Shocking Statistics on Poverty in the Sub-Saharan African ----hole.

[abu afak]

We hear all this crap about "Racism" being the reason for Black Failure in America/elsewhere.
Actually WE/Whites are carrying this population to 50x what they make in sub-Sahara.
35K in the USA.

And it's not for lack of resources that they live so.
On the contrary. The Congo, ie, has just about everything. ie, Japan nothing.

Were it not for Western help (Medical/economic), the stats would be much Worse.
Half the continent would be wiped out by AIDS, Ebola, etc.

They had no use or value, for things like oil, magnesium-etc, and coffee, before outside demand.
They were/are hunter-gatherers living on the edge of Western civilization.

Leading Facts on Poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa
5 Shocking Statistics on Poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa

1. The average life expectancy at birth for someone born in sub-Saharan Africa is 46. This sobering number is due to the prevalence of HIV/AIDS in the region. According to UNDP, “a person can hope to live on average only 46 years, or 32 years less than the average life expectancy in countries of advanced human development, with 20 years slashed off of life expectancy due to HIV/AIDS.” Thankfully, HIV death rates are decreasing across sub-Saharan Africa. In Rwanda, AIDS-related mortality rates dropped from 7% to 5% from 2011-2012. Similarly, in Uganda the life expectancy was raised by ten years between 2000 and 2013, from age 46 to age 55. Foreign aid and the distribution of HIV/AIDS medication has played a large role in this reversal.
2. 48.5% of the population is living on less than $1.25 per day, and 69.9% on less than $2.00 per day. With a little over 910 million people living in the region, this places around 637 million Africans below the poverty line. The good news is that poverty rates are steadily declining in almost all of the countries in the region. In 2011, the head of the Africa World Economic Forum Katherine Tweedie stated that “10 fastest-growing economies will come from sub-Saharan Africa in the next five years.” In 1981, the poor in this region accounted for 50% of the world’s poor population. Today, they account for one third of the world’s poor population. Although one third is still a significant number, it is considerably less daunting than the numbers from a few decades ago.
3. HIV/AIDS is the #1 killer in sub-Saharan Africa. UNAIDS estimates that 2 million Africans perish each year from the disease. 70% of these African HIV/AIDS deaths were in sub-Saharan Africa. The region also lays claim to 90% of new HIV infections in children. In Namibia alone, 15,000 people die every year from the disease.
4. The Democratic Republic of the Congo is the Poorest country in Africa and the second poorest country in the world, with almost 88% of the population living on less than $1.25 a day. With a population of 65.7 million people, 88% is an unnerving statistic. Children are severely malnourished (rates have reached 30% in certain areas) and many die due to these adverse conditions. In fact, children account for almost 50% of deaths in the country. If any country in Africa deserves aid from the United States, it is the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

..........
`

 

[IM2]

We hear all this crap about "Racism" being the reason for Black Failure in America/elsewhere.
Actually WE/Whites are carrying this population to 50x what they make in sub-Sahara.
35K in the USA.

And it's not for lack of resources that they live so.
On the contrary. The Congo, ie, has just about everything. ie, Japan nothing.

Were it not for Western help (Medical/economic), the stats would be much Worse.
Half the continent would be wiped out by AIDS, Ebola, etc.

They had no use or value, for things like oil, magnesium-etc, and coffee, before outside demand.
They were/are hunter-gatherers living on the edge of Western civilization.

Leading Facts on Poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa
5 Shocking Statistics on Poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa

1. The average life expectancy at birth for someone born in sub-Saharan Africa is 46. This sobering number is due to the prevalence of HIV/AIDS in the region. According to UNDP, “a person can hope to live on average only 46 years, or 32 years less than the average life expectancy in countries of advanced human development, with 20 years slashed off of life expectancy due to HIV/AIDS.” Thankfully, HIV death rates are decreasing across sub-Saharan Africa. In Rwanda, AIDS-related mortality rates dropped from 7% to 5% from 2011-2012. Similarly, in Uganda the life expectancy was raised by ten years between 2000 and 2013, from age 46 to age 55. Foreign aid and the distribution of HIV/AIDS medication has played a large role in this reversal.
2. 48.5% of the population is living on less than $1.25 per day, and 69.9% on less than $2.00 per day. With a little over 910 million people living in the region, this places around 637 million Africans below the poverty line. The good news is that poverty rates are steadily declining in almost all of the countries in the region. In 2011, the head of the Africa World Economic Forum Katherine Tweedie stated that “10 fastest-growing economies will come from sub-Saharan Africa in the next five years.” In 1981, the poor in this region accounted for 50% of the world’s poor population. Today, they account for one third of the world’s poor population. Although one third is still a significant number, it is considerably less daunting than the numbers from a few decades ago.
3. HIV/AIDS is the #1 killer in sub-Saharan Africa. UNAIDS estimates that 2 million Africans perish each year from the disease. 70% of these African HIV/AIDS deaths were in sub-Saharan Africa. The region also lays claim to 90% of new HIV infections in children. In Namibia alone, 15,000 people die every year from the disease.
4. The Democratic Republic of the Congo is the Poorest country in Africa and the second poorest country in the world, with almost 88% of the population living on less than $1.25 a day. With a population of 65.7 million people, 88% is an unnerving statistic. Children are severely malnourished (rates have reached 30% in certain areas) and many die due to these adverse conditions. In fact, children account for almost 50% of deaths in the country. If any country in Africa deserves aid from the United States, it is the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

..........
`

There is no sub saharan Africa. Aflac you need to study the political histories of these countries before you run your mouth.

