NationStates Jolt Archive

As a Brit, soon to be American, I look at Africa, and I look at the history, since its independence, its turned to a waste land pretty much (don’t whinge oh south Africa’s ok, ive travelled Africa, ive seen this all first hand)

Corrupt dictaters and an unfair world market keeps Africa in poverty, the world, and Africa has 2 decisions.

First the African people get off their backsides expecting the west to support them, and overthrow the dictators like magubai and king maswati 3rd. Im sure the west would then love to help them establish real democracy,

Of course, in the real world, this won’t happen, so, the second option, my favourite, would work.

We do it all for them, we recolonise them, we rebuild the empire!!!!!!!!

The British troops go in, oust the dictators, and we govern Africa! Simple!!!!

When Britain owned roughly a 3rd of Africa, the Africans had jobs, we updated them technologically, we gave them an identity to be proud of, yes, not always the British were mean ba*stards, but, on the whole, we increased life pretty much all over.

Now, Africa has shown it can’t look after itself; the people won’t do anything we have to, unless we want to stand by and watch 20,000 children die every day there.

If we recolonised, we would rebuild African industry, and entwine it with our own, we would make the streets safe, we would create MILLIONS of jobs by rebuilding Africa (well, build, its never really been built before) we also would again update them technologically, improved farming methods would allow millions more hectares available for farming and for farming to become much more efficient, ending the food crises,

They are no longer of a corrupt good for nothing government, instead a democracy, and after we’re nearly there, we hold a referendum, if they want us to stay (like in Gibraltar, ST Helena and Northern Ireland) we will, if not, we’ll leave. They get food, water, education infrastructure, and an identity to be proud of; we get to sell all there goods. I for one would be the first to volunteer to take the union jack ashore in Africa, and oh yeah, actually destroying the ridiculously outdated armies of Africa would mean minimum casualties for both sides, even an African guerrilla campaign wouldn’t last long, and it didn’t in the Boer war and the IRA have just given up in Ireland.

What are your thoughts? Before you say YOU IMPERIALIST F**KER!!!!!! Actually consider the idea, what’s the alternative? How likely is the alternative to happen? Not bloody likely.

Have fun getting your ass shot off by enraged African militants. It's not as easy as just going over and saying "you're our collony now". Many Africans beleive that European imperialism is the root cause of their present day problems.

Well, I don't think Congo wants us back.

Have fun getting your ass shot off by enraged African militants. It's not as easy as just going over and saying "you're our collony now". Many Africans beleive that European imperialism is the root cause of their present day problems.

With education, theyd know the BRITISH havent casued there problems today, yeah the other europeans, eg the belgiums in rwanda DID cause the troubles of today but, education would change that, and the fact that as i stated, the african military is like bows and arrows compared to ours,

I dunno. Treating a gun wound with a magnum isn't my idea of a cure...

Does Britain even have a large enough army to do that? The only reason they were successful in the past was technological advantage. How would they fair against modern day Africans? You’d need to institute a draft or something.

Have fun getting your ass shot off by enraged African militants. It's not as easy as just going over and saying "you're our collony now". Many Africans beleive that European imperialism is the root cause of their present day problems.

Which it really is. The British colonial empire kept down industrialization, that's why said countries are in this mess. What Rougu's proposing, though, is more a restructuring than colonization. Either way, it looks like something one of my friends would be into. The one who's idol is Emperor Palpatine.

Does Britain even have a large enough army to do that? The only reason they were successful in the past was technological advantage. How would they fair against modern day Africans? You’d need to institute a draft or something.

we dont, our army is something like 200,000 , and allways shrinking, but, i also beleive in national service......

I agree that Africa was probably better off under an empire. There's just one problem with reinstituting it: it would be a far bigger problem today than it was around 1900. Imagine all of the troops and money needed to maintain order, let alone solve problems.

With education, theyd know the BRITISH havent casued there problems today, yeah the other europeans, eg the belgiums in rwanda DID cause the troubles of today but, education would change that, and the fact that as i stated, the african military is like bows and arrows compared to ours,Teehee. African military bows and arrows. Bows an arrows can kill too. Especially when you have to spread your troops to cover an entire CONTINENT.

You just try that... You'll have millions of angry black people with AK-47's everyware.

Which it really is. The British colonial empire kept down industrialization, that's why said countries are in this mess. What Rougu's proposing, though, is more a restructuring than colonization. Either way, it looks like something one of my friends would be into. The one who's idol is Emperor Palpatine.
thats a better word, reconstructing, we woudent own them as such, as i said a refurendom and we go but, we both benifit if rebuild/build africa without having to deal with these currpt goverments.

