Europe and Africa

[Gelion]

A debate was started in this thread, which was a bit offtopic. [http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=189225&page=7, second half of page]
I want to invite it here.

I really want to hear an answer to this. Personaly I haven't made up my mind on the situation. So I ask:
- Is the current state of Africa largely a fault of European colonisers?
- Was there any chance for Afircans to catch up on the technology/society gap and build something different that ew know today?
and
- What are in your view effects of European colonialism on Africa?

 

[Masquerouge]

- Is the current state of Africa largely a fault of European colonisers?

No, the current state is partly a fault of European colonization.

- Was there any chance for Afircans to catch up on the technology/society gap and build something different that ew know today?

We'll never know. But what we know for sure is that they could have caught up once they got rid of colonial powers. Some African countries did better than others in that regard.

Note that the US and the EU are not helping with their tariffs and taxes on African goods, along with subsidized agriculture. When it's cheaper to buy European cotton - because it's subsidized - than African cotton, something's terribly wrong with world trade.

- What are in your view effects of European colonialism on Africa?

The biggest negative effect is the drawing of artificial borders completely neglecting the regional political powers. Ennemy nations found themselves within the same European-drawn borders.

But to be honest 300 years ago most of Africa was still in the stone age. The transition phase might be a bit long.

 

[Perfection]

European Colonialism may have had a blarge negative impact on Africa, but only the Africans can repair the damage.

 

[CurtSibling]

Africans have done plenty to destroy their own countries.

Blaming European colonisation or Yankee diamond mining is the easy scapegoat.

.

 

[Perfection]

Playing the blame game may be interesting from a historical perspective, but it's not something that needs to be seen in the political halls. It should be focused on solving problems, not about figuring out who caused them so they can yell at thier decendants.

 

[CurtSibling]

The African republics should stop killing each other as a first step towards progress.

.

 

[CruddyLeper]

The bankers and other blood sucking leeches should also forigive African debt as a 2nd step towards progress.

Don't blame the colonisers, blame the capitalists who bankrolled them.

And look where a lot of the Afrcans ended up - in the Americas.

Don't tell me the US never benefited from African poverty. That is a lie.

 

[Lambert Simnel]

Don't tell me the US never benefited from African poverty. That is a lie.

Get your retaliation in first ? I'm not sure anyone has yet suggested that the US (and the UK) didn't benefit massively from exploiting Africa and its peoples.

But when they do, I'm sure you'll be there ready!

 

[garric]

The African republics should stop killing each other as a first step towards progress.

.

You make it sound so easy. The same could have been said of your beloved Europe some decades ago.

.

 

[Peri]

You make it sound so easy. The same could have been said of your beloved Europe some decades ago.

.

This is about African development. How are European wars relevant to this? You are familiar with this Europe; the home of the Industrial Revoltion and the majority of advances made by mankind?

 

[garric]

This is about African development. How are European wars relevant to this? You are familiar with this Europe; the home of the Industrial Revoltion and the majority of advances made by mankind?

I was using it as an example. By saying "Yeah, Africans should just stop killing eachother", is like answering a question on Global Warning by saying "Yeah, we should just stop polluting, that would solve everything". It's a fine answer but it's not that simple. It's relevant to Europe because as we all know European nations have often attacked and fought eachother, much like the African republics. Are the Africans really that more savage than Europeans? You're right, I guess the Europeans have used their advanced machinery as a means of efficiently killing human beings!

And the home of the Industrial Revolution was America, not Europe.

 

[Lambert Simnel]

And the home of the Industrial Revolution was America, not Europe.

Really ? Wiki, for what it's worth

I've never before come across anyone who disputed that the Industrial Revolution started in Britain.

 

[garric]

Really ? Wiki, for what it's worth

I've never before come across anyone who disputed that the Industrial Revolution started in Britain.

Rule #1: Don't use wikipedia as a source in an argument or you'll be scoffed at in higher circles of learning.
Rule #2: Don't make assumptions.

Never did I say that the Industrial Revolution did not start in Europe, but like most things from Europe, it was expanded on and perfected in America. Shortly after the Industrial Revolution, (don't quote me on this one, I'm not 100% sure) America became the leading nation in the world in regards to wealth, and produced a very large % (was it 80%?) of the world's goods! And also, to boot, has become the de-facto world power, a title of which it has never stepped down from.

Eurocentered textbooks probably will not aknowledge this fundamental fact, so I'd understand where any disagreement will come from.

 

[Masquerouge]

And the home of the Industrial Revolution was America, not Europe.

That's a pretty bold and unorthodox statement.

Shortly after the Industrial Revolution, (don't quote me on this one, I'm not 100% sure) America became the leading nation in the world in regards to wealth, and produced a very large % (was it 80%?) of the world's goods!

Your Eurocentered textbooks probably will not aknowledge this fundamental fact, so I'd understand where any disagreement will come from.