 

[abu afak]

There is No Sub Saharan Africa. Aflac you need to study the political histories of these countries before you run your mouth...

Sub-Saharan Africa
Sub-Saharan Africa - Wikipedia

Sub-Saharan Africa is, geographically, the area of the continent of Africa that lies south of the Sahara. According to the UN, it consists of all African countries that are fully or partially located south of the Sahara.[2] It contrasts with North Africa, whose territories are part of the League of Arab states within the Arab world. Somalia, Djibouti, Comoros and Mauritania are geographically in Sub-Saharan Africa, but are likewise Arab states and part of the Arab world.[3]..​

or just copying part of Google page

Sub-Saharan Africa | Data - World Bank Data - World Bank Group
Sub-Saharan Africa | Data
Sub-Saharan Africa. Angola; Benin; Botswana; Burkina Faso; Burundi; Cabo Verde; Cameroon; Central African Republic; Chad; Comoros; Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Cote d'Ivoire; Equatorial Guinea; Eritrea; Ethiopia; Gabon; Gambia, The; Ghana; Guinea; Guinea-Bissau; Kenya; Lesotho; Liberia; Madagascar; Malawi ...

Sub-Saharan Africa - New World Encyclopedia
www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Sub-Saharan_Africa
Oct 23, 2015 - Since the end of the last ice age, the north and sub-Saharan regions of Africa have been separated by the extremely harsh climate of the sparsely populated Sahara, forming an effective barrier interrupted by only the Nile River. The regions are distinct culturally as well as geographically; the dark-skinned ...

‎Geography · ‎History · ‎Economies · ‎Nations of sub-Saharan ...
List of Sub-Saharan African Countries - Library of Congress
section - Africana Collections: An Illustrated Guide (Library of Congress - African & Middle Eastern Division)
Côte d'Ivoire Djibouti Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Ethiopia Gabon The Gambia Ghana Guinea Guinea-Bissau Kenya Lesotho Liberia, Madagascar Malawi Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mozambique Namibia Niger Nigeria Réunion Rwanda Sao Tome and Principe Senegal, Seychelles Sierra Leone Somalia South Africa Sudan
...​

What will Stupid contentLess Troll will IM2 post in response?
Who knows, but it will be probably be another Ebonics troll, and probably with a picture.
`

 

[IM2]

There is No Sub Saharan Africa. Aflac you need to study the political histories of these countries before you run your mouth...

Sub-Saharan Africa
Sub-Saharan Africa - Wikipedia

Sub-Saharan Africa is, geographically, the area of the continent of Africa that lies south of the Sahara. According to the UN, it consists of all African countries that are fully or partially located south of the Sahara.[2] It contrasts with North Africa, whose territories are part of the League of Arab states within the Arab world. Somalia, Djibouti, Comoros and Mauritania are geographically in Sub-Saharan Africa, but are likewise Arab states and part of the Arab world.[3]..​

or just copying part of Google page

Sub-Saharan Africa | Data - World Bank Data - World Bank Group
Sub-Saharan Africa | Data
Sub-Saharan Africa. Angola; Benin; Botswana; Burkina Faso; Burundi; Cabo Verde; Cameroon; Central African Republic; Chad; Comoros; Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Cote d'Ivoire; Equatorial Guinea; Eritrea; Ethiopia; Gabon; Gambia, The; Ghana; Guinea; Guinea-Bissau; Kenya; Lesotho; Liberia; Madagascar; Malawi ...

Sub-Saharan Africa - New World Encyclopedia
www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Sub-Saharan_Africa
Oct 23, 2015 - Since the end of the last ice age, the north and sub-Saharan regions of Africa have been separated by the extremely harsh climate of the sparsely populated Sahara, forming an effective barrier interrupted by only the Nile River. The regions are distinct culturally as well as geographically; the dark-skinned ...

‎Geography · ‎History · ‎Economies · ‎Nations of sub-Saharan ...
List of Sub-Saharan African Countries - Library of Congress
section - Africana Collections: An Illustrated Guide (Library of Congress - African & Middle Eastern Division)
Côte d'Ivoire Djibouti Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Ethiopia Gabon The Gambia Ghana Guinea Guinea-Bissau Kenya Lesotho Liberia, Madagascar Malawi Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mozambique Namibia Niger Nigeria Réunion Rwanda Sao Tome and Principe Senegal, Seychelles Sierra Leone Somalia South Africa Sudan
...​

What will Stupid contentLess Troll will IM2 post in response?
Who knows, but it will be probably be another Ebonics troll, and probably with a picture.
`

.Let the lesson begin.

Don't call me a Sub-Saharan African: It is a racist term.

Ben Omoakin Oguntala

The term sub-Saharan African allows people to take away the pain of being African and only benefit from the gain of being Africa. The easiest way to narrate this is to look at those that are not considered to be part of sub-Saharan Africa, they include Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya and Egypt, some even include Ethiopia and South Africa. They are fully African when it is time to attract tourism or get international aid but not when we are describing the problems in Africa. Ironically, the problems that are symptomatic of being African are also in subsistence across the other so called non sub-Saharan Africa.