Either way, it looks like something one of my friends would be into. The one who's idol is Emperor Palpatine.
Which is really creepy since Palpatine’s modeled after Hitler…

Please tell me you are not that naive. You do realize that most African countries want to be socialist, but captalists want them to remain struggling. That we use technology and other things to keep them under control and desolate. Trust me we use the dictators as the excuse, to keep African in the 3rd world so we can continue to exploit them. In Mozambique for example it was the U.S. who gave the dictator's military weapons and such to keep people from rebelling.

I agree that Africa was probably better off under an empire. There's just one problem with reinstituting it: it would be a far bigger problem today than it was around 1900. Imagine all of the troops and money needed to maintain order, let alone solve problems.Some people consider European (and I mean all of it, not just the Belgians or all but the British) Colonialism the cause for the problem in the first place.

*hums Rule Britannia*

If we could pull it off, it'd be a great idea, but I think that, like Lotus said, re-colonizing Africa won't be as simple as it was the first time around. Not because the Africans will be able to offer any impressive resistance, mind you, but simply because the political will for it back home does not and will not exist.

I agree that Africa was probably better off under an empire. There's just one problem with reinstituting it: it would be a far bigger problem today than it was around 1900. Imagine all of the troops and money needed to maintain order, let alone solve problems.

This is true, im not saying my plan is flawless, but i want to see what everyone thinks

*hums Rule Britannia*

If we could pull it off, it'd be a great idea, but I think that, like Lotus said, re-colonizing Africa won't be as simple as it was the first time around. Not because the Africans will be able to offer any impressive resistance, mind you, but simply because the political will for it back home does not and will not exist.


True, the liberal democrats would have a field day opposing it, and saying throwing money at them will work eventually

thats a better word, reconstructing, we woudent own them as such, as i said a refurendom and we go but, we both benifit if rebuild/build africa without having to deal with these currpt goverments.How fast do you think the coalition would be out of Iraq if there was a referendum?

it would cost you too much and then you'd probably try and get your money back somehow which wouldn't be good for africa.

We do it all for them, we recolonise them, we rebuild the empire!!!!!!!!

Montgomery actually had a plan not entirely dissimilar to this shortly after WWII.

Some people consider European (and I mean all of it, not just the Belgians or all but the British) Colonialism the cause for the problem in the first place.

Indeed, however in some places around the globe it did seem to have a much more positive effect than in Africa - India, for example, if we ignore the whole border dispute thang.

Indeed, however in some places around the globe it did seem to have a much more positive effect than in Africa - India, for example, if we ignore the whole border dispute thang....and the fact that India still has a vast population that's impoverished. There's a couple examples that show that the Empire was good for the country, but these are also mainly predominately white countries where the indigenous population was suppressed and the whites came to stay. That's why those places have things like a working infrastructure and why they didn't do so badly.
Africa doesn't have many examples of states like India...

Prime example: Rhodesia, now Zimbabwe, was waaaayyy better off under british rule. It was a democracy, though thought as fascist, admittantly, the quality of life was 10 times better. The same, senial old man(Robert Mugabe) has been running that place since 1980, and it gets worse every day. The brits' only mistake was being rascist, otherwise, they ran most of those colonies very well. In my opinion, the British empire should give it another try.

Prime example: Rhodesia, now Zimbabwe, was waaaayyy better off under british rule. It was a democracy, thought a little fascist, admittantly, the quality of life was 10 times better. The same, senial old man(Robert Mugabe) has been running that place since 1980, and it gets worse every day. The brits' only mistake was being rascist, otherwise, they ran most of those colonies very well. In my opinion, the British empire should give it another try.Yes, you need your "space under the sun" again, don't you?

Africa doesn't have many examples of states like India...

Indeed, just pointing out that for all its myriad flaws, the British Empire did have some positive benefits, particularly when compared to other Empires. Not a sign of support for the British Empire or Imperialism in general.

Actually, I've got a better idea. Instead of having the army colonise them, lets use our massively superior bargaining position as granters of aid to get private business to colonise them. We could only grant aid if they opened up their economies to private enterprises that could use them for raw materials without really providing much stability in the economy, and allow them trading rights only if they accepted terms on intellectual property laws that stopped them from borrowing technology in the same way that most of the big global economic players did to get ahead in the development game.

I think I may be on to something here. Someone tell the WTO...

