How Europe Stole The World

[Nar-el]

I am come from Congo where we have plenty mineral resources. I would have rather wanted to come from a country that doesn't have that much. Putting corruption and political proble ms aside, It forces the people to go to work to build wealth instead of complaining about what you have buried. Not having resource forced and being in the cold forces you to be ingenious compared when you have plenty.This is a reality that I saw myself

Uh huh. Nice try Braden.

 

[Nkrumah Was Right]

I don't agree with that vantage point because the decline in some of those empires had nothing to do with the Europeans. Ghana, Mali and the Yoruba civilizations declines occurred mostly due to internal strife. They had succession issues which led to constant Civil Wars and and those constant wars within weakened them and led to people people leaving their empires. Case in point look at how the Mande people fled Ghana/Mali. Those people leaving occurred over a period of the last 500 years or so. Now when you go into West Africa you will see Mande people everywhere from Liberia all the way over into Nigeria but they are not from those places and only left due to strife in Ghana/Mali and to openness trade routes. Same thing with the Akan people in Ivory Coast and modern day Ghana. They migrated to their current location to evade the spread of Islam in the Sahel. The Fulani are another migratory group. A large block of them are in Nigeria now, but they are not from Nigeria.

So you are looking at the end result of how Africans were colonized, but the seeds of that colonization had already been laid due to declining empires rather than the comingof the White man. The Whiteman's arrival only gave rise to lesser societies like Dahomeywhich had previously been tribute paying vassal State of the larger Yoruba Empire. That is way it took the Europeans hundreds of years to capture those lands and then they quickly gave them independence and installed puppet governments because those lands still had remnants of empires and they were too hard to hold.

Interesting interpretation of West African history

 

[Malcolmxxx_23]

The Mongols destroyed their competition and allowed Europe access to Asian goods.

Before the Mongols Central Asia was arguably the center of civilization and you had to go through them, the Uzbeks, Khwarazmians, Kyivans, Pashtuns, Cumaks, Iranians, etc if you wanted to trade with China which itself was disunified so even if you got to China you had 3-4 kingdoms you had to deal with.

Mongols came through, destroyed all these kingdoms and massacred millions of people, united China under one emperor and basically took out the middle men that was preventing western Europeans from getting a sizeable return on trade.

That’s why the Silk Road is looked as this great thing and world changing event by Europeans because they weren’t effected by it and were able to profit from it as they could now travel freely to China and beyond gaining wealth. The Mongols just liked to receive tribute and be told how great they were and they both hated Islam so it was a win win. Meanwhile in Islamic, Eastern European and Central Asian sources it’s an apocalyptic event that they still haven’t recovered from.


Look up cities like Samarkand, Baghdad, Merv, Bukhara, Garanj before the Mongol conquests. They make Rome look like a pastoral village.

Is it tru that the mongols wanted establish a trade network and peaceful economic cooperation with the Arabs at first ? But their convoy was killed so they attacked baghdad?


Crazy how history works ..imagin if Muslims defeated France after controlling Spain

Would of a wrap for europe ..oh well

 

[Khadafi1982]

I don't agree with that vantage point because the decline in some of those empires had nothing to do with the Europeans. Ghana, Mali and the Yoruba civilizations declines occurred mostly due to internal strife. They had succession issues which led to constant Civil Wars and and those constant wars within weakened them and led to people people leaving their empires. Case in point look at how the Mande people fled Ghana/Mali. Those people leaving occurred over a period of the last 500 years or so. Now when you go into West Africa you will see Mande people everywhere from Liberia all the way over into Nigeria but they are not from those places and only left due to strife in Ghana/Mali and to openness trade routes. Same thing with the Akan people in Ivory Coast and modern day Ghana. They migrated to their current location to evade the spread of Islam in the Sahel. The Fulani are another migratory group. A large block of them are in Nigeria now, but they are not from Nigeria.

So you are looking at the end result of how Africans were colonized, but the seeds of that colonization had already been laid due to declining empires rather than the comingof the White man. The Whiteman's arrival only gave rise to lesser societies like Dahomeywhich had previously been tribute paying vassal State of the larger Yoruba Empire. That is way it took the Europeans hundreds of years to capture those lands and then they quickly gave them independence and installed puppet governments because those lands still had remnants of empires and they were too hard to hold.