More:

Over the years, I have attended meetings and heard both Black and White people use the phrase Sub Saharan Africa and I often wondered what they mean or indeed, if they truly appreciate the euphemism of the term. It connotes, people in Africa that do want to be associated with the problems in Africa, it represents those in Africa who wish to distinguish themselves from the darkness of Africa, literally and figuratively. It means Africa has problems but not the lighter skinned ones just the "Ugandan looking Blacks". It is effectively saying there is something wrong with Ugandan looking Black people, which worries me because, I love Ugandan looking Black complexions, it is remarkable work of God.

More:

Every time I hear the phrase, I can't help but think it is racist and trying to isolate the problem in Africa to Black people and depict them as having the worst of everything in life. That is simply not true.

The continent makes a geographical distinction of who is and who is not African, if you are in the continent, then you are African, if you emerge from the continent, even 10,000 generations ago, you are still African, whether you like it or not!

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dont-call-me-sub-saharan-african-racist-term-ben-omoakin

Why do we still use the term “sub-Saharan Africa”?

So, why use this vague term that few can agree on and is geographically inaccurate? And where does it come from?

The term spread as a replacement for the racially-tinged phrases “Tropical Africa” and “Black Africa” that were used until around the 1950s, says Columbia University anthropologist Brian Larkin.

The dividing line itself also has some troubling origins in what Larkin calls “racist” colonial theories that thought northern Africa more culturally developed.

“It divides Africa according to white ideas of race, making North Africans white enough to be considered for their glories, but not really white enough,” Tatenda Chinondidyachii Mashanda, a politics and international affairs scholar at Wake Forest University, wrote earlier this year for The African Exponent. “[It] is a way of saying ‘Black Africa’ and talking about black Africans without sounding overtly racist.”

Why do we still use the term 'sub-Saharan Africa'?

More:

Rethinking the Term “Sub Saharan Africa”

My big criticism of the term SSA is that it divides Africa according to white ideas of race making North Africans white enough to be considered for their glories, but not really white enough.

As politics and culture change, rarely has linguistics shifted to accommodate the new changes. Some words and expressions are backed up by agency and have the potential to change our perceptions. This is the case with the term “Sub- Saharan Africa” (herein referred to as SSA).

Western agency not only has unilateral access to international platforms, but additionally maintains the power to ensure meanings are normalized across diverse linguistic and geographical communities.

The power of Western agency means that they can construct words which speak exclusively to their perceived reality. The UN, EU, World Bank, IMF or any other big institution that you might think of has been leading in using the term SSA. It must be pointed out that even many governments and organizations in this region also use the term SSA without really interrogating the meaning or implied meaning of SSA. This has been useful in setting up a false dichotomy and systematic normalization of the term.

It is important to emphasize that these deeply embedded assumptions and stereotypes about Africa not only stand in the way of effectively learning about the continent, but also have been the basis of ill-conceived academic research and policies.

More:

Six years ago the Nigerian born Chikia Onyeani of the Celebrate Africa Group argued that the term sub-Saharan Africa is demeaning to Africa and must be rejected. He rightfully argued that there is no other continent that has sub something, there is no Sub-Europe or Sub-America. We should be concerned that it’s only the people who were considered as sub human in history who are being referred to as sub-Saharan Africans. The concept of some invisible border, which divides the North of Africa from the South, is rooted in racist thought. A black and white view of African culture only serves racist generalizations. There are more serious issues to be concerned with, but we cannot exclude identity and terminology from conversations on race.

It baffles me how we never question the use of the term SSA. It is becoming clearer to me that SSA refers to the entire African continent, with the exception of the five predominantly Arab states of the North. The concept ‘sub-Sahara Africa’ is ludicrous and disingenuous, if not a meaningless classificatory representation. The use of the term defies geography and focuses more on racist labelling and stereotypes. It is undoubtedly a racist geopolitical signature in which the users (from the onset) aimed to depict the image of dilapidation, squalor and hopelessness. This is despite that majority of Africans do not live anywhere near the Sahara.

More:

What does it really mean in practice to say “SSA?” It is a way of saying “Black Africa” and talk about black Africans without sounding overtly racist.

What should also be considered is the racist stereotypes that are associated with Black Africa. When one uses the suffix “sub” to refer to “below,” images of Africa as all poor, suffering from AIDS (not to demonize the victims) and in a state of disarray are reinforced. These problems and stereotypes are perceived as endemic to blacks.

If it was truly about the Sahara and not race, Mauritania would never be counted as sub-Saharan: Its capital, like most of the country, is hardly south of the Sahara.

If it wasn’t about race prior to the formal legitimate people’s rule in South Africa in 1994, then why was South Africa never considered as part of sub-Saharan Africa? It was either referred to as White South Africa or South Africa Sub-continent. After the legitimate people’s government which was largely a majority black government there was a sudden change in the representation. South Africa was now part of sub-Saharan Africa. Nothing happening to South African geography for it to be differently classified and rendered SSA.

https://www.africanexponent.com/bpost/rethinking-the-term-sub-saharan-africa-36

I do think it's much wiser to talk to and listen to Africans on manners of Africa, not Wikipedia, encyclopedias, or white boys calling themselves Abu. No African I have ever talked to in 56 years of life has ever considered this a valid term. It does not exist except in the minds of dumb ass whites. There is no sub saharan Africa especially when you consider that conveniently there are African nations below the Sahara that are not considered sub saharan.

Aflac, I will take you to the woodshed every time you try me. Whites don't get to define Africa. Africans do. Africans say there is no sub saharan Africa, Africa is one continent. That's means it does not exist aflac.

