Why are the 10 Poorest Cities in the World all From Black Africa???

[Two Thumbs]

Margaret Sanger ring a bell? Margaret Sanger was a Leftist Democrat Progressive who wanted to do just that, not only in Africa, but also in America to purify and improve the black race. She was honored recently at a Democratic forum.

And they call republicans racists.

Ayn Rand was a nazi. So was Charles Lindbergh. But both are heroes to the right.

For all her faults, Sanger did enormous good for the poor. You can't say that for any rw hero.

she was a genocidal racist and a heroin to the left.

I'm not making shit up, but you are.

 

[Coyote]

Moved to appropriate forum.

 

[Pete7469]

African countries tend to elect people who are more concerned with enriching themselves rather than moving the nation forward. Perhaps tribal loyalties? Something like America is fast becoming.

I agree with this to some extent, but I think Africa, like so many quasi-colonial regions, are merely bit players in the global economy, much like the middle east, which is an energy chess piece for powerful nations.

Consider this. Our economy depends heavily on raw material and labor from all over the 3rd world. We depend on Africa for strategic minerals like chromium, cobalt, manganese and platinum (to name only 4) - as do other powerful nations.

Our goal is to have easy access to these resources. The biggest threat, for the USA, is when a particular leader wants to nationalize resources (meaning: he wants to use the resources for his own country's enrichment as opposed to giving them to foreign investors).

That's pseudointellectual liberal bullshit. Show me ONE despot who nationalized a resource for any other purpose beyond SELF enrichment.


To understand this look at Mosaddegh in Iran. He was democratically elected and wildly popular, but he refused to play ball with Western energy needs. He wanted his country to control their resources without foreign influence. So the USA, whose economy depends on middle east petroleum, took part in a coup to remove him. He was replaced by the brutal Shaw of Iran, who turned over his country's oil resources to the west (mostly UK and USA). [I can't complain since my lifestyle has been enriched by cheap energy]

Of course, liberals NEVER complain about cheap energy...

So in reality, we don't want strong democratic leaders who are inclined to put their nation's needs ahead of ours. We look for corruptible leaders who are willing to do our bidding with their resources. This is why Reagan initially poured so much money and weapons into the Hussein regime - because Hussein was a corrupt leader willing to be a chess piece for our needs. Unfortunately, like most corrupt leaders, he outlived his utility.

Are you really that daft? We sold weapons to both sides of Iraq/Iran. Our "foreign policy" of that goat fuck was "hopefully both sides will lose". You might be stunned to find out that's exactly what happened.

Also study how we used IMF Loans in the 80s. We would get poor nations, mostly from the global south, to take out large loans for "structural improvement". This tended to work only with corrupt dictators because honest leaders were often hesitant to mortgage their nation's future to foreign powers. After taking out the loan, the corrupt leader would predictably default (but get very generously rewarded). This default would put the nation into technical receivership and give western powers the ability to seize control over necessary assets like raw material, trade laws and anything else that allowed us to insert them into a global economy which primarily served the more powerful nations.

That is, our largest corporations, the one's who own many of our congressmen, benefit immensely from Taiwanese sweatshops. Remember: the whole point of capitalism is to get a higher return on investment - meaning cheap labor is key. In order to get ultra cheap sweatshop labor, you need to invest in freedom-hating dictators who keep their people living in hovels, making $5/day. The biggest threat to capital accumulation is when a freedom-loving, politically literate middle class sprouts up near a supply chain. These people drive up labor costs and they snoop around your smoke stakes and the chemicals you're dumping in the river. When this happens, you have to ship the jobs to communist China. Of course, in the front of the house you scare the serfs with stories about evil communists, but in the back of the house you set up a conveyor belt from communist China to Walmart (so you can get your TVs and toasters made for pennies). The point of political news coverage is to obscure this stuff with disinformation, and to keep people anesthetized with the culture war.

That was really all the mindless drivel I could tolerate reading. It hurt my brain to answer the stupid shit I addressed above.

Remove the child proof lids on household chemicals people... it needs to become a national priority.

 

[DriftingSand]

Food for thought:

1) All races have been on the planet for many, many centuries.
2) All races have had ample time to "step up to the plate" and prosper or at least vastly improve their condition.