Have fun getting your ass shot off by enraged African militants. It's not as easy as just going over and saying "you're our collony now". Many Africans beleive that European imperialism is the root cause of their present day problems.
European imperialism did not do any long term damage to africa. If African people were smarter (no offense to African people), they would know that the problems are caused by those dictators, and are unassociated with European imperialism. I say to bring back European imperialism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Union

This is the solution to Africa's problems. Along with the most helping hand the rich world can possibly give: Fair Trade and debt cancellation.

See, the main problem with your plan is that it's totally backward thinking and not forward thinking.

A) Where does the money come from to "build" Africa?
B) What makes you think our interference would be welcome?
C) The rich world has been deliberately keeping Africa impoverished for over a century, we have benefitted so much from cheap labour (hello, slavery!), unfair trade, and installing and supporting corrupt dictators who keep the people down etc etc. We got rich by keeping them poor. So we are not inclined to help them now. Just look at the feeble offerings to come out of G8 after all the campaigning of MPH.
D) Many African militants have guns, hell, even remote tribes are getting hold of them now. That's our fault too btw, we just gave a bunch of weapons to a few people and now the people are going crazy for them. How many kidnappings and murders have there been by armed militant rebels now? _Many_.

You propose getting rid of current dictatorships in favour of a new one, us. And how exactly do you propose we control 11.6 million square miles and 800 million people? Are you suggesting installing our own chosen, British dictators in each existing country (all 54 of them)? Or would one single authority do the job? What you suggest isn't only immoral, it's impractical too!

We need to convince the government to help Africa solve its own problems, encourage the African Union and get our grubby little fingers out of the African biscuit tin.

D) Many African militants have guns, hell, even remote tribes are getting hold of them now. That's our fault too btw, we just gave a bunch of weapons to a few people and now the people are going crazy for them. How many kidnappings and murders have there been by armed militant rebels now? _Many_.

Lets not forget how much trouble the flip-flop wearing and be-wigged drunkards operating under the name The West Side Boys caused for the British Army a few years ago. Even if the casualty ratios sustained in the rescue there were mirrored across the continent (25 WSB to 1 Brit), taking Africa would be a 'sticky' proposition to say the least.


Forgive me if I fail to see the logic of installing Imperialism in Africa on the basis of the fact that it didn't work last time.

didn't work[/i] last time.

I believe the point is what makes you think it will work this time?

I believe the point is what makes you think it will work this time?

That was my point: I'm not in favour of the idea.

Here's a different idea though, which doesn't involve pointing guns at anyone: open British citizenship and immigration to anyone from Africa.

Here's a different idea though, which doesn't involve pointing guns at anyone: open British citizenship and immigration to anyone from Africa.

No, a terrible idea. But its your country, so by all means.

No, a terrible idea. But its your country, so by all means.

Why?

I think really the problem is trying to give countries their own economic system when they never had one before. I mean a read an article about Bulgaria I think it was on here actually that there was plenty of food, but people could not afford it and we're still starving. People don't have $ to spend and it's not going to get any better. And to be honest, no "throwing $ at them" is not going to work. $ is not the problem, it's the system. They need food, supplies, technology, jobs, not money...

Actually, I've got a better idea. Instead of having the army colonise them, lets use our massively superior bargaining position as granters of aid to get private business to colonise them. We could only grant aid if they opened up their economies to private enterprises that could use them for raw materials without really providing much stability in the economy, and allow them trading rights only if they accepted terms on intellectual property laws that stopped them from borrowing technology in the same way that most of the big global economic players did to get ahead in the development game.

I think I may be on to something here. Someone tell the WTO...

heh heh heh.

An interesting idea. However, it would never fly. The only way we can actually help Africa is to stop sending aid and let them fend for themselves. The governments are the ones actually getting that money, and it never reaches the people. I say we leave Africa alone and let it solve its own problems.

It may help in the long run, but the actual start of the colonization process would be hell.

Think Iraq.

And your going to have a massive economic shock from feeding, educating, clothing, and sheltering all those millions of people in a short amount of time.

Then your going to have a huge responsibility to actually make sure that their lives are bettered, and not worsened.

Basically it'll be Iraq times 20. Good luck with that, Brits. ;)

Yes, you need your "space under the sun" again, don't you?

What's that? Got something to say? Personal commentary, perhaps? :gundge:

I take it you remember me from the heritage thread, right? ;)

We still have imperialism by proxy, only now multinationals abuse & murder the incinvenient fuzzy brown folk who were unlucky enough to be born on top of our oil. However, since they're 'independent' states, and not British protectorates, they don't get the expensive perks which went with being subjects of his (her) majesty - like education, infrastructure, the rule of law, and of course, cricket.

