Was decolonization messy on purpose?

Was decolonization messy on purpose?

  1. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yes obviously.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Obviously

  2. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    In most of Africa no.
    For the French parts absolutely.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      Love this narrative in the English speaking world according to which Britain was nice and all but France was awful
      It's like France is their boogeyman to avoid talking about how they themselves behaved
      France didn't do half the fucked up shit Britain did in Africa. Hell, the South Africa apartheid remains the worse case of decolonization and it didn't occur in a French colony.

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        >the South Africa apartheid remains the worse case of decolonization
        Nearly all of the worst countries in Africa have French origins, you fucking what? Are you really going to argue that Mali and Chad are or were ever in a better state than fucking South Africa?

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          Sounds arbitrary

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Defining Apartheid as "the worse case of decolonization" is far more arbitrary than observing objective living conditions like secure access to food or water you fucking mong.

            • 9 months ago
              Anonymous

              Colonization ha s been over for some time, any conditions the blacks are living in now is due to their own actions

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Colonization ha s been over for some time
                Not that logn to be honest.

                >any conditions the blacks are living in now is due to their own actions
                Because things don't occur in a vacuum like the rest of the world does. Many of the shit you see now is a result of the actions and polices done back in the day. Yes they are things that are done due to locals entities and stuff like that but you can't be daft and completely just ignore the colonial era and the tumultuous decade after that

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                It's not white people's fault that blacks are super corruptible

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                Generalizing the entire population of sub-saharan Africa doesn't add to the discussion.
                Botswana has a massive AIDS problem but otherwise avoided political instability, extreme corruption etc despite or in fact because colonial rule amounted to little more than acknowledging British overlordship.

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                Botswana is only relevant because of its diamond mines, otherwise its an absolute shithole

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                It isn't an absolute shithole though, it's better than most sub-saharan countries. Many of those countries also have valuable resources but have thus far failed to successfully use them to the benefit of the country as a whole. Botswana did.
                Whatever point you tried to make is false.

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                So what you're saying is that Africa needs to have more foreign funded resource extraction so africans can huddle around the giant vacuum hose for warmth because they're not ever going to do anything themselves

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                You sound like some mentally unhinged man on some new sites comment section lol

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                >dude africa's great if it has diamonds!
                okay

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Not that logn to be honest.

                Africa was colonized for 80 years
                Africa has been independent for 60 years

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Africa was colonized for 80 years
                >Africa has been independent for 60 years
                Still pretty long especially in an era where tech has made massive jumps and the whole conquest game radically changed where things went much faster than they did in previous centuries lol. Look at Angola. The Portuguese only made the jump from their small coastal control to full on domination in the 1920's after having been in Africa for literal centuries.

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Nearly all of the worst countries in Africa have French origins
          South Sudan? Somalia? Zimbabwe? Britain left behind a fair share of horrific shitholes

          >Are you really going to argue that Mali and Chad are or were ever in a better state than fucking South Africa?
          The French left them as shitholes, just like they found them. But at least they didn't leave behind a racist cast of white colonist ruling over the locals like the British did in SA.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Somalia
            Italian

            >Zimbabwe
            Actually doing better now.. Still in the gutter but actually making little steps to recovery.

            >Britain left behind a fair share of horrific shitholes
            True but they thing is that many of them are on their road to recovery or actually have a chance of making it big.

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Hell, the South Africa apartheid remains the worse case of decolonization and it didn't occur in a French colony.
          Yeah dude because what the French did in Algeria, Cameroon, Mali, Niger, Chad, and Mauritius was just so benign. Especially Algeria, Apartheid was so much worse than the military directly torturing and killing civilians.

          He kind of has a point though
          Don't get me wrong, the French weren't any better than the British like he claims, but they also weren't any worse like it's often claimed by the British.
          As someone who studied African history thoroughly, I can tell you that the (slight) difference between French and British former colonies in black Africa doesn't boil down to how the colonial masters behaved but rather to where the colonies were located.

          East Africans are superior to West Africans. There, I said it.
          West Africa will always be a shithole.
          The only "successful" British colony located there, Nigeria, only "does well" economically due to its massive population (kinda like India "does well"). But in reality Nigeria is a godawful poverty-ridden shithole that hosts one of the most heinous terror group on the whole planet.
          If I was given the choince between living in the "successful" Nigeria or in Kenya/Tanzania, i'd choose in a split second.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            What do you think about Ghana history? What do you think is in store for Ghana?

