Yeah. Hollywood finally made a movie in old Africa and guess what? Bad guys are still white! π
The movie is about poor African tribes fighting against evil white invaders. Who could have guessed it, huh?
That sums up the Western World regarding so much for so long. Yeah.
'Scramble for Africa' in your school curriculum?
Europe civilized Africa. The most colonized countries are the richest and the least colonized the poorest.
shareSad but true.
shareAlmost every part of Africa was colonized by different countries. Belgium, Spain, Germany, Portugal, Spain and Italy all held different parts at different points.
The only two areas that werenβt are modern day Ethiopia and Liberia. Ethiopia is 7th out of the 54 countries in Africa in terms of GDP. Liberia is 43rd.
Also, a countries wealth isnβt an indication of civilization. Itβs an indication of economic output based on infrastructure and resources. Countries can have bartering systems and still be more civilized than foreign invaders who pillaged, raped and murdered to exploit another countryβs resources.
Your typical justification for white supremacy is idiotic and inaccurate.
Wrong you idiot. This paper shows the more colonized areas ended up richer:
https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w18162/w18162.pdf
Nice trick using total GDP instead of GDP per capita. Ethiopia is 33rd and Liberia is 47th in terms of GDP per capita. Both of them are poorer than average.
South Africa is most colonized an it's among the wealthiest. (the wealthiest if you ignore oil rich ones like Gabon and diamond rich Botswana)
According to every history of the world map on Youtube Europe was grey as well as coloured much sooner than Africa and Africa didn't become fully coloured until it was colonized by Europe:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6Wu0Q7x5D0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymI5Uv5cGU4&t
White supremacy is an objective conclusion everyone arrives at looking at the world, provided he does not have an indoctrination-ally installed ideological filter.
Try again moron.
What do you mean finally? This would not be the first movie about old Africa. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086798/fullcredits/?ref_=tt_ql_cl
shareWell, and what's wrong with that?
It's historically accurate. Deal with it.
I'm glad that they finally started to have some African stories, maybe now they will stop having black female Viking leaders ...
its calling out colonialism like Avatar(2009) and its Upcoming Sequel The Way of Water if you cant handle the hard truth then you are a racist Colonizer like them
sharePerhaps it's you the one that can't handle the truth: every ethnic group did the exact same... and even worse. Blacks killed each other or took them as slaves for centuries in Africa. They were way, but way more bloody than whites.
shareNo whites did it worse stop reading those Based MAGA Textbooks with racist outdated information
shareSeethe and cope bitch.
sharethats not history be proud of its history to be Condemned Bitch
shareit's ok to be white.
shareyeah but as a caucasian male im not proud of what my race has done I'm letting this pay for my generations mistake I'm choosing to be better you should to Eff Columbus and Every Warmongerig Colonizer
shareTake your happy ass back to Europe if you don't like Columbus.
shareNot your European stop presuming i was born here in the states its Indigenous Peoples Day the true Americans how about stop hanging onto to old ideals and BE BETTER
shareWell me being Italian, I can tell you Africans were not kind to my people, and other southern European countries. You sound like you think that you're smarter then you are. Go hide out in your Caucus mountain with your tail between your leg Joogle.ππΌ
share[deleted]
Go hide out in your Caucus mountain with your tail between your leg Joogle.ππΌ
I'm not hiding I care about equality dude Columbus was born in Genoa Italy dude he was a colonizer and reviled his Name is mud like John Wilkes Booth, Donald Trump , Adolf Hitler and your former ruler Benito Mussolini, your the coward
If you're going to try and sound smart at least use the proper grammar Joogle. As for Columbus he left Italy and sailed with the Spaniards. So you're 0 for 2 on that. As for my former ruler who was a dictator, the people stoned his body after he was defeated, it's not like he was supported for what he was doing. 0 for 3, damn you're terrible at this, not only a coward but an ignorant fool also. Broken clock is right twice a day so keep trying you will evetually get one of your bullshit opinions to stick. ππΌ
Later Joogle
> As for Columbus he left Italy and sailed with the Spaniards.
still violated the native women and was a textbook colonizer and Columbus day has been renamed indigenous peoples day thank goodness
> not only a coward but an ignorant fool also. Broken clock is right twice a day so keep trying you will evetually get one of your bullshit opinions to stick
your the coward for supporting Rapist Theives and Murderers and white supremacy YOUR THE COWARD
Where do you see in any of my posts of saying or writing that I support that? Piece of shit coward you are making lies just to fit your agenda. That's how you live your life you deserve to be back in those mountains. Joogle the Coward patrolling the moviechat forums spreading lies when he gets called out on his bullshit. Maybe you need to get laid, you shouldn't be a virgin your whole life (but I guess when you're a coward that happens).Now go beat off to Trump while you search these forums racist caucasoid.ππ½
shareits Indigenous Peoples Day the true Americans
I don't remember Genghis Han being white. I don't remember the Aztecs (a plague on the previous tribes in Tenochtitlan) being white.