Damn right they'd be better off back under the Union Jack, as the smart folks in Barbados, and many other remanants of empire know too well. The citizens of Sierra Leone asked Jack Straw earlier this year if they could be made a protectorate as they are making such a damn mess of it themselves, but the fact is, modern economies need educated and disciplined workforces, and they are neither, and would be a real fiscal handicap.

We still have imperialism by proxy, only now multinationals abuse & murder the incinvenient fuzzy brown folk who were unlucky enough to be born on top of our oil. However, since they're 'independent' states, and not British protectorates, they don't get the expensive perks which went with being subjects of his (her) majesty - like education, infrastructure, the rule of law, and of course, cricket.


Aww, someone stole my idea. Damn you shell, nipping in there and claiming the credit!

Please tell me you are not that naive. You do realize that most African countries want to be socialist, but captalists want them to remain struggling. That we use technology and other things to keep them under control and desolate. Trust me we use the dictators as the excuse, to keep African in the 3rd world so we can continue to exploit them. In Mozambique for example it was the U.S. who gave the dictator's military weapons and such to keep people from rebelling.



Are you kidding? These nations do not have the infrastructure and intelligence necessary to maintain a socialist system. To impose socialism, you would need imperialism again, which would defeat your entire purpose!

That was my point: I'm not in favour of the idea.

Here's a different idea though, which doesn't involve pointing guns at anyone: open British citizenship and immigration to anyone from Africa.

Well, im glad most of the people here do support my idea, they see the flaws yes, there are a lot of flaws, but its a good idea, but ures is ridiulous, letting all the africans into britain, a tiny country will solve all of africas problems by letting every african emigrate to britain, laughable. our economy would die, with so many on benifits, and the over crowded areas, blah,

Montgomery actually had a plan not entirely dissimilar to this shortly after WWII.

Please enlighten me , id love to hear it , anything about our empire! (no im not being sarcastic etc, i want to know!)

I think we should have western nations being adopt an African nation/s that way the western nations will help there adopted country and in return when the western nation falls on hard times there African nation/s will hep them

...and the fact that India still has a vast population that's impoverished. There's a couple examples that show that the Empire was good for the country, but these are also mainly predominately white countries where the indigenous population was suppressed and the whites came to stay. That's why those places have things like a working infrastructure and why they didn't do so badly.
Africa doesn't have many examples of states like India...

south africa, china, singapore's done allright too, saudi arabia, isreal

I think we should have western nations being adopt an African nation/s that way the western nations will help there adopted country and in return when the western nation falls on hard times there African nation/s will hep them

What's defined as 'hard times' for a Western nation?

Debt? Oh, the US is in HARD times.
Violence? Got that too.
Civil Unrest? Maybe not violent, but there's no way we can say we're all in agreement.

How would the African nation help them, if they're still beneath the umbrella of a Western nation? They'd fall too, in all probablity.

I think we should have western nations being adopt an African nation/s that way the western nations will help there adopted country and in return when the western nation falls on hard times there African nation/s will hep them

well, theres sonething like 5 african countrys for each western country, if each country had 5 nations though, that would work, each occupy 5 nations and rebuild them, and basicly carve up africa, again. lol. i dunno if that would wor but, nice idea though

Prime example: Rhodesia, now Zimbabwe, was waaaayyy better off under british rule. It was a democracy, though thought as fascist, admittantly, the quality of life was 10 times better. The same, senial old man(Robert Mugabe) has been running that place since 1980, and it gets worse every day. The brits' only mistake was being rascist, otherwise, they ran most of those colonies very well. In my opinion, the British empire should give it another try.


HAZZAR!!!! exackly what i think, :D

What's defined as 'hard times' for a Western nation?

Debt? Oh, the US is in HARD times.
Violence? Got that too.
Civil Unrest? Maybe not violent, but there's no way we can say we're all in agreement.

How would the African nation help them, if they're still beneath the umbrella of a Western nation? They'd fall too, in all probablity.

if the western nation would help rebuild the African nation if the table's eventually turn and the western nation is suffering like Africa then they will have someone willing to help them and this cycle would continue

if the western nation would help rebuild the African nation if the table's eventually turn and the western nation is suffering like Africa then they will have someone willing to help them and this cycle would continue

If the Western nation fell, you'd have a lot more problems then a newer nation could help with. Especially one who's probably still dependant on it.

Hell, you'd have problems the WORLD could hardly deal with, since trade is so connected. If one falls, others will fall with it... maybe not as far, but far enough so that THEY'D be in 'hard times' and so on and so forth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Union

This is the solution to Africa's problems. Along with the most helping hand the rich world can possibly give: Fair Trade and debt cancellation.