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >The only "successful" British colony located there, Nigeria, only "does well" economically due to its massive population (kinda like India "does well"). But in reality Nigeria is a godawful poverty-ridden shithole that hosts one of the most heinous terror group on the whole planet.
            Ghana is objectively far more successful than Nigeria, has a lower poverty rate, better access to education, and better Infastrcture.
            Even Sierra Leone is starting to get better, and is turning into a better functioning Democracy.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >mfw Ghana is now a French colony

            • 9 months ago
              Anonymous

              The post your quoting doesn't say or even imply such a thing though
              Can't you read?

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yes I can indeed. He claims Nigeria is the only somewhat successful British Colony in west Africa, which means he's implying
                a) Ghana is less successful than Nigeria, which is a glaringly false claim
                b) or he's implying Ghana is not a British colony, which if not, would imply it to be another part of French West Africa
                Both implications are false but I gave him benefit of the doubt and assumed he meant the less retarded claim

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >West Africa
            Best: Ghana (british)
            Worst: Mali (french)
            >East Africa
            Best: Kenya (british)
            Worst: Burundi (belgian)
            >Indian Ocean
            Best: Mauritius (british)
            Worst: Madagascar (french)

            • 9 months ago
              Anonymous

              >West Africa
              >Worst: Mali (french)
              It's actually Niger (which is French as well)
              Mali has a pretty bad HDI (roughly similar to the shithole British ex-colony Sierra Leone) but still quite above Nig(g)er

              >East Africa
              Worst: Burundi (belgian)
              Burundi is considered part of Central Africa, and anyway has a higher HDI than South Soudan (British) which is in East Africa

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                Isn't Niger Central Africa? Also who considers Burundi central Africa?

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regions_of_the_African_Union

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                >burundi in central africa and rwanda in east africa
                Kek

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Hell, the South Africa apartheid remains the worse case of decolonization and it didn't occur in a French colony.
        Yeah dude because what the French did in Algeria, Cameroon, Mali, Niger, Chad, and Mauritius was just so benign. Especially Algeria, Apartheid was so much worse than the military directly torturing and killing civilians.

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          You left out Madagascar. Lol the French fucked them up hard.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            I knew I was forgetting somewhere important, thanks anon. It's laughable to call Apartheid the worst thing that happened down there.

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          You think people weren't being tortured and killed under Apartheid?

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Yeah dude because what the French did in Algeria, Cameroon, Mali, Niger, Chad, and Mauritius was just so benign.
          The French did fucked up shit in Algeria, but not in the other countries you randomly mentioned for now reasons afterward.

          >Especially Algeria, Apartheid was so much worse than the military directly torturing and killing civilians.
          Yeah, bad things happen during guerrilla warfare.
          The Americans did the same in Iraq, the British did the same in Ireland....etc
          That's bad but nowhere near as fucked up as doing shit like that during fucking peace time like in South Africa.

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        I love the french narrative more. It's like a pendulum. They swing from outright denying they did anything bad in colonial africa to taunting nafris with pictures of lynched algerians and the infamous "algie drowning practice in the seine" photo whenever they get in an argument. What an absolute schizophrenic race.

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          >poltards are retarded
          What a fascinating discovery

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Eh, I don't frequent LULZ. I comment on what I see from french posters on /int/ and even normalfags on f*c*book

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          Algerians really don't have any self awareness, it's amazing
          The drowings in Paris in 1961 occurred during a pro-FLN rally at the heart of Paris, after FLN terror attacks in Paris had been killing dozens of policemen in the previous weeks.
          So yes, the policemen snapped when they saw a pro-terrorism rally in their fucking city by a bunch of foreigners, just like any other police in the world would have.

          Algerians are one of the most wicked people on earth and everything they got during colonization they fully deserved it (unlike sub-saharan africans, viets, native americans....etc)
          Hell, the very reason why Algeria was colonized in the first place is because these subhumans had been enslaving Europeans for centuries
          Most justified colonial conquest ever

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Algerians are one of the most wicked people on earth and everything they got during colonization they fully deserved it
            How fucked are you in the head?

            >Hell, the very reason why Algeria was colonized in the first place is because these subhumans had been enslaving Europeans for centuries
            that was actually the first war that various Euros cracked down on Algeria. The reason for the conquest was not due to "THEY ENSLAVED US".