 

[abu afak]

Don't call me a Sub-Saharan African: It is a racist term.
Ben Omoakin Oguntala ...
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dont-call-me-sub-saharan-african-racist-term-ben-omoakin
... Tatenda Chinondidyachii Mashanda, a politics and international affairs scholar at Wake Forest University, wrote earlier this year for The African Exponent. More:
...Six years ago the Nigerian born Chikia Onyeani of the Celebrate Africa Group argued that the term sub-Saharan Africa is demeaning to Africa and must be rejected. ....
https://www.africanexponent.com/bpost/rethinking-the-term-sub-saharan-africa-36...

So some Afros/Afroexponent/AfroTouristBoard or Apes like Ben OkaBunka/TikeMachunga/etc disliking the term doesn't change it's truth/usefulness/accuracy in describing the ****hole that is Black Africa.
Which truly is "sub" everything.
LOFL

I'll stick with Wiki, encyclopedias, the World Bank, Library of Congress over some monkeys who don't want to call a banana, a banana.
`

 

[IM2]

Don't call me a Sub-Saharan African: It is a racist term.
Ben Omoakin Oguntala ...
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dont-call-me-sub-saharan-african-racist-term-ben-omoakin
... Tatenda Chinondidyachii Mashanda, a politics and international affairs scholar at Wake Forest University, wrote earlier this year for The African Exponent. More:
...Six years ago the Nigerian born Chikia Onyeani of the Celebrate Africa Group argued that the term sub-Saharan Africa is demeaning to Africa and must be rejected. ....
https://www.africanexponent.com/bpost/rethinking-the-term-sub-saharan-africa-36...

So some Afros/Afroexponent/AfroTouristBoard or Apes like Ben OkaBunka/TikeMachunga/etc disliking the term doesn't change it's truth/usefulness/accuracy in describing the ****hole that is Black Africa.
Which truly is "sub" everything.
LOFL

I'll stick with Wiki, encyclopedias, the World Bank, Library of Congress over some monkeys who don't want to call a banana, a banana.
`

And here we see another psychosis riddled white idiot.

 

[DGS49]

Back a long time ago, when The World still knew that races were real, there was a commonly - understood term, "Negro," which accurately and truly described the people who are now referred to as people from "Sub - Saharan Africa."

It is NOT racist to use the term, but it is one semantic device to distinguish between Africans who are Negroes from those who are other races.

Like it or not, and with a few obscure exceptions, all of the countries that are predominantly populated by Negroes are third world ("shit-hole") countries.

Facts are facts; they are not "racist."

 

[Lastamender]

Don't call me a Sub-Saharan African: It is a racist term.
Ben Omoakin Oguntala ...
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dont-call-me-sub-saharan-african-racist-term-ben-omoakin
... Tatenda Chinondidyachii Mashanda, a politics and international affairs scholar at Wake Forest University, wrote earlier this year for The African Exponent. More:
...Six years ago the Nigerian born Chikia Onyeani of the Celebrate Africa Group argued that the term sub-Saharan Africa is demeaning to Africa and must be rejected. ....
https://www.africanexponent.com/bpost/rethinking-the-term-sub-saharan-africa-36...

So some Afros/Afroexponent/AfroTouristBoard or Apes like Ben OkaBunka/TikeMachunga/etc disliking the term doesn't change it's truth/usefulness/accuracy in describing the ****hole that is Black Africa.
Which truly is "sub" everything.
LOFL

I'll stick with Wiki, encyclopedias, the World Bank, Library of Congress over some monkeys who don't want to call a banana, a banana.
`

And here we see another psychosis riddled white idiot.

You are kind of boring, and a racist.

 

[IM2]

Don't call me a Sub-Saharan African: It is a racist term.
Ben Omoakin Oguntala ...
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dont-call-me-sub-saharan-african-racist-term-ben-omoakin
... Tatenda Chinondidyachii Mashanda, a politics and international affairs scholar at Wake Forest University, wrote earlier this year for The African Exponent. More:
...Six years ago the Nigerian born Chikia Onyeani of the Celebrate Africa Group argued that the term sub-Saharan Africa is demeaning to Africa and must be rejected. ....
https://www.africanexponent.com/bpost/rethinking-the-term-sub-saharan-africa-36...

So some Afros/Afroexponent/AfroTouristBoard or Apes like Ben OkaBunka/TikeMachunga/etc disliking the term doesn't change it's truth/usefulness/accuracy in describing the ****hole that is Black Africa.
Which truly is "sub" everything.
LOFL

I'll stick with Wiki, encyclopedias, the World Bank, Library of Congress over some monkeys who don't want to call a banana, a banana.
`

And here we see another psychosis riddled white idiot.

You are kind of boring, and a racist.

I've said nothing racist and you can't post one thing I have said that is.

 

[IM2]

Back a long time ago, when The World still knew that races were real, there was a commonly - understood term, "Negro," which accurately and truly described the people who are now referred to as people from "Sub - Saharan Africa."

It is NOT racist to use the term, but it is one semantic device to distinguish between Africans who are Negroes from those who are other races.

Like it or not, and with a few obscure exceptions, all of the countries that are predominantly populated by Negroes are third world ("shit-hole") countries.

Facts are facts; they are not "racist."

Anther idiot who knows nothing about the political history of this region.