This will prove you wrong:

Linky:http://mondediplo.com/2004/10/04asia

Basically it was not until after WW1 that the US became a real industrial power house, long after the Industrial Revolution.

 

[Sidhe]

Really ? Wiki, for what it's worth

I've never before come across anyone who disputed that the Industrial Revolution started in Britain.

Indeed, it was Britain who started the whole affair. We're not the most impressive country in history, in fact we've been pretty diabolical, but let's at least give credit where due.

Anyway basically Europe exploited the hell out of Africa and then left when political division meant here was little worth exploting in the colonies in Africa, we pretty much screwed them over for profit, but such was the way in those days. Of course we make excuses now, that somehow we were in the right, but frankly we've left countries struggling to survive, supplied them with weapons and got the hell out of there. We did nothing wrong?

 

[Lambert Simnel]

Rule #1: Don't use wikipedia as a source in an argument or you'll be scoffed at in higher circles of learning.
Rule #2: Don't make assumptions.

Never did I say that the Industrial Revolution did not start in Europe, but like most things from Europe, it was expanded on and perfected in America. Shortly after the Industrial Revolution, (don't quote me on this one, I'm not 100% sure) America became the leading nation in the world in regards to wealth, and produced a very large % (was it 80%?) of the world's goods!

Your Eurocentered textbooks probably will not aknowledge this fundamental fact, so I'd understand where any disagreement will come from.

Oh, you do make me laugh, Garric. Ah, where to start ? Firstly, please note that I did put the link to Wiki as a "for what it's worth" - to my mind Wikipedia is quite useful, but at times hopelessly US biased. I'm not actually using it as a basis for an argument, my friend, because I'm not arguing. Go and look at any number of "Eurocentric" or otherwise textbooks and check. Wiki was just the easiest to find. (Just out of interest, is there anything in the Wiki entry that you're actually disputing ? After all, the quality of the message is the thing, not the quality of the messenger.)

Assumptions. Okay. The one who actually used the term of "home of the Industrial Revolution" first in this thread was Peri. We have both made assumptions. You're assuming that he meant "home, as in, not where it started or underwent it's initial development, but where it was expanded upon", while I assume he meant "home, as in, the place it originated from". I'd suggest that my interpretation (or, if you will, "assumption") is a more usual one for the term in question, but I'm happy to let Peri be the judge of what he actually meant. (You're missing a lot of relevant history, by the way, if you think that building on the Industrial Revolution was a peculiarly American practice)

80% sounds like an insane figure, so I'll wait for you to back it up. But I do really like the way you say "don't quote me on this one, I'm not 100% sure" and then describe it as "a fundamental fact".

Lastly, textbooks ? Textbooks ? What age do you think I am ? I was practically around when the Industrial Revolution started, m'boy. The UK has had some bilious teaching materials over the years, but not any (at least while I was involved in education) which could honestly be described as "Eurocentric".

(PS Was "higher circles of learning" meant to refer to CfC, or perhaps to the wonderful US as a whole ? Love to get this one clear)

 

[Urederra]

I was practically around when the Industrial Revolution started, m'boy.

Did you met James Watt? LOL.

kidding, kidding.

 

[CruddyLeper]

You make it sound so easy. The same could have been said of your beloved Europe some decades ago.

.

Alas, the conflicts over the breakup of Yugoslavia smoulder still.

I always thought the definition of an "industrialised" country was the ratio of population to agricultural workers - get it down to 5% or less and the country has (technically) had an industrial revolution.

 

[Peri]

And the home of the Industrial Revolution was America, not Europe.

Well as long as you are sure about that.
Yes Lambert I did mean it in the context of from where it began and I dont see how it could be interpreted in another way. However I think the main problem is that I dared to burst his bubble on the eternal greatness of the US and as a mere European that is not allowed.

 

[Stolen Rutters]

Conventional wisdom... Britain was the home of the Industrial Revolution.

Conventional wisdom... until the Industrial Revolution, china would have dominated world production since human labor was not multiplied by machines to the same level before 1700 as the time following the 1700s (1700s being called the beginning of the aforementioned IndRev), meaning that population effectively defined productivity before then.

Britain held a nice lead in industrial productivity compared to most of the world until the rest of the world really made efforts to catch up in the 1800s. Note I said productivity, not total production. 150 million Chinese could still probably outproduce less than 10 million British in totality. However, with the industrial machines and rail infrastructure in place well before the year 1800, Britain almost certainly made a great many goods cheaper than anyone else.

Read a book called "An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of The Wealth of Nations" by Adam Smith, published in 1776. It's an eye opening book to the state of economics in the world at the time... he uses examples from all over the world, including Asia and Africa. The question wasn't Europe and Africa at the time... it was "Why was Britain an industrial powerhouse and everywhere else wasn't".

After reading this book, it actually kind of makes sense why much of the world, Africa included, was de-industrisalized in the face of the Industrial Revolution of the 18th and 19th centuries.