The Chines and the Japanese had some evil empires in Asia. The Persians, The Ottomans had not been better.
So maybe it's just some ignorance on your part :D
Read about the Comanche atrocities against the Pawnees, Osages, Blackfeet, Kiowas (not to mention what they did to Mexicans). Enough to make you thank God for the Catholic Monarchs of Spain
sharethat too.
i didn't plan to list all nations that did the same or worse than the white race,
You are clearly a well read student of history and I appreciated your point. Neoliberal American scholars think Western Europeans had a monopoly on bloody conquest. For me, the true question is: whose conquest actually amounted to something of benefit for humanity? The manifest answer is the great modern civilizations established by European conquest of the Americas; a new world of individual rights, an ever expanding circle of liberty for all races, religions, and creeds, and twice in the Twentieth Century, a savior of the world from totalitarian barbarity.
shareUnfortunately those invaders were too busy killing and enslaving the locals to make a new world of individual rights, an ever expanding circle of liberty for all races, religions, and creeds. Unless it was just for the invaders.
shareYou act as if time suspended in 1492 while Iβm talking about the civilization that culminated centuries later from European discovery, exploration, and colonization of the New World. Today, immigrants of every race and origin are desperate to come to North America and Western Europe while absolutely no one is clamoring to get into societies of Asia, Africa or South America
shareSo you're saying that Asia (Japan, South Korea etc), Africa (SA) and countries in South America have no immigration? That is a rather stupid claim to make.
shareLeftists only know what their handlers tell them..
shareYeah this movie looks great, thanks for promoting it π
Viola Davis as a kick ass warrior? Sign me up for that shit!
I dunno. There's something a bit odd that you can't acknowledge perhaps the biggest event in West Africa over the past 500 years was Europeans invading to capture black slaves.
shareThat's a big lie. It's well known that whites didn't capture the slaves but they bought the slaves from the Arabs or even from other blacks.
The actual, massive colonization of Africa has happened AFTER whites outlawed slavery.
Does the abolition of slavery really matter so much when the colonizers are able to maim or kill the locals with impunity? King Leopold made the Congo population serfs; they worked the rubber plantations. The King's Force Publique (black soldiers, white officers and NCO's) kept the slave labors in line to maximize profits for the King.
shareBuying stolen property (or people) makes the buyer part of the problem, part of the evil. Do you think anyone at all would capture people for the purposes of slavery if no one was willing to buy them to use as slaves?
share" Do you think anyone at all would capture people for the purposes of slavery if no one was willing to buy them to use as slaves?"
Do you think that there were NO slaves prior to the Arab slave trade???
Slavery has existed far longer than most nations. Are you going to answer my question?
shareYou just answered your own question.
And your question is quite stupid on its own: one can enslave people just to use them, not necessarily to sell them.
SO YES, "people would capture people for the purposes of slavery to use as slaves" - it has been done all over history, there was NO NEED for the Europeans to come and buy them for them to enslave each other. And you even acknowledge that
To put it the other way: if the Africans wouldn't have sold people into slavery the Europeans wouldn't have bought them. So, the main blame is not on the Europeans, is on the ones DOING the enslavement ...
If you DON'T sell something I CANNOT buy it from you. Savvy?
So if you, personally, buy a slave, it is okay because you are not the one selling them? Is it that way with drugs too?
I want to see an answer from you, not claim that I answered it. You need to man up and put in your own words, what evidence you have that Europeans did not capture their own slaves.
Yes, most African slaves owned by Europeans were captured by other Africans then sold to slave traders, but some slaves were directly captured by Europeans. I hardly see why this makes a difference.
https://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/history-of-slavery/west-africa#section--the-capture-and-sale-of-enslaved-africans
"So if you, personally, buy a slave, it is okay because you are not the one selling them? Is it that way with drugs too?"
No, I would personally never buy a slave, or drugs. It would NOT be ok! Not sure about you since you're using that argument.
But apparently for you is ok to enslave people and sell slaves as long as you don't buy them?
You ask and you answer? I like that!!
"Yes, most African slaves owned by Europeans were captured by other Africans then sold to slave traders," bingo, so you know the answer.
"but some slaves were directly captured by Europeans." just some, the minimum, we are talking about the general picture here, the Atlantic slave trade wouldn't even had been profitable with few slaves captured by the Europeans without the bulk that was traded to Europeans so without that trade it might had never happened.
"I hardly see why this makes a difference." so you don't see the difference between actually enslaving a human being probably killing more in the process (and selling them) and buying them?
Well, in my book there is difference between stealing goods and buys stolen goods, as an example. Not saying that humans are goods, just putting into perspective which of the acts is worse.
But it's funny that you continue with this reasoning like ONLY the Europeans are somehow in the wrong for the Atlantic slave trade and the African and Arab slavers and slave traders did NOTHNIG wrong.