 

[Meathead]

There is No Sub Saharan Africa. Aflac you need to study the political histories of these countries before you run your mouth...

Sub-Saharan Africa
Sub-Saharan Africa - Wikipedia

Sub-Saharan Africa is, geographically, the area of the continent of Africa that lies south of the Sahara. According to the UN, it consists of all African countries that are fully or partially located south of the Sahara.[2] It contrasts with North Africa, whose territories are part of the League of Arab states within the Arab world. Somalia, Djibouti, Comoros and Mauritania are geographically in Sub-Saharan Africa, but are likewise Arab states and part of the Arab world.[3]..​

or just copying part of Google page

Sub-Saharan Africa | Data - World Bank Data - World Bank Group
Sub-Saharan Africa | Data
Sub-Saharan Africa. Angola; Benin; Botswana; Burkina Faso; Burundi; Cabo Verde; Cameroon; Central African Republic; Chad; Comoros; Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Cote d'Ivoire; Equatorial Guinea; Eritrea; Ethiopia; Gabon; Gambia, The; Ghana; Guinea; Guinea-Bissau; Kenya; Lesotho; Liberia; Madagascar; Malawi ...

Sub-Saharan Africa - New World Encyclopedia
www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Sub-Saharan_Africa
Oct 23, 2015 - Since the end of the last ice age, the north and sub-Saharan regions of Africa have been separated by the extremely harsh climate of the sparsely populated Sahara, forming an effective barrier interrupted by only the Nile River. The regions are distinct culturally as well as geographically; the dark-skinned ...

‎Geography · ‎History · ‎Economies · ‎Nations of sub-Saharan ...
List of Sub-Saharan African Countries - Library of Congress
section - Africana Collections: An Illustrated Guide (Library of Congress - African & Middle Eastern Division)
Côte d'Ivoire Djibouti Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Ethiopia Gabon The Gambia Ghana Guinea Guinea-Bissau Kenya Lesotho Liberia, Madagascar Malawi Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mozambique Namibia Niger Nigeria Réunion Rwanda Sao Tome and Principe Senegal, Seychelles Sierra Leone Somalia South Africa Sudan
...​

What will Stupid contentLess Troll will IM2 post in response?
Who knows, but it will be probably be another Ebonics troll, and probably with a picture.
`

.Let the lesson begin.

Don't call me a Sub-Saharan African: It is a racist term.

Ben Omoakin Oguntala

The term sub-Saharan African allows people to take away the pain of being African and only benefit from the gain of being Africa. The easiest way to narrate this is to look at those that are not considered to be part of sub-Saharan Africa, they include Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya and Egypt, some even include Ethiopia and South Africa. They are fully African when it is time to attract tourism or get international aid but not when we are describing the problems in Africa. Ironically, the problems that are symptomatic of being African are also in subsistence across the other so called non sub-Saharan Africa.

More:

Over the years, I have attended meetings and heard both Black and White people use the phrase Sub Saharan Africa and I often wondered what they mean or indeed, if they truly appreciate the euphemism of the term. It connotes, people in Africa that do want to be associated with the problems in Africa, it represents those in Africa who wish to distinguish themselves from the darkness of Africa, literally and figuratively. It means Africa has problems but not the lighter skinned ones just the "Ugandan looking Blacks". It is effectively saying there is something wrong with Ugandan looking Black people, which worries me because, I love Ugandan looking Black complexions, it is remarkable work of God.

More:

Every time I hear the phrase, I can't help but think it is racist and trying to isolate the problem in Africa to Black people and depict them as having the worst of everything in life. That is simply not true.

The continent makes a geographical distinction of who is and who is not African, if you are in the continent, then you are African, if you emerge from the continent, even 10,000 generations ago, you are still African, whether you like it or not!

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dont-call-me-sub-saharan-african-racist-term-ben-omoakin

Why do we still use the term “sub-Saharan Africa”?

So, why use this vague term that few can agree on and is geographically inaccurate? And where does it come from?

The term spread as a replacement for the racially-tinged phrases “Tropical Africa” and “Black Africa” that were used until around the 1950s, says Columbia University anthropologist Brian Larkin.

The dividing line itself also has some troubling origins in what Larkin calls “racist” colonial theories that thought northern Africa more culturally developed.

“It divides Africa according to white ideas of race, making North Africans white enough to be considered for their glories, but not really white enough,” Tatenda Chinondidyachii Mashanda, a politics and international affairs scholar at Wake Forest University, wrote earlier this year for The African Exponent. “[It] is a way of saying ‘Black Africa’ and talking about black Africans without sounding overtly racist.”

Why do we still use the term 'sub-Saharan Africa'?

More:

Rethinking the Term “Sub Saharan Africa”

My big criticism of the term SSA is that it divides Africa according to white ideas of race making North Africans white enough to be considered for their glories, but not really white enough.

As politics and culture change, rarely has linguistics shifted to accommodate the new changes. Some words and expressions are backed up by agency and have the potential to change our perceptions. This is the case with the term “Sub- Saharan Africa” (herein referred to as SSA).

Western agency not only has unilateral access to international platforms, but additionally maintains the power to ensure meanings are normalized across diverse linguistic and geographical communities.

The power of Western agency means that they can construct words which speak exclusively to their perceived reality. The UN, EU, World Bank, IMF or any other big institution that you might think of has been leading in using the term SSA. It must be pointed out that even many governments and organizations in this region also use the term SSA without really interrogating the meaning or implied meaning of SSA. This has been useful in setting up a false dichotomy and systematic normalization of the term.