See, the main problem with your plan is that it's totally backward thinking and not forward thinking.

A) Where does the money come from to "build" Africa?
B) What makes you think our interference would be welcome?
C) The rich world has been deliberately keeping Africa impoverished for over a century, we have benefitted so much from cheap labour (hello, slavery!), unfair trade, and installing and supporting corrupt dictators who keep the people down etc etc. We got rich by keeping them poor. So we are not inclined to help them now. Just look at the feeble offerings to come out of G8 after all the campaigning of MPH.
D) Many African militants have guns, hell, even remote tribes are getting hold of them now. That's our fault too btw, we just gave a bunch of weapons to a few people and now the people are going crazy for them. How many kidnappings and murders have there been by armed militant rebels now? _Many_.

You propose getting rid of current dictatorships in favour of a new one, us. And how exactly do you propose we control 11.6 million square miles and 800 million people? Are you suggesting installing our own chosen, British dictators in each existing country (all 54 of them)? Or would one single authority do the job? What you suggest isn't only immoral, it's impractical too!

We need to convince the government to help Africa solve its own problems, encourage the African Union and get our grubby little fingers out of the African biscuit tin.


Well, africa wont solve itself, and us as dictaters? no, we'd have democracy, they can choose the direction the colonial power goes in. And when its done, they can have a withdraw refurendum.

800 million, well, historcly, only the minority of the population change the world, the rest follow. to otherthrow and install a dictatership in britian (would never happen, its just an example) you'd need 100,000 loyal minions, not 50 million , the population of britian, most people follow like sheep, if u understand the way the human mind works ud know that people love being part of a group , something greater ,,

being part of the british empire is something greater then a poor curropt country would it not?, want to control them? give them tv and internet (most dont have them) and properganda there asses!!!!! and when we did rule it, not many complaints from the africans, and now, we wont be as racist like before, theyll love it!!! we would control the media, (yes, kinda dictaershipness) but, it would be nessesary at first to persuade the population.

Interferance welcome? the africans will get it, oh well, the same mentality as before, we have better guns.

the rebels as stated before are a minority, we surpressed them in the 2nd boer war, in africa, we can do it again, ure right, WE sell them the weapons, if we stopped doing that, they run out of weapons and ammo, simple, that and our armys are the best trained in the world.

and yes, we'd stop explioting africa,cos it would be in our interest to have a prosperous africa if we sell there goods etc, the ONE thing u said that i cant think of a solution to is the initial money, well, the money saved from not having to give aid would be a start.

Too expensive.

Best thing we can do is exterminate the Africans, strip mine the continent back to the bedrock, then use it at a giant landfill site. A bit like the Americans did to the injuns.

Too expensive.

Best thing we can do is exterminate the Africans, strip mine the continent back to the bedrock, then use it at a giant landfill site. A bit like the Americans did to the injuns.

ooh what a rosy world you live in :rolleyes:

wouldn't it be a tad pricy shooting every African

Polio infected blankets, reservations in places too far from food or water to walk out, AIDS (obviously) and our old favourite, xyklon-b

Polio infected blankets, reservations in places too far from food or water to walk out, AIDS (obviously) and our old favourite, xyklon-b

couldn't we just gas them in concentration camps :rolleyes:

Xyklon-b: giftgas: y'know, Hydrogen Cyanide.

No, we don't. We just need to keep selling them guns & succumb to white guilt about not removing evil facist dictators like we did hitler.

Did you know Thalo Mbeki (S. Africa) allowed a book (Behold: a pale horse) to be circulated in the S. African medical community by a member of his own government which claims AIDS was invented by 'flying saucer people' to exterminate blacks?

Trust me, with imbeciles like this at the reins, it's only a matter of time.

Did you know Thalo Mbeki (S. Africa) allowed a book (Behold: a pale horse) to be circulated in the S. African medical community by a member of his own government which claims AIDS was invented by 'flying saucer people' to exterminate blacks?


I think that book would be a good read :D

i agree with the rebuilding of africa partly because i am somwhat of an imperialist but also because i dont want any of those bastards geting nukes and killing of any of the democratic "good" countries. That would actually make a good rp The Re-colonization of Africa.

ok well im done pressing my imperialistic views on you guys.

As a Brit, soon to be American, I look at Africa, and I look at the history, since its independence, its turned to a waste land pretty much (don’t whinge oh south Africa’s ok, ive travelled Africa, ive seen this all first hand)

Corrupt dictaters and an unfair world market keeps Africa in poverty, the world, and Africa has 2 decisions.

