Why didn't Africans ever establish any society on par with the ones in Eurasia? -

FatalTater

Fattest Among Thousands, Altogether Lethargic
kiwifarms.net
Several countries tried to colonize Africa and failed, too. English, Dutch, French...

Can a whole continent be cursed?
 

biozeminadae1

kiwifarms.net
The african coast is a larger landmass than the entirity of europe (if you count most of russia as part of asia, which is about as unlivable anyways).

This image gives a good idea of approximate sizes.

View attachment 2032048
Siberia is much more fertile than it seems. It's just that communist and post-communist shithole Russia is yet to take advantage of it. There's also the fact that the land has been habitable since before the 19th century, unlike inner Africa.

And while the coasts are large, you have to factor in the availability of fresh water and fertile land, which would have been relatively difficult to acquire. Those people that would make cities or proto-cities would still have been largely isolated as well, limiting trade and thus ideas of technological progress.
 

Helvítis Túristi

True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
To the people bringing up the admixture from other hominid species, the Sub-Saharan Africans are not pure. .5% of their DNA comes from neanderthals and 2%(if I remember right) came from an archaic unknown hominid species. Take that for what you will.
 

Techpriest

Praise the Machine Spirits
kiwifarms.net
Every map projection is shitty; Peters no more so than Mercator that people are familiar with and a good shock to the system. Comparing sizes is much more accurate in the Peters projection, if I'm not mistaken, but teach me more if you're a map afficianado or expert or whatever.
It’s more accurate but the polar distortions make Europe look smaller than it actually is. Europe is about 1/3rd the size of africa. The Gail-Peters projection suffers the same problems every cylinder projection does.
 

ClownBrew

Drink the brew!
kiwifarms.net
Okay, for the smooth brains who keep disliking my comments

I'm not one of those neggers but I think I know what might be racking up those disagrees.

You go off on really long winded and smug lectures without actually telling anyone where you get any of your info. Then you make bitchy remarks at anyone who dares to talk back. You are doing everything sane people hate about both leftos and academics.

I'd be much more open to believing you about Wakanda if you could say it more neutrally and then prove it.
 

Haim Arlosoroff

Archpolitician June Lapercal
kiwifarms.net
Low IQ: Blacks are too dumb, lol

Midwit IQ: The nations of the world developed according to their geography. The largest climatic zones extend east to west and not south to north, and so it follows that the ideal plants for human cultivation grow apart and differentiate within the same climatic zone but separated by vast distances allowing for the maximum farming viability in the random genetic variation. Having become a farming civilization, the densities and sedentary lifestyles allow for labor specialization much as with the plants. Africa lacked the large amount of plants suitable for farming, and so herding and hunter-gathering persisted.

Eventually the technological growth from specialized labor refining their fields leads tools from Stone to natural metals like Copper to alloy metals like Bronze. Unfortunately Bronze is a social limit for it is made of Copper and Tin, and while Copper is prevalent Tin is not. While there are a few sources of Tin in Central Asia, namely in Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Afghanistan, that show signs of having been exploited starting around 2000 BC, the Bantu culture of Zimbabwe are known to have actively mined, smelted and traded tin between the 11th and 15th centuries AD.

Whilst terrestrial iron is naturally abundant, its high melting point of 1,538 °C (2,800 °F) placed it out of reach of common use until the end of the second millennium BC. Tin's low melting point of 231.9 °C (449.4 °F) and copper's relatively moderate melting point of 1,085 °C (1,985 °F) placed them within the capabilities of the Neolithic pottery kilns, which date back to 6000 BC and were able to produce temperatures greater than 900 °C (1,650 °F). A process called a bloomery was used to produce small amounts of iron which was a pit or chimney with heat-resistant walls made of earth, clay, or stone. Near the bottom, one or more pipes (made of clay or metal) enter through the side walls. These pipes allow air to enter the furnace, either by natural draught or forced with bellows. An opening at the bottom of the bloomery may be used to remove the bloom, or the bloomery can be tipped over and the bloom removed from the top. These however produced about 1 lb of low quality iron with a huge waste product called pig iron, which bronze age civilization didn't think was mostly worth it. This led to a long period from 3300–1200 BCE of civilization which stagnated until environmental disasters coupled with mass migration forced the surviving civilizations to adopt into the Iron Age or be destroyed. Africa was largely free of the environmental damage and the marauding bands of Italians(?) called the Sea Peoples.