When we step back and look into past history we will see that not all races have contributed equally to their own prosperity. Some have created wonderful architecture; rich music; awe-inspiring paintings; road systems; sewer systems; irrigation systems; vast farms that feed thousands; intricate machinery; etc. They have made vast headway in the fields of medicine; mathematics; language; science; etc.

Others, on the other hand, have created very little in comparison. I realize that it's not politically correct to recognize these facts but I'm a realist and simply can't help it.

 

[DriftingSand]

Because Africa was the last of the world to be colonized by westerners, Africa had the least contact with the principles of western civilization that create wealth and prosperity.

What an idiotic and misguided statement.

The people of Africa.....and for that matter China, India, Asia, and the Middle East.....all had functioning and vibrant civilizations before the Europeans invaded and destroyed their way of life.

Basically, enslaving the people and stealing their natural resources.

And forcing the indigenous people into poverty and servitude to their European colonial masters for centuries. ..

And yet, which are the nations that are thriving? Those who have had prolonged contact with western ideas. Those we are struggling the most the ones that had the shortest contact with colonial powers. Their prior civilizations don't have relevance to their current prosperity.

My question is this: Why should a third world nation have contact with the western world in order to prosper?

 

[ShootSpeeders]

]

You do realize IQ tests are not a test of intelligence, they are a test of a culture. You would fail a Japanese IQ test.

.

Is that so.? Maybe the verbal questions, but the ones involving math or spatial relationships are the same in all languages.

BTW - if it's all about culture why do asian-americans do as well on IQ tests as white americans while black americans always bring up the rear.? In fact that's true on all standardized tests.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Food for thought:

1) All races have been on the planet for many, many centuries.
2) All races have had ample time to "step up to the plate" and prosper or at least vastly improve their condition.

When we step back and look into past history we will see that not all races have contributed equally to their own prosperity. Some have created wonderful architecture; rich music; awe-inspiring paintings; road systems; sewer systems; irrigation systems; vast farms that feed thousands; intricate machinery; etc. They have made vast headway in the fields of medicine; mathematics; language; science; etc.

Others, on the other hand, have created very little in comparison. I realize that it's not politically correct to recognize these facts but I'm a realist and simply can't help it.

And africa is the worst. They don't have the brains to make a first world country. Hell, they can't even maintain a first world country after they steal one from the whites that built it. Look at the incredible collapse of zimbabwe over the last 35 years. Or the Congo over the last 50. And South Africa is now going the same route.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

J
Of course, when women and blacks were given the same opportunities as white men, they proved that they had the intellectual equipment to thrive.

HAHA. They proved no such thing. That's why america is awash in affirmative action programs. You give equal opportunity to blacks and women and they do nothing with it. They need special treatment.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Moved to appropriate forum.

Hey einstein. Why was this moved to the europe board? USMB has an africa board.

 

[Pogo]

It is generally agreed now that Humanity first emerged in Central Africa. So, it seems fair to ask why, after all this time, can they still not feed themselves over there?

And also, why, after a half century of the Great Society and the War on Poverty, can they still not feed themselves in Detroit and Chicago?

I realize that just asking such questions will draw the race card, but don't they deserve to be asked and what is the answer?

There's nothing to hunt and gather in Detroit or Chicago. Well, except drugs.

Detroit is another story. It's called Liberalism Gone Wild. What happens when Democrats get everything they want. Obama is about to do the same to the US.

Cities aren't run by political ideologies, grasshopper.

 

[DriftingSand]

There's nothing to hunt and gather in Detroit or Chicago. Well, except drugs.

Detroit is another story. It's called Liberalism Gone Wild. What happens when Democrats get everything they want. Obama is about to do the same to the US.

Cities aren't run by political ideologies, grasshopper.

What? Have you ever heard of the cities of Communist Russia or Communist China or Communist Cuba or Communist North Korea? They all conform to political ideology.

 

[Pogo]

Detroit is another story. It's called Liberalism Gone Wild. What happens when Democrats get everything they want. Obama is about to do the same to the US.

Cities aren't run by political ideologies, grasshopper.