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            What gave French the right to steal resources from Algeria? Dirty kaafir your time is up now Muslims will give you something back

            • 9 months ago
              Anonymous

              What resources? Algerians lived or piracy and goat herding when the French arrived
              Soil was full of oil but it aint like them sheep fucker knew how to extract it or even had the technology to use it.
              Btw colonization was a payback for the enslavement of white europeans by Algerians

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Btw colonization was a payback for the enslavement of white europeans by Algerians
                It wasn't you retard. the "payback" was done long before the colonization and even back then Europeans used the pirates within the area as way to hinder their allies. this whole "payback " is rooted in some retarded entitlement.

            • 9 months ago
              Anonymous

              >resources from Algeria
              What, like their alfalfa farms?

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          Well, the "crimes against humanity" in Algeria never happened but boy i sure wish they did

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          It might be the narrative among far-right French people who are butthurt about getting ethnically replaced, but it's definitly not the official French narrative.
          Everyone in France has heard about that insignificant "massacre" in which dozens of pro-FLN protesters in Paris were beat up and thrown in the Seine by the exasperated police they had been killing for months.
          This shit is taught in French school and the French president apologizes for it every year.

          Meanwhile, I doubt anyone in France below the age of 60 has ever heard of the infamous massacres perpetrated by Algerians on Pieds-noirs and garden gnomes on 20 August 1955.
          This shit was basically the turning point of the Algerian War and turned a decolonization conflict into a race war.
          That day the Algerians reached a level of barbarity (a word that comes from "Beber", how fitting) that would make the Dirlewanger brigade puke in disgust. Not even the worst of what the French army later did to Algerian rebels (in reprisal for that day) such as torturing them with electricity on the dick, even comes close to what Algerians did to random civilians on that day.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            You vastly overestimate the memory or historical knowledge of the average French person

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >a word that comes from "Beber", how fitting
            You got that wrong, champ. Bar bar is influenced from the greek Barbaroi which was used to describe all non hellene. Say, even your gallic ancestors were called Barbaroi at one point or the other.
            By the way, since it's a matter of perspective, and you consider it wholly justified and legal to lynch and nuke nafris, I'm pretty sure nafris felt wholly justified in killing a bunch of settlers who weren't native to the land, no? Funny how morality works both ways.

            • 9 months ago
              Anonymous

              Pretty sure this guy is German
              Anyways yes, "the suitcase or the coffin" works both ways and i am fine with it
              I will add that pieds noirs are a bunch of spanish garden gnomes who have been a pain in the ass ever since they came back and if it were up to me i'd have left them with the Algerians, i'd even have exchanged them for the harkis

            • 9 months ago
              Anonymous

              >By the way, since it's a matter of perspective, and you consider it wholly justified and legal to lynch and nuke nafris, I'm pretty sure nafris felt wholly justified in killing a bunch of settlers who weren't native to the land, no? Funny how morality works both ways.

              I'm sure even the most racist guys in France just want to remigrate muslims and not genocide them.
              I doubt any of them could castrate a father in front of his children before killing them all or slice newborns with a cleaver like Algerians did to random white and gnomish civilians on that day
              Only arabs (and maybe mexicans) are capable of that kind of sadistic shit

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                Kek, what? Are you implying that the pieds noirs were in any way less violent in their "Retaliations" against the natives? Or are you trying to paint them as the ultimate victim of le evil algerians? Jesus Christ, get a grip.
                And no, the most racist guy in france would absolutely genocide les bougnoules. Do you specialize in selective deafness?

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                Algerians are the scum of the earth, aren't they the kidnapping capitol of the world?

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Are you implying that the pieds noirs were in any way less violent in their "Retaliations" against the natives?

                Factually yes
                Sometimes they'd shoot or beat to death an innocent Algerian, but this doesnt even come close to the ISIS-tier gorey shit the Algerians had done to cause these retaliations to begin with

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                BUT THE COMPLETELY MADE UP ALGERIAN GENOCIDE ANON

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                French people in 2021 are just as justified in wanting to kill every Algerian in France as the Algerians were justified in 1960 in wanting to kill every French person in Algeria.
                French people in France and Algerian people in Algeria.

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                Ew, there's Algerians in France? Is that who's driving the trucks of peace?

