity, that way everyone gains, hardly punishment
.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
Fuck that. Bad enough having individual idiots think they are owed for what never happened to them, much worse to take such stupidity international. Are we going to sue Italy because Britain was enslaved by the Romans next?
If punative measures cannot be taken against the SPECIFIC people involved, then there should be no measures taken at all. If any are taken, then all you've done is victimise another innocent group, and now you have two pissed off groups instead of one. Hardly a solution. The justice systems we have built figured this out, at least to an extent, centuries ago.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
...Actually, I'm not interested in arguing because I've been the only one doing the arguing. What you've been doing is not answering the important questions.
BigUniverse wrote,
"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."
...
HOLY SHIT THEY DIDN'T EVEN HAVE COLOUR IN 1945!!!
Don't take it personally, or the wrong way. I am all for helping Africa and getting rid of all its corrupt leaders. But this won't do it. It will simply piss off those who were compensated (because it can't possibly be enough to make up for the enslavement of your family), as well as those who did the compensating (Well I never enslaved anyone, and that was decades/centuries ago anyway). As an ironic twist, it also pisses off everyone else (why are they getting money? they had it good! MY family was *insert random act of cruelty from history*, where's MY money?!).
It's simply impractical.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
lol sorry i actually wrote something really stupid, so edited it out
...Actually, I'm not interested in arguing because I've been the only one doing the arguing. What you've been doing is not answering the important questions.
I argue that europe ( if you want countries then england, france portuagal, germany,spain. you get the idea the ones involved, i thought it was kind of obvious) screwed africa over, and are morally obliged to help set things right. nothing hard there. Why morally obliged because they are in the good position today because of screwing over africa (and others) and are still benefiting from it. In other words they have alot now because of screwing others over, on a personal level you enjoy the quality of life you do because of what happened, that for me is enough for europe to be morally obliged to help, yes quite a bit of that is speculation but i don't think it is that unreasonable (look at the growth rates of the countries benefiting from this and compare it to others that didn't, the ones that benefited were th ones that drove technology forward unless im mistaken). look at the smaller european coutries that didn't colonise notice how they are still better than african coutries? Now look at england what natural resources do they have of there own? do you think they would be in there current position withiout any of this?
Repayment the reason why i don't say what it should be is because I don't think it should happen (it is pointless atm) i have said this many times. So i feel no need to say what it should be as I don't think it should happen.
reply don't reply, just though i would let you know, all in one place instead of it being all over the place.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.