What? Have you ever heard of the cities of Communist Russia or Communist China or Communist Cuba or Communist North Korea? They all conform to political ideology.

A city isn't a big enough scale to exercise political ideology. You don't have an economy to run other than simply managing a budget. You don't have a constitution, you don't have a foreign policy. Basically you get to declare when the trash gets picked up and present a big fake key when some movie star passes through. That's hardly the stuff of Locke and Voltaire.

Just as all of your examples had to be qualified with not only the country they belong to but the country with an adjective in front of it. The city by itself... not so much.

 

[westwall]

J
Of course, when women and blacks were given the same opportunities as white men, they proved that they had the intellectual equipment to thrive.

HAHA. They proved no such thing. That's why america is awash in affirmative action programs. You give equal opportunity to blacks and women and they do nothing with it. They need special treatment.

Tell that to the Tuskegee airmen.

 

[GHook93]

This has the potential to be interesting if you all can address the OP and stop bickering like 3rd graders.

I don't believe Blacks are less intelligent than whites, just as I don't believe that Asians are smarted than whites. I have know enough intelligent blacks and unintelligent whites to lead me to believe that it's not genetic.

Call me racist if you want, but I see the never ending failure on the continent of Africa as a huge issue. Regardless of the excuse the leftist give, their continued failure has NOTHING to do with the white man and even less to do with colonialism of the past century. So the question remains, why are all TEN from Africa?

 

[Pogo]

This has the potential to be interesting if you all can address the OP and stop bickering like 3rd graders.

I don't believe Blacks are less intelligent than whites, just as I don't believe that Asians are smarted than whites. I have know enough intelligent blacks and unintelligent whites to lead me to believe that it's not genetic.

Call me racist if you want, but I see the never ending failure on the continent of Africa as a huge issue. Regardless of the excuse the leftist give, their continued failure has NOTHING to do with the white man and even less to do with colonialism of the past century. So the question remains, why are all TEN from Africa?

If you're just going to reject any reasoned answer that's not what you want to hear, then what's the point of engaging here?

 

[westwall]

This has the potential to be interesting if you all can address the OP and stop bickering like 3rd graders.

I don't believe Blacks are less intelligent than whites, just as I don't believe that Asians are smarted than whites. I have know enough intelligent blacks and unintelligent whites to lead me to believe that it's not genetic.

Call me racist if you want, but I see the never ending failure on the continent of Africa as a huge issue. Regardless of the excuse the leftist give, their continued failure has NOTHING to do with the white man and even less to do with colonialism of the past century. So the question remains, why are all TEN from Africa?

I think the reason why Africa is so backward is based on a LOT of reasons, including white imperialism. There are cultural reasons that started millennia ago. There are nutritional reasons that started millennia ago. There are religious reasons that started millennia ago. Add to those reasons the continuous attacks for slaves that began at least 5,000 years ago and then the imperialistic conquests and their impact and you have the beginnings of the reasons for the problem.

So long as people claim it is one thing or the other, and scream "racist" whenever they can't articulate an argument then nothing will change except the names of the victims.

 

[Tank]

Why are you deleting my posts?

 

[TheOldSchool]

Hi, you have received -1144 reputation points from GHook93.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
Go fuck yourself ******

Regards,
GHook93

 

[Roudy]

There's nothing to hunt and gather in Detroit or Chicago. Well, except drugs.

Detroit is another story. It's called Liberalism Gone Wild. What happens when Democrats get everything they want. Obama is about to do the same to the US.

Yeah. That was a measured and thoughtful comment. So glad you took the time.

Oh sorry, my bad, Obama is a great president, he has led this country to the promised land and restored our respect in the international community, how's that?

 

[Esmeralda]

And they call republicans racists.

Ayn Rand was a nazi. So was Charles Lindbergh. But both are heroes to the right.

For all her faults, Sanger did enormous good for the poor. You can't say that for any rw hero.

Ayn Rand was a Nazi?! You realize what you just uttered? Wow.

Metaphorically, yes, in many ways she was a Nazi. Don't you realize the term Nazi is used metaphorically for a certain type of individual? This has been done for decades. Where have you been? Or is this another case of a conservative being unable to think in anything but literal terms?