It is important to emphasize that these deeply embedded assumptions and stereotypes about Africa not only stand in the way of effectively learning about the continent, but also have been the basis of ill-conceived academic research and policies.

More:

Six years ago the Nigerian born Chikia Onyeani of the Celebrate Africa Group argued that the term sub-Saharan Africa is demeaning to Africa and must be rejected. He rightfully argued that there is no other continent that has sub something, there is no Sub-Europe or Sub-America. We should be concerned that it’s only the people who were considered as sub human in history who are being referred to as sub-Saharan Africans. The concept of some invisible border, which divides the North of Africa from the South, is rooted in racist thought. A black and white view of African culture only serves racist generalizations. There are more serious issues to be concerned with, but we cannot exclude identity and terminology from conversations on race.

It baffles me how we never question the use of the term SSA. It is becoming clearer to me that SSA refers to the entire African continent, with the exception of the five predominantly Arab states of the North. The concept ‘sub-Sahara Africa’ is ludicrous and disingenuous, if not a meaningless classificatory representation. The use of the term defies geography and focuses more on racist labelling and stereotypes. It is undoubtedly a racist geopolitical signature in which the users (from the onset) aimed to depict the image of dilapidation, squalor and hopelessness. This is despite that majority of Africans do not live anywhere near the Sahara.

More:

What does it really mean in practice to say “SSA?” It is a way of saying “Black Africa” and talk about black Africans without sounding overtly racist.

What should also be considered is the racist stereotypes that are associated with Black Africa. When one uses the suffix “sub” to refer to “below,” images of Africa as all poor, suffering from AIDS (not to demonize the victims) and in a state of disarray are reinforced. These problems and stereotypes are perceived as endemic to blacks.

If it was truly about the Sahara and not race, Mauritania would never be counted as sub-Saharan: Its capital, like most of the country, is hardly south of the Sahara.

If it wasn’t about race prior to the formal legitimate people’s rule in South Africa in 1994, then why was South Africa never considered as part of sub-Saharan Africa? It was either referred to as White South Africa or South Africa Sub-continent. After the legitimate people’s government which was largely a majority black government there was a sudden change in the representation. South Africa was now part of sub-Saharan Africa. Nothing happening to South African geography for it to be differently classified and rendered SSA.

https://www.africanexponent.com/bpost/rethinking-the-term-sub-saharan-africa-36

I do think it's much wiser to talk to and listen to Africans on manners of Africa, not Wikipedia, encyclopedias, or white boys calling themselves Abu. No African I have ever talked to in 56 years of life has ever considered this a valid term. It does not exist except in the minds of dumb ass whites. There is no sub saharan Africa especially when you consider that conveniently there are African nations below the Sahara that are not considered sub saharan.

Aflac, I will take you to the woodshed every time you try me. Whites don't get to define Africa. Africans do. Africans say there is no sub saharan Africa, Africa is one continent. That's means it does not exist aflac.

I'm guessing your ancestors came from sub-Saharan Africa, right?

 

[Lastamender]

Don't call me a Sub-Saharan African: It is a racist term.
Ben Omoakin Oguntala ...
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dont-call-me-sub-saharan-african-racist-term-ben-omoakin
... Tatenda Chinondidyachii Mashanda, a politics and international affairs scholar at Wake Forest University, wrote earlier this year for The African Exponent. More:
...Six years ago the Nigerian born Chikia Onyeani of the Celebrate Africa Group argued that the term sub-Saharan Africa is demeaning to Africa and must be rejected. ....
https://www.africanexponent.com/bpost/rethinking-the-term-sub-saharan-africa-36...

So some Afros/Afroexponent/AfroTouristBoard or Apes like Ben OkaBunka/TikeMachunga/etc disliking the term doesn't change it's truth/usefulness/accuracy in describing the ****hole that is Black Africa.
Which truly is "sub" everything.
LOFL

I'll stick with Wiki, encyclopedias, the World Bank, Library of Congress over some monkeys who don't want to call a banana, a banana.
`

And here we see another psychosis riddled white idiot.

You are kind of boring, and a racist.

I've said nothing racist and you can't post one thing I have said that is.

The post I replied to will do.

And here we see another psychosis riddled white idiot.

How is that, racist?

 

[IM2]

There is No Sub Saharan Africa. Aflac you need to study the political histories of these countries before you run your mouth...

Sub-Saharan Africa
Sub-Saharan Africa - Wikipedia

Sub-Saharan Africa is, geographically, the area of the continent of Africa that lies south of the Sahara. According to the UN, it consists of all African countries that are fully or partially located south of the Sahara.[2] It contrasts with North Africa, whose territories are part of the League of Arab states within the Arab world. Somalia, Djibouti, Comoros and Mauritania are geographically in Sub-Saharan Africa, but are likewise Arab states and part of the Arab world.[3]..​

or just copying part of Google page

Sub-Saharan Africa | Data - World Bank Data - World Bank Group
Sub-Saharan Africa | Data
Sub-Saharan Africa. Angola; Benin; Botswana; Burkina Faso; Burundi; Cabo Verde; Cameroon; Central African Republic; Chad; Comoros; Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Cote d'Ivoire; Equatorial Guinea; Eritrea; Ethiopia; Gabon; Gambia, The; Ghana; Guinea; Guinea-Bissau; Kenya; Lesotho; Liberia; Madagascar; Malawi ...