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                Don't forget German people
                Algerians are literally killing and raping their people as shown on pic

                Algerians really don't have any self awareness, it's amazing
                The drowings in Paris in 1961 occurred during a pro-FLN rally at the heart of Paris, after FLN terror attacks in Paris had been killing dozens of policemen in the previous weeks.
                So yes, the policemen snapped when they saw a pro-terrorism rally in their fucking city by a bunch of foreigners, just like any other police in the world would have.

                Algerians are one of the most wicked people on earth and everything they got during colonization they fully deserved it (unlike sub-saharan africans, viets, native americans....etc)
                Hell, the very reason why Algeria was colonized in the first place is because these subhumans had been enslaving Europeans for centuries
                Most justified colonial conquest ever

                And they don't even have the excuse of "it's revenge for muh colonization" like in France
                It's just pure chimp behavior from subhumans

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                >French people in 2021 are just as justified in wanting to kill every Algerian in France as the Algerians were justified in 1960 in wanting to kill every French person in Algeria.
                I agree with this sentiment. So

                No matter how biased you are, beating up someone before throwing him in a river or throwing someone to his death from a helicopter is objectively less bad than castrating a father in front of his kids and putting the genitals in his mouth or hacking newborns into pieces with a cleaver.
                The French were brutal and rutheless while the Algerians were barbaric and sadistic.

                spare me your false outrage

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                No matter how biased you are, beating up someone before throwing him in a river or throwing someone to his death from a helicopter is objectively less bad than castrating a father in front of his kids and putting the genitals in his mouth or hacking newborns into pieces with a cleaver.
                The French were brutal and rutheless while the Algerians were barbaric and sadistic.

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                >And no, the most racist guy in france would absolutely genocide les bougnoules. Do you specialize in selective deafness?

                The French far-right's favorite word is "rémigration", not "génocide"

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                The most racist guy in any country would absolutely genocide every other race. Except they don't have any power because they are retarded. You need diplomacy with other people and other countries to negociate or trade in the real world. Thankfully you are also retarded and that's why you also don't have any power.

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                What the fuck are you even trying to say you stupid n-word?

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                That saying the most racist guy in France would absolutely genocide the algerians is a stupid and useless statement.

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous
              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Only arabs (and maybe mexicans) are capable of that kind of sadistic shit
                the French did fucked up shirty to religious minorities within France during various parts of history.

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        >it didn't occur in a French colony.
        Algeria basically had segregation anon. Technically their colonies had some form of it

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          Considered part of the arab world, we're discussing nignogs in this thread
          Though it's hilarous how Algeria, despite its shitty religion and culture, its massive inbreeding rate and its brutal decolonization war, still does better than the best parts of black africa.
          Genetics are truly something amazing.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Algeria is part of Africa you retard. Ignorance is not a virtue.

            • 9 months ago
              Anonymous

              And Europe is part of Asia if we go by retarded landmass distinction instead of cultural and racial distinction.
              You know very well what people mean when they say "Africa", and no they don't mean Egypt or Algeria

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        Read the loi cadre, or our attempts at shooting down the mali federation

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous
        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous
    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      >What is the Mau Mau uprising
      >What is the Portuguese anti colonial wars

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      The French are quite clearly the villains of history.

  3. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yeah leaving behind all that infrastructure sure was messy

  4. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    [deleted post]

    >Pre-colonial Africa was messy too
    Not any more or less than the rest of the world.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yes, much more
      In 1880, the rest of the world didn't have wars between fucking villages nor did it have slaver raids...

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        >In 1880, the rest of the world didn't have wars between fucking villages nor did it have slaver raids...
        No they had massive scale wars between people anon. American Civil War?

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        Blood feuds were still a thing in the Balkans, Italy, Scotland, and parts of North America

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          Difference is that in these places villages weren't nations

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Neither were they across Africa.

            • 9 months ago
              Anonymous

              Pre-colonial Africa had many village-nations (especially in Central Africa) and even the most developped "nations" tended to consist in a hundred of villages at most
              If it had had mapped borders, it would be even more of "a mess" than current Africa

              • 9 months ago
                Anonymous

                Not really . Espcially since many of these entities had organized political structures, taxation structures, militarizes, hierarchies, castes, a ruling class or more. What is Aksum, Kongo Kingdom, Ethiopia, Nubia, Somali city--states, swahili city-states, Songhai, Mali. etc etc.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Cannibalism, living in mud huts with no sanitation and slavery weren't that bad bro

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      Uh what?