ALTHOUGH you acknowledge that "Slavery has existed far longer than most nations" and that the majority of the slaves send over the Atlantic were traded to the Europeans as already slave you insist to blame only the Europeans.
Let me tell you something: if the roles would had been reversed the Africans would have done the same to Europeans. Actually they already did that in Spain ... read about the Moorish invasion in 711 and the enslavement of white population, plus the raids on the coastal Europe by the Moors and the enslavement of the population.
You see, I'm not trying to absolve the Europeans for their sins, but you are trying to blame it only on Europeans ...
In the 15th century, Europeans would capture slaves for themselves. But when some African countries began resisting, they switched to buying black slaves from other African nations.
So your evidence that Europeans only bought slaves from other Africans is what exactly?
"In the 15th century, Europeans would capture slaves for themselves. But when some African countries began resisting, they switched to buying black slaves from other African nations."
So you agree with that? And then you ask.
"So your evidence that Europeans only bought slaves from other Africans is what exactly?"
A bit confused, are you? You basically agree with the statement and the you ask what's the evidence?
My evidence is history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade#African_participation_in_the_slave_trade
I know, you will say "Wikipedia" and dismiss it :D
https://www.history.com/news/african-diaspora-trans-atlantic-slave-trade
"The trans-Atlantic slave trade was one leg of a three-part system known as the triangular trade. The forming of the triangle began when European ships, carrying firearms and manufactured goods, sailed to Africa, where the commodities were traded for enslaved men, women and children. Next, the same ships transported the human cargo across the Atlantic Ocean to the Americas. "
You claimed in part; "It's well known that whites didn't capture the slaves". But Europeans captured slaves themselves and also bought from others. Either method of acquiring slaves is evil.
I'm asking what evidence you have that whites did not capture slaves. Going to keep avoiding an answer?
I frequently use Wikipedia as a reference, so I'm not going to dismiss it just because it is Wikipedia.
There is more to slave trading than the trans-Atlantic route. You need to read a lot more. Read more Wikipedia.
Here is an example of Europeans enslaving natives. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canary_Islands#After_the_conquest_and_the_introduction_of_slavery
Are you going to suggest that the French hired Arabs to enslave the natives on the Canary Island and then sell them to the french?
Do you forget where did we started from? Context my man is important.
And context was West Africa - the continent.
And the reason for it was that they were not able to capture those slaves because they couldn't venture inland.
Of course on the islands and there some enslavements but that's not what we were talking about. South America might be a better example for that.
Btw, from your wiki: "The method of forcibly relocating Africans to the Canary Islands in order to provide intensive labor" ...
Your evidence that "they" could not venture inland is what? You make lots of claims, but your evidence for a lack of European involvement in capturing slaves sucks.
One of your links above says in part; "central role played by ruling African states in the capture and sale of fellow Africans to European tradersβan estimated 90 percent of all captives."
So the other 10% were captured by who? Probably the European slavers captured the slaves themselves.
Why are you so insistent on depicting Europeans as mere traders in human flesh rather than the captors? Does it make them somehow "cleaner"?
No, you insist in shifting all the blame on Europeans in the hope of making the others "clean".
Remember what you said??? "If Europeans wouldn't buy them there would be no reason for slavery" although you acknowledge that slavery was a lot older than that, so you basically admit that's a strawman just to point ALL the blame on Europeans.
No, ALL OF THEM ARE GUILTY. Not just the Europeans but all nations had and traded slaves. Period. And as I said in a different post: if the role were reversed they would have happily enslaved all Europe, given the chance. Remember the moors, the ottomans, etc.
What makes the Europeans "cleaner" is that they started the abolishment of slavery. Hell, there are right now in Africa black slave owners and black slaves. A thing you WOULD NOT SEE in Europe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_contemporary_Africa
I said both the buyer and seller were evil slavers. I did not give all the blame to anyone; I said both were guilty. Show me where I do so, if you're going to keep insisting I said Europeans had all the blame.
European slavers are not cleaner just because their countrymen worked to abolish slavery. A slaver is a filthy human being no mater who they are and how you support their actions.
Slavery still exists in Europe and other continents even though it is illegal. https://www.thenewfederalist.eu/the-reality-of-modern-slavery-in-europe?lang=fr
That's illegal in Europe AND it's not quite slavery.
"European slavers are not cleaner" I didn't say that.
I said it makes the Europeans cleaner. Pay attention.
And if you would have paid attention you would have noticed that the context was me answering to a claim that puts the blame exclusively on Europeans that "biggest event in West Africa over the past 500 years was Europeans invading to capture black slaves." - which was not really that since we established that the bulk of the slaves were NOT captured by the Europeans.
Ok, so we both agree that all "sides" are to blame, not just the Europeans. I'm ok with that, thanks.