The result of poor plants with which to farm, early metals to mine, and a lack of cultural competitiveness between tribes and eventually nations there would never have arisen any societies on par with eurasian ones.

Galaxy Brain IQ: The races of the earth are mere breeding populations with a shared sense of destiny. Without a fertile soil to florish and a virile competitive collection with nations around it, no area of the world could have developed such a people which could have boldly stepped into the world stage as a competitor and all nations would be as backward as the black given the same homeland. Africa mothers and breeds its races only into dumb highly material peoples, so not even the wheel was invented until late 19th century.
 

Slap47

Hehe xd
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
History is filled with extinct species and people. The better question is, why didn't africans go extinct like other people and species? Why do they thrive without influential civilisation? Why was the subjugation of the americas so much more succesful than that of africa?

Barely edited autism screed.

How did the pilgrims fight back the overwhelming hoards of savages and prevail? How did a couple of hundred mercenaries conquer an empire all by themselves? The answer is that they did not. The overwhelming majority of native peoples were wiped out by diseases like smallpox, measles, and plague. Most of the pre-19th century conquests were made possible exploiting the structures of prexisting centrally planned empires and sheer numbers.

The initial English conquests relied heavily on divide and conquer during hard times. When the pilgrims found the Wampanoag they were decimated by disease from traders, surrounded on all sides and looking for an ally. The Wampanoag allied with English and they worked together to create a thriving community and commit genocides against shared enemies. The English began to outnumber the natives through their insane 16 kid families and conflict arose as the ancestors of the initial settlers found themselves no longer feeling indebted to the natives for protecting them. Similar stories happened in most other colonies.

The Spanish conquistadors also exploited hard times. The Aztec and Inca empires were insanely powerful, but also centrally planned states surrounded by enemies. Cortez found literally hundreds of thousands of warriors willing to fight alongside him (some of these tribes hated the Aztec so much that they were Spanish loyalists until its end in the 19th century). Cortez crippled the Aztec state by capturing their emperor and the most successful part of his conquest was him coming back after spreading a healthy dosage of smallpox during his initial rampage. However, disease's affects are best shown with the Inca. An Incan emperor died of a plague he got from traders and the Inca did their traditional ritual of parading his corpse across the entirety of the empire and letting local leaders touch it. Another Incan emperor died and this caused a civil war that just so happened to happen alongside Pizarro's arrival.

After the 17th century the English could rely on sheer numbers and the Spanish on controlling the systems set up by the prexisting empires. The English had overwhelming numbers, and that made all of the difference. By the the 1650s tribes had whole armies armed with guns and western natives had been riding horses for more than century. This numbers issue was not helped by tribes like the Iroquois going on a rampage that decimated most native populations. The Spanish barely governed their insanely huge empire. In most viceroyalties they let petty kingdoms exist basically untouched well into the 1750s. Minor efforts to weaken these kingdoms through the Bourbon reforms lead to rebellions that threatened the long barely profitable empire. Much of the Spanish empire was natives kings being allowed to do whatever they want with a small tithe and governors using the prexisting labor systems of the fallen empires to fill mines.

The African stories are similar, but with them technology plays a much bigger role. Sure the slave trade decimated populations and fueled wars around guns, slaves and distilled spirits... but, even with that the Africans still had strong states, economies and professional armies. African story is pretty simple - Europeans just gunned down the core of professional warriors ruling the empires and seized control of prexisting slave/feudal economies. Sure the Africans had guns, but they weren't being sold the best guns, 19th century gun boats or cannons.