      Read some of the missionary accounts of 19th century Africa and keep in mind these guys were anti-slavery liberal/progressive types.

      >cannibalism
      >human sacrifice
      >"muti" beliefs where albino skins and dried baby fingers were used for magic
      >constant small scale violence

      Africa south of the Niger and north of the Limpopo was pretty hellish in pre-colonial era.

  5. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    Africans wanted colonialism to end, they didn't want a period of gradually ceding power, of negotiations to redraw maps or anything, they wanted independence right away, so that's what they got.

    Colonial borders have remained despite much war and instability since maintaining national governments and national armies in Africa is a source of stability. If a nation cedes territory it sets a precedent that violence and hostility gets results, which invites more. In theory anyway, regardless in practice they remain.

    Also isn't it the left always saying "diversity is strength"? Tribal based nations would be a clusterfuck. They have to learn to live together to some extent.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      No other way was really possible because the colonial power would rush it if it was getting to costly for them. There's also the fact that if the locals were to agree to independance at later date the European power could do so many things to fuck them over in one or any combo of the following like:

      >Refuse to do anything at all past the bare minimum until the date of serperation
      >set up the economy and political/economic structure that even spot independence Europeans woudl have death grip on the economy.
      >Strip everything that is not bolted to the floor.
      >Leave but have all the resources be firmly under the control of their companies
      >Infinitely delay it.
      >Set up the colony so that it's political structure would be super frail and easy to exploit post independence

      there was nothing that could work asides from immediate independence since Africans didn't have much pull asides from the threat for rebellion which was iffy since as shown in the Mau Mau Rebellion, Malaysian emergency, Portuguese Colonial War they could put them down brutally if they desired.

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        What are you basing this on? Europe had universal democracy and had elected socialist governments vehemently opposed to colonialism. In the end most newly independent democracies would be taken over by despots. No doubt Europe would make errors or place their interests over Africa's at points, because they are human, however it would be far from your "da jooz" tier conspiracy theories.

        It is obvious you are an extreme far-leftist who prefers incorrect opinions that give you good feels as opposed to facts, logic and correct opinions. Just admit you are wrong and stop being an idiot.

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Europe had universal democracy and had elected socialist governments vehemently opposed to colonialism
          On paper. yo fail to realize that just because a government is ""lefty" or "eighty" doesn't mean their polices all align with it. Especial when many left wing politicians back than were not all against colonization. Even today we have Euro states promoting polices abroad that completely clash with their beliefs.

          >your "da jooz" tier conspiracy theories.
          How is it a conspiracy when all those things I mentioned did occur in some way?

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Refuse to do anything at all past the bare minimum until the date of seperation
            Many colonies were ruled on shoestring budgets so maintaining the status quo until the time was up is realistic. you saw this in Eritrea/Somalia under British military administration and German South West Africa under South Africa

            >set up the economy and political/economic structure that even post independence Europeans would have death grip on the economy.
            Was the primary goal for Rhodesia with how minority rule and voting operated in the state

            >Strip everything that is not bolted to the floor.
            France did this to Guinea by stripping the copper from several government buildings

            >Leave but have all the resources be firmly under the control of their companies
            Belgium's plan in the Congo by Belgian mining companies supporting Katanga to split so they can get total access to their resources.

            >Set up the colony so that it's political structure would be super frail and easy to exploit post independence
            Many colonies in Franco-Africa fit this. Especially since their elections are dependant on who has France's backing and the reverse also apposite to France

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Also isn't it the left always saying "diversity is strength"
      No, that's only for white nations.

      In African nations it's "the colonists mixed together people from different tribes, that's why African nations are violent".

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      > diversity is a strength
      Random borders make countries less diverse than they ar should be.

  6. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    Anyways, don't forget that "colonization" isn't over. ~thirteen African countries have their economic policies ran from Paris. Africa is still very much under control of eurohomos and resources are still being extracted so Europe can afford to live with its degeneracy.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      Resources are being extracted by chinks and then SOLD (in exchange for MONEY, just like during slavery) to the Europeans.
      The only thing Europe is stealing to Africa right now is its inhabitants

  7. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    If only Britain had listened to Ian Smith...

  8. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why does this board become so fucking cucked when darkies come into the equation? I swear that what's left of whites in 100 years will still be crying over how huwhite privilege is keeping the black man down.

  9. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    If they had enough control to do it properly they wouldn't do it at all.

Your email address will not be published.