I didn’t say that the decline was strictly because of the white man. Just like any Asian or another African conquering tribe will do, knowing internal kingdoms/tribes politics and strife you can divide and conquer. Knowing how Lebanon is divided based on religious politics or Nigeria issues between the Muslim North and Christian South, a conqueror could take advantage and set in motion a plan to divide and conquer.

 

[RareHunter]

Is anyone tired of these ppl?

 

[desjardins]

The fact that we lost to a poor, cold, no natural resourced land as badly as we did is embarrassing .

It's a book called Guns, Germs, and Steel that tries to explain how this happened
Basically Europe and Asia had geographical advantage because they are more wide than they are tall so technology advancements spread faster across horizontal trade routes. Obvious example is how efficient the silk road was vs. the journey Mansa Musa had to take for his pilgrimage

 

[UpAndComing]

So you saying if other people did this for example the Americas they wouldn’t be damn near killed off

Yes for sure. The power the Europeans gained from Capitalism made their Imperialism and Colonialism possible

Christopher Columbus and the other explorers from Portugal, Spain, etc coming to America were sanctioned and financed by their countries. Even the Pilgrims who "came for Religious freedom" were only able to come here because they were financed from their home country

 

[JadeB]

Is it tru that the mongols wanted establish a trade network and peaceful economic cooperation with the Arabs at first ? But their convoy was killed so they attacked baghdad?


Crazy how history works ..imagin if Muslims defeated France after controlling Spain

Would of a wrap for europe ..oh well

Yeah. Mongols originally came in peace to the Abbasid Caliphate but they underestimated their brutality and killed the convoy. You know the rest.

And I wonder what a Islamic Europe would look like if Charles Martel lost at the Battle of Tours.

 

[Malcolmxxx_23]

Yeah. Mongols originally came in peace to Abbasid Caliphate but they underestimated their brutality and killed the convoy. You know the rest.

And I wonder what a Islamic Europe would look like if Charles Martel lost at the Battle of Tours.

Probably all of Europe under caliphate

 

[VoxSphere74]

Aside from how Southern African history officially went, one of the big what ifs of history is what if the Mali Empire led by Mansa Qu had gone north along the African coast until reaching Europe instead of traveling out into the Atlantic to explore it and presumably getting lost at sea?

What happens if Africans reach the Europeans first in the early 1300's 100 years before the Portuguese start exploring? Do they conquer them? Trade? Or just maintain diplomatic contact?

 

[Gritsngravy]

Yes for sure. The power the Europeans gained from Capitalism made their Imperialism and Colonialism possible

Christopher Columbus and the other explorers from Portugal, Spain, etc coming to America were sanctioned and financed by their countries. Even the Pilgrims who "came for Religious freedom" were only able to come here because they were financed from their home country

I don’t think the ideology of capitalism it’s self was the reason why the world is the way it is today, European capitalism would be looked at as a failure if they never had access to African slaves
Slavery made capitalism what it is today, but without slavery that shyt would’ve never grown
I don’t see how you could claim capitalism is the main cause
Them other countries didn’t fail because they weren’t capitalist

 

[UpAndComing]

I don’t think the ideology of capitalism it’s self was the reason why the world is the way it is today, European capitalism would be looked at as a failure if they never had access to African slaves
Slavery made capitalism what it is today, but without slavery that shyt would’ve never grown
I don’t see how you could claim capitalism is the main cause
Them other countries didn’t fail because they weren’t capitalist

You're just arguing just to argue

 

[Gritsngravy]

You're just arguing just to argue

The points you made doesnt make sense, your biases makes you look goofy to even make some of the claims you made

 

[UpAndComing]

The points you made doesnt make sense, your biases makes you look goofy to even make some of the claims you made

Its goofy because you don't understand them and how impactful the 4 to 5 points I mentioned are. Its ok to admit it. Stop the uneducated babble and open a book so you can understand my points

 

[Gritsngravy]

Its goofy because you don't understand them and how impactful they are. Its ok to admit it. Stop the uneducated babble and open a book so you can understand my points

Capitalism isn’t the end all be all, for you to be so educated you would understand that