*Side Story*
What's particularly interesting about the American empires is that they had support from non-white subjects because those subjects saw the empires as a source of protection.
The actual rebellions that lead to Independence in Latin America were lead by Crillo white elites who were tired of the Peninsulares elites who thought themselves better. The natives often sided with Spain to preserve the traditional order. The same happened with the United States as a major part of that rebellion was the British trying to restrict settlement to keep the colony manageable. Most NA tribes sided with the British for both the Revolutionary War and War of 1812. The turncoats who sided with the colonizers in Africa also held strong with the Europeans and in some cases still do.
 

Lemmingwise

The capture of the last white wizard, decolorized
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
African story is pretty simple - Europeans just gunned down the core of professional warriors ruling the empires and seized control of prexisting slave/feudal economies. Sure the Africans had guns, but they weren't being sold the best guns, 19th century gun boats or cannons.
This is mostly true for the americas as well; the selling of older guns.

I do think IQ plays a role that such a strategy was even possible; it certainly didn't or could've worked in China or Japan.
 

Techpriest

Praise the Machine Spirits
kiwifarms.net
This is mostly true for the americas as well; the selling of older guns.

I do think IQ plays a role that such a strategy was even possible; it certainly didn't or could've worked in China or Japan.
No, the reason it didn’t work there was because there was a monolithic state with a monopoly on the goods the Europeans wanted. This monopoly was guarded to the hilt. The difference between the armies of the Qing and European powers wasn’t that different until around the late 18th century, and the states were able to limit the amount of information the Europeans could access regarding them.

Theres a fantastic book on the Opium War and the lead up to the whole affair, Twilight of the Imperium, that covers a bunch of the factors that led to the start of the century of humiliation and the European involvement in China.
 
Last edited:

Bosmadden

kiwifarms.net
Coping white man answer: because Africans have an average IQ of 70, only Aussie Abos are dumber, and they're like really dumb motherfuckers

Midwit knownothing answer: Africans can literally pick fruit off the ground. There's no need to strive and work to survive harsh winters. Black men are smart that way.

Truth: The Kangz in Africa were all Wakandans back in the olden times. They had space ships and hover cars and shit. Then the first white man appeared. He suffered from a terrible genetic condition robbing him of melanin and dropping his IQ down to 130 from the average African's 250. Being God fearing people the Africans took pity on him, and instead of killing him on sight for being an abomination, they let him live (big mistake). Despite being very dumb the white man started recruiting more of his kind and before you know it destroyed all the cool space ships and ran off to the Caucus mountains or else face the wrath of the black man. However Africa never really recovered and despite the 250 IQ all the Africans had to live in mud huts and eat their own shit for a pastime.
 

Yinci

Another Lain PfP
kiwifarms.net
And by Africans i mean the sub-saharan kind.
I don't think any society is truely real and is just a total physiological figment no matter how may times we draw it on a map. People live where they live and do what they do and the more of them you can tax the bigger you oh so great historical empire is.
 

Cool Dog

A goodboi denied his Wendy's
kiwifarms.net
And by Africans i mean the sub-saharan kind.
Big detail, I dont even consider africa as a single continent since with the sahara in the middle we're basically talking 2 effectively separated continents given the size

In ancient times it was easier to go from europe all the way to china through central asia than to cross the sahara or navigate around it, it was that big of a barrier

Subsaharans were for most of history essentially separated from the rest of mankind once the ice age ended and the sahara went from being another savannah with some lakes in the middle to the huge ass deathtrap is has been for the last 10000 years or so, and it only got worse every year since then. Its a desert as big as western europe

Contact is a big thing and being isolated like subsaharans were is a major handicap. Consider northern europeans got into the iron age but never figured out writting until the romans arrived. Meanwhile the mayans and aztec did get writing but were barely getting into the bronze age when the spanish arrive and had to fight them with stone clubs

On a side note did any subsaharan tribes ever got past the stone age? the bronze age? talking pre-contact here
 
Last edited:
'Africans' are dumb and lazy. Germans, English, and Japanese are all workaholics who love working more then they need to survive. Africans will bate while files cover their anorexic bodies waiting for the king or lord or what ever ruler to feed them for free. As a natural result Subsaharan African leaders are very resilient in the face of the starving masses.