Sub-Saharan Africa - New World Encyclopedia
www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Sub-Saharan_Africa
Oct 23, 2015 - Since the end of the last ice age, the north and sub-Saharan regions of Africa have been separated by the extremely harsh climate of the sparsely populated Sahara, forming an effective barrier interrupted by only the Nile River. The regions are distinct culturally as well as geographically; the dark-skinned ...

‎Geography · ‎History · ‎Economies · ‎Nations of sub-Saharan ...
List of Sub-Saharan African Countries - Library of Congress
section - Africana Collections: An Illustrated Guide (Library of Congress - African & Middle Eastern Division)
Côte d'Ivoire Djibouti Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Ethiopia Gabon The Gambia Ghana Guinea Guinea-Bissau Kenya Lesotho Liberia, Madagascar Malawi Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mozambique Namibia Niger Nigeria Réunion Rwanda Sao Tome and Principe Senegal, Seychelles Sierra Leone Somalia South Africa Sudan
...​

What will Stupid contentLess Troll will IM2 post in response?
Who knows, but it will be probably be another Ebonics troll, and probably with a picture.
`

.Let the lesson begin.

Don't call me a Sub-Saharan African: It is a racist term.

Ben Omoakin Oguntala

The term sub-Saharan African allows people to take away the pain of being African and only benefit from the gain of being Africa. The easiest way to narrate this is to look at those that are not considered to be part of sub-Saharan Africa, they include Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya and Egypt, some even include Ethiopia and South Africa. They are fully African when it is time to attract tourism or get international aid but not when we are describing the problems in Africa. Ironically, the problems that are symptomatic of being African are also in subsistence across the other so called non sub-Saharan Africa.

More:

Over the years, I have attended meetings and heard both Black and White people use the phrase Sub Saharan Africa and I often wondered what they mean or indeed, if they truly appreciate the euphemism of the term. It connotes, people in Africa that do want to be associated with the problems in Africa, it represents those in Africa who wish to distinguish themselves from the darkness of Africa, literally and figuratively. It means Africa has problems but not the lighter skinned ones just the "Ugandan looking Blacks". It is effectively saying there is something wrong with Ugandan looking Black people, which worries me because, I love Ugandan looking Black complexions, it is remarkable work of God.

More:

Every time I hear the phrase, I can't help but think it is racist and trying to isolate the problem in Africa to Black people and depict them as having the worst of everything in life. That is simply not true.

The continent makes a geographical distinction of who is and who is not African, if you are in the continent, then you are African, if you emerge from the continent, even 10,000 generations ago, you are still African, whether you like it or not!

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dont-call-me-sub-saharan-african-racist-term-ben-omoakin

Why do we still use the term “sub-Saharan Africa”?

So, why use this vague term that few can agree on and is geographically inaccurate? And where does it come from?

The term spread as a replacement for the racially-tinged phrases “Tropical Africa” and “Black Africa” that were used until around the 1950s, says Columbia University anthropologist Brian Larkin.

The dividing line itself also has some troubling origins in what Larkin calls “racist” colonial theories that thought northern Africa more culturally developed.

“It divides Africa according to white ideas of race, making North Africans white enough to be considered for their glories, but not really white enough,” Tatenda Chinondidyachii Mashanda, a politics and international affairs scholar at Wake Forest University, wrote earlier this year for The African Exponent. “[It] is a way of saying ‘Black Africa’ and talking about black Africans without sounding overtly racist.”

Why do we still use the term 'sub-Saharan Africa'?

More:

Rethinking the Term “Sub Saharan Africa”

My big criticism of the term SSA is that it divides Africa according to white ideas of race making North Africans white enough to be considered for their glories, but not really white enough.

As politics and culture change, rarely has linguistics shifted to accommodate the new changes. Some words and expressions are backed up by agency and have the potential to change our perceptions. This is the case with the term “Sub- Saharan Africa” (herein referred to as SSA).

Western agency not only has unilateral access to international platforms, but additionally maintains the power to ensure meanings are normalized across diverse linguistic and geographical communities.

The power of Western agency means that they can construct words which speak exclusively to their perceived reality. The UN, EU, World Bank, IMF or any other big institution that you might think of has been leading in using the term SSA. It must be pointed out that even many governments and organizations in this region also use the term SSA without really interrogating the meaning or implied meaning of SSA. This has been useful in setting up a false dichotomy and systematic normalization of the term.

It is important to emphasize that these deeply embedded assumptions and stereotypes about Africa not only stand in the way of effectively learning about the continent, but also have been the basis of ill-conceived academic research and policies.

More:

Six years ago the Nigerian born Chikia Onyeani of the Celebrate Africa Group argued that the term sub-Saharan Africa is demeaning to Africa and must be rejected. He rightfully argued that there is no other continent that has sub something, there is no Sub-Europe or Sub-America. We should be concerned that it’s only the people who were considered as sub human in history who are being referred to as sub-Saharan Africans. The concept of some invisible border, which divides the North of Africa from the South, is rooted in racist thought. A black and white view of African culture only serves racist generalizations. There are more serious issues to be concerned with, but we cannot exclude identity and terminology from conversations on race.