First the African people get off their backsides expecting the west to support them, and overthrow the dictators like magubai and king maswati 3rd. Im sure the west would then love to help them establish real democracy,

Of course, in the real world, this won’t happen, so, the second option, my favourite, would work.

We do it all for them, we recolonise them, we rebuild the empire!!!!!!!!

The British troops go in, oust the dictators, and we govern Africa! Simple!!!!

When Britain owned roughly a 3rd of Africa, the Africans had jobs, we updated them technologically, we gave them an identity to be proud of, yes, not always the British were mean ba*stards, but, on the whole, we increased life pretty much all over.

Now, Africa has shown it can’t look after itself; the people won’t do anything we have to, unless we want to stand by and watch 20,000 children die every day there.

If we recolonised, we would rebuild African industry, and entwine it with our own, we would make the streets safe, we would create MILLIONS of jobs by rebuilding Africa (well, build, its never really been built before) we also would again update them technologically, improved farming methods would allow millions more hectares available for farming and for farming to become much more efficient, ending the food crises,

They are no longer of a corrupt good for nothing government, instead a democracy, and after we’re nearly there, we hold a referendum, if they want us to stay (like in Gibraltar, ST Helena and Northern Ireland) we will, if not, we’ll leave. They get food, water, education infrastructure, and an identity to be proud of; we get to sell all there goods. I for one would be the first to volunteer to take the union jack ashore in Africa, and oh yeah, actually destroying the ridiculously outdated armies of Africa would mean minimum casualties for both sides, even an African guerrilla campaign wouldn’t last long, and it didn’t in the Boer war and the IRA have just given up in Ireland.

What are your thoughts? Before you say YOU IMPERIALIST F**KER!!!!!! Actually consider the idea, what’s the alternative? How likely is the alternative to happen? Not bloody likely.

Did it ever occur to you that maybe the reason that Africa is so fucked up now is BECAUSE OF the colonization by Europe? That maybe they would have been better off left alone?

Amazon have it.

Africa is in the hole because the dynamic relationship between government and populace has broken down. In Western democracies, the economy depends upon the general populace getting up and going to work. In Africa, the government would be better off if the general populace fell over dead and let it get on with spending it's oil revenues.

The people don't have marketable skills: Everything the government needs (Mercedes Benz, tanks, Rolex, Armani suits and helicopter gunships) is bought in. All the populace have to sell is physical labour, which, with the advent of mechanised agriculture, has no value. I have never met an African who delivered 700HP at the flywheel.

For the same reason the US got rid of it's slaves, and Britain got rid of it's empire, African Elites want rid of their populations. As an uneducated mass, they have no value. Exterminating them would be less evil than sitting back and doing nothing, although, cowards we are, I bet that's just what we do.

(As opposed to education, clean water, the rule of law, and birth control, which is what they really need.)

Finish the war on terrorism, then you brits can do that if you want.


:mp5: :sniper: :mp5:
The Armed Republic Of Cruel Tyrany

I'll be long dead.

Some people consider European (and I mean all of it, not just the Belgians or all but the British) Colonialism the cause for the problem in the first place.
There was only one problem with colonialism in general, and that was that it brought the ideaological battles from Europe to Africa. Africa's children were not raped by their German or British fathers, but raised poorly by the foster homes of Maoism, socialism, and fasicm, and seduced by a Neverland where they never, ever ever had to grow up. That was the guilt and pity that Europe felt after their empire, and the guilt of the US. The last one was particularly strange, as the US never had an empire in Africa.