If you too dumb to farm or hunt you are too dumb to live.
 

Yinci

Another Lain PfP
kiwifarms.net
'Africans' are dumb and lazy. Germans, English, and Japanese are all workaholics who love working more then they need to survive. Africans will bate while files cover their anorexic bodies waiting for the king or lord or what ever ruler to feed them for free. As a natural result Subsaharan African leaders are very resilient in the face of the starving masses.

If you too dumb to farm or hunt you are too dumb to live.
Kinda just my own reply but also a criticism talking about how Asians and Whites somehow work harder than Africans and Latinos. For me I see the Industrial world as it's own think and is spread from Siberia to the Island of Japan where the Japanese government was able to make it's people utilize it. China was highly conservative and over populated and prevent the spread of industrialism into Asia. Africa is a desolate but full of civilizational history on it's frontiers, Just nothing significant like in Europe or Asia.

I hate this point White Supremacist make becuase they want to controll me to increase the population of white people and I spit in that efforts face.
 

Lemmingwise

The capture of the last white wizard, decolorized
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Kinda just my own reply but also a criticism talking about how Asians and Whites somehow work harder than Africans and Latinos. For me I see the Industrial world as it's own think and is spread from Siberia to the Island of Japan where the Japanese government was able to make it's people utilize it. China was highly conservative and over populated and prevent the spread of industrialism into Asia. Africa is a desolate but full of civilizational history on it's frontiers, Just nothing significant like in Europe or Asia.

I hate this point White Supremacist make becuase they want to controll me to increase the population of white people and I spit in that efforts face.

You don't need to be a whale supremacist to want whales to not go extinct. I don't want african pygmy's to go extinct either, but the bantu will probably slowly make them extinct.

What do you mean with african frontiers? Things like the dutch building settlements there?


Also I think you need to watch this and think about this.

 

jje100010001

kiwifarms.net
Siberia is much more fertile than it seems. It's just that communist and post-communist shithole Russia is yet to take advantage of it. There's also the fact that the land has been habitable since before the 19th century, unlike inner Africa.

And while the coasts are large, you have to factor in the availability of fresh water and fertile land, which would have been relatively difficult to acquire. Those people that would make cities or proto-cities would still have been largely isolated as well, limiting trade and thus ideas of technological progress.
Problem with Siberia is that until the 19th century, it was hard to get to, and is still hard to get to in this day. Things may get better once the polar ice recedes, but that's still a long ways off, and logistics will still be rather problematic in Siberia (long distances to Russian consumer/production base).

Plus the fact that it's a massive stretch of cold, dark, untamed, mosquito-ladden forests and wetlands (the area is very poorly drained), and you can see why colonization is limited- there just weren't enough people to throw at it until the forests were cleared, the stumps pulled, and the swamps drained (excess population was better suited towards colonization projects closer to the core territories)- same thing with the Canadian boreal belt- there are pockets of fertile lands, but the seasons are just too brutal for most people to want to have a go at it.

Today, Canadian, Russian, and Chinese demographics today are no longer conductive towards any massive colonization efforts, and environmental movements would likely attempt to restrict any further development as well. IMO the most promising use of these lands would be as grazing grounds for cattle, rather than for intensive agriculture.

I guess one of the ironies would be that these forests were once mostly steppelands, until the megafauna were hunted to extinction.
 
Last edited:
Top