It baffles me how we never question the use of the term SSA. It is becoming clearer to me that SSA refers to the entire African continent, with the exception of the five predominantly Arab states of the North. The concept ‘sub-Sahara Africa’ is ludicrous and disingenuous, if not a meaningless classificatory representation. The use of the term defies geography and focuses more on racist labelling and stereotypes. It is undoubtedly a racist geopolitical signature in which the users (from the onset) aimed to depict the image of dilapidation, squalor and hopelessness. This is despite that majority of Africans do not live anywhere near the Sahara.

More:

What does it really mean in practice to say “SSA?” It is a way of saying “Black Africa” and talk about black Africans without sounding overtly racist.

What should also be considered is the racist stereotypes that are associated with Black Africa. When one uses the suffix “sub” to refer to “below,” images of Africa as all poor, suffering from AIDS (not to demonize the victims) and in a state of disarray are reinforced. These problems and stereotypes are perceived as endemic to blacks.

If it was truly about the Sahara and not race, Mauritania would never be counted as sub-Saharan: Its capital, like most of the country, is hardly south of the Sahara.

If it wasn’t about race prior to the formal legitimate people’s rule in South Africa in 1994, then why was South Africa never considered as part of sub-Saharan Africa? It was either referred to as White South Africa or South Africa Sub-continent. After the legitimate people’s government which was largely a majority black government there was a sudden change in the representation. South Africa was now part of sub-Saharan Africa. Nothing happening to South African geography for it to be differently classified and rendered SSA.

https://www.africanexponent.com/bpost/rethinking-the-term-sub-saharan-africa-36

I do think it's much wiser to talk to and listen to Africans on manners of Africa, not Wikipedia, encyclopedias, or white boys calling themselves Abu. No African I have ever talked to in 56 years of life has ever considered this a valid term. It does not exist except in the minds of dumb ass whites. There is no sub saharan Africa especially when you consider that conveniently there are African nations below the Sahara that are not considered sub saharan.

Aflac, I will take you to the woodshed every time you try me. Whites don't get to define Africa. Africans do. Africans say there is no sub saharan Africa, Africa is one continent. That's means it does not exist aflac.

I'm guessing your ancestors came from sub-Saharan Africa, right?

There is no such place.

 

[IM2]

Don't call me a Sub-Saharan African: It is a racist term.
Ben Omoakin Oguntala ...
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dont-call-me-sub-saharan-african-racist-term-ben-omoakin
... Tatenda Chinondidyachii Mashanda, a politics and international affairs scholar at Wake Forest University, wrote earlier this year for The African Exponent. More:
...Six years ago the Nigerian born Chikia Onyeani of the Celebrate Africa Group argued that the term sub-Saharan Africa is demeaning to Africa and must be rejected. ....
https://www.africanexponent.com/bpost/rethinking-the-term-sub-saharan-africa-36...

So some Afros/Afroexponent/AfroTouristBoard or Apes like Ben OkaBunka/TikeMachunga/etc disliking the term doesn't change it's truth/usefulness/accuracy in describing the ****hole that is Black Africa.
Which truly is "sub" everything.
LOFL

I'll stick with Wiki, encyclopedias, the World Bank, Library of Congress over some monkeys who don't want to call a banana, a banana.
`

And here we see another psychosis riddled white idiot.

You are kind of boring, and a racist.

I've said nothing racist and you can't post one thing I have said that is.

The post I replied to will do.

And here we see another psychosis riddled white idiot.

How is that, racist?

So am I saying all whites have psychosis? That would be racist.

 

[Lastamender]

So some Afros/Afroexponent/AfroTouristBoard or Apes like Ben OkaBunka/TikeMachunga/etc disliking the term doesn't change it's truth/usefulness/accuracy in describing the ****hole that is Black Africa.
Which truly is "sub" everything.
LOFL

I'll stick with Wiki, encyclopedias, the World Bank, Library of Congress over some monkeys who don't want to call a banana, a banana.
`

And here we see another psychosis riddled white idiot.

You are kind of boring, and a racist.

I've said nothing racist and you can't post one thing I have said that is.

The post I replied to will do.

And here we see another psychosis riddled white idiot.

How is that, racist?

So am I saying all whites have psychosis? That would be racist.

No more bait taken here. Adios racist.

 

[IM2]

And here we see another psychosis riddled white idiot.

You are kind of boring, and a racist.

I've said nothing racist and you can't post one thing I have said that is.

The post I replied to will do.

And here we see another psychosis riddled white idiot.

How is that, racist?

So am I saying all whites have psychosis? That would be racist.

No more bait taken here. Adios racist.

Some whites just make up racism as it suits them. .

 

[Lastamender]

You are kind of boring, and a racist.

I've said nothing racist and you can't post one thing I have said that is.

The post I replied to will do.

And here we see another psychosis riddled white idiot.

How is that, racist?

So am I saying all whites have psychosis? That would be racist.

No more bait taken here. Adios racist.

Some whites just make up racism as it suits them. .

No kidding?

 

[IM2]

I've said nothing racist and you can't post one thing I have said that is.

The post I replied to will do.

And here we see another psychosis riddled white idiot.

How is that, racist?

So am I saying all whites have psychosis? That would be racist.

No more bait taken here. Adios racist.

Some whites just make up racism as it suits them. .

No kidding?

You are an example.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

If I am two is any indicator to the mental acuity of Sub Saharan Africans it's no wonder the place is a shithole.

 

[IM2]

What is called sub Saharan Africa.

Location of the Sahara

As you see, there are countries considered as sub Saharan that are in the Sahara. So the term is inaccurate.