south africa, china, singapore's done allright too, saudi arabia, isrealI've had a bit to think about this, and here goes:
States like South Africa, Australia, the USA, Canada, and Zimbabwe (fit into this category once, I'll come back to that) are colonies in which permanent settlements of Europeans became the ruling class or predominant "race" (hate that word but couldn't find anything better). That's why there was an actual interest in developing a working infrastructure compared to other colonies such as Cameroon, Côte d'Ivoire, or the Sudan (to name a few). China wasn't colonized be the Western powers as the African continent was. It was mainly a game of taking an important port and making the Chinese comply with anything that was demanded. They were not kept from building a proper infrastructure as African states were, since China still maintained a bit of sovereignity. Also, borders remained based more on ethnicity than in Africa. Likewise, the colonization of China was later than the early colonization of Africa.
Singapore is not as big as most African states are and rather isolated. In truth, Cape Verde , an archipelago nation, is in a similar situation and is doing rather well (though there are currently some issues with natural disasters).
Saudi Arabia and Israel: Turkish colonies. The practice of taking colonies at your doorstep usually resulted in these being more developed infrastructuraly, especially since Jerusalem is considered a muslim holy site, the Ottomans had an interest in keeping it "civilized". When the British took over, there was a large influx of jewish settlers (large groups of well educated middle-class Europeans being quite representative) that technically replaced the local population (I will under no circumstances deny that the state of Israel has the right to exist and I affirm the right of these people to settle there. It was basically a return of a people in exodus; not something that could be said for Americans, Canadians, or Australians). Saudi Arabia likewise benefited from Turkish rule with respects to infrastructure. In fact, the whole region is riddled with holy sites that have been the goals of pilgrimages. Infrastructure has been developing there for quite some time. Needless to say, unlike any other state it's size except maybe Iraq, Saudi Arabia has the largest resources of oil, which has clearly helped in financing it's rise to wealth, especially considering that it had a wealthy elite to properly exploit these resources.
Now, as you will undoubtedly agree with me, none of these countries above had to endure the slave trade that racked Africa. None of these countries had their local tribal culture destroyed so early on as was done to Africa.
In fact, there are only two countries in Africa that can claim to never have been colonized: Liberia and Ethiopia. Liberia was the United States' little bitch and was abused as a place to send freed slaves after the civil war and that among other things has caused bloody civil war. Ethiopa was actually doing fine until the Italians conquered it in 1935 and turned it into the mess it is today.

This is true, im not saying my plan is flawless, but i want to see what everyone thinks
Of course. But you do hit on one point. Whether the world likes it or not, it must address Africa. Now is not the time. But not in the future. As the forces of the 21st century stamp out the ideaologies of hatred across the planet (such as the Middle East), they will find refuge in sub-Sahara Africa. Unless the world weans Africa off the milk of cheap aid and socialism, Africa is doomed to be worst, wiith tribal conflict intermixing with religious wars and a hatred of progress. The Middle East is in Africa's position, and for the past fourty years, there was no shortage of green recruits thirsty for blood. They even helped bring down the Soviet Empiire. Africa is worse, but the signs of radicalization are just appearing. Once African backwardness is inevitably painted into a corner, it will strike like a tiger on the cusp of death. But the world will be much stronger by then, and I pray that, unlike today, the world has the moral courage to face what wishes to destroy us.

The last one was particularly strange, as the US never had an empire in Africa.The US is in part to blame for the role it played in the slave trade, which is something the African colonies experienced in a manner that no other place to be colonized did. The US screwed up plenty in Liberia.

Finish the war on terrorism, then you brits can do that if you want.


:mp5: :sniper: :mp5:
The Armed Republic Of Cruel Tyrany

You started it

Africa has had years to recover from our empires and lets face it I don't think we did that much damage there have just been a high number of failed states wither it be manmade or natural (to reply to someone saying Italy messed up Ethiopia no it was caused by a drought)

The reason why I'm so disgusted with the topic of this thread is that this poem captures it's motivation quite well (bold parts added for emphasis):

The White Man's burden

Take up the White Man's burden--
Send forth the best ye breed--
Go, bind your sons to exile
To serve your captives' need;
To wait, in heavy harness,
On fluttered folk and wild--
Your new-caught sullen peoples,
Half devil and half child.

Take up the White Man's burden--
In patience to abide,
To veil the threat of terror
And check the show of pride;
By open speech and simple,
An hundred times made plain,
To seek another's profit
And work another's gain.

Take up the White Man's burden--
The savage wars of peace--
Fill full the mouth of Famine,
And bid the sickness cease;
And when your goal is nearest
(The end for others sought)
Watch sloth and heathen folly
Bring all your hope to nought.

Take up the White Man's burden--
No iron rule of kings,
But toil of serf and sweeper--
The tale of common things.
The ports ye shall not enter,
The roads ye shall not tread,
Go, make them with your living
And mark them with your dead.

Take up the White Man's burden,
And reap his old reward--
The blame of those ye better
The hate of those ye guard--
The cry of hosts ye humour
(Ah, slowly!) toward the light:--
"Why brought ye us from bondage,
Our loved Egyptian night?"

Take up the White Man's burden--
Ye dare not stoop to less--
Nor call too loud on Freedom
To cloak your weariness.
By all ye will or whisper,
By all ye leave or do,
The silent sullen peoples
Shall weigh your God and you.

Take up the White Man's burden!
Have done with childish days--
The lightly-proffered laurel,
The easy ungrudged praise:
Comes now, to search your manhood
Through all the thankless years,
Cold, edged with dear-bought wisdom,
The judgment of your peers.

-Rudyard Kipling

We've already tried to make Africa a better place. We didn't manage then, so I doubt we'll manage today. In fact, us trying to make it a better place is what made the mess in the first place.

"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
- George Santayana

Africa has had years to recover from our empires and lets face it I don't think we did that much damage there have just been a high number of failed states wither it be manmade or natural (to reply to someone saying Italy messed up Ethiopia no it was caused by a drought)Africa has had years to recover, but not to catch up with the world. Africa was disrupted in its feudal stage, and was denied the chance to develop properly. Now that we've been gone, you expect them to have overcome the burden of colonization and catch up with a world whose advancement was was carried by them?
As for Ethiopia: A drought? Is that all you have to contest my opinion? I can make mistakes and admit them, but I'm not going to fold because you claim one drought alone ruined Ethiopia.

Africa has had years to recover, but not to catch up with the world. Africa was disrupted in its feudal stage, and was denied the chance to develop properly. Now that we've been gone, you expect them to have overcome the burden of colonization and catch up with a world whose advancement was was carried by them?
As for Ethiopia: A drought? Is that all you have to contest my opinion? I can make mistakes and admit them, but I'm not going to fold because you claim one drought alone ruined Ethiopia.

ever wondered why people are starving in Ethiopia? because they grew and sold crops

Africa is better off now than when we started colonization the continent actually had more war!

We've already tried to make Africa a better place. We didn't manage then, so I doubt we'll manage today. In fact, us trying to make it a better place is what made the mess in the first place.

"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
- George Santayana

Nice poem, dont know y ure disgusted though, im not saying we should go abck in and enslave the africans, im saying we should go in and build then up for them, we sell there goods, so we both benifit, for humanitarion reasons,

Peace keeping is not enough (somalia) we need to recolonise, and i dont mean like before when we were mean b*stards, i mean to help the people of africa, we sell there goods and produce, we all benifit, can see owt wrong with that mate. Only the money and politics to do it dont exist, presently.

Did it ever occur to you that maybe the reason that Africa is so fucked up now is BECAUSE OF the colonization by Europe? That maybe they would have been better off left alone?

ignorant of history quote, not even worth a reply, read a history book mate, i can recommend a LOT if u want.

ignorant of history quote, not even worth a reply, read a history book mate, i can recommend a LOT if u want.

Recommend one about the British war with the Zulu tribes. :)

Oh sure let the British rule Africa and not let the African nations decide thats pretty un-democratic if you ask me.

Nice poem, dont know y ure disgusted though, im not saying we should go abck in and enslave the africans, im saying we should go in and build then up for them, we sell there goods, so we both benifit, for humanitarion reasons, In the end, isn't what you're saying being stated by the poem? People had the same ideas that you have now back then, and take a look at Africa now. My personal opinion is that you won't be able to do things better because you're going by the same premise that the original colonizers did. Please understand that I find it deplorable that you are advocating the same mistake that was done before.

Peace keeping is not enough (somalia) we need to recolonise, and i dont mean like before when we were mean b*stards, i mean to help the people of africa, we sell there goods and produce, we all benifit, can see owt wrong with that mate. Only the money and politics to do it dont exist, presently.To be honest, fair trade is what I'd consider part of the answer. Buy products with the "TransFair" or a similar label, if you want to support the goods produced by honest workers in Africa. I agree that Somalia is a mess, but there's a good reason why the African Union is unwilling to accept NATO personnel as part of any effort to enforce things in Sudan. There are moderately (very moderately) successful attempts by Africans to keep peace themselves. The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) has actually had some successes in securing peace in Sierra Leone with it's monitoring group ECOMOG. Belittling Africans and telling them they're "children" is exactly what you are doing by telling them they can't solve the problem on their own. They've messed up. But guess what? We gave the Europeans a try and I'm pretty sure they don't want to give us another.
Give Africa a chance. We fucked ours up royaly.

Please enlighten me , id love to hear it , anything about our empire! (no im not being sarcastic etc, i want to know!)

Here you go, this is the first result I got, the article is not exactly without its own spin on the matter, but it should give you sufficient for your own research.

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v18/v18n2p33_Weber.html

I am not claiming that you are a racist, as Montgomery is painted here, just that your piece reminded me of his plans.

Well, im glad most of the people here do support my idea, they see the flaws yes, there are a lot of flaws, but its a good idea, but ures is ridiulous, letting all the africans into britain, a tiny country will solve all of africas problems by letting every african emigrate to britain, laughable. our economy would die, with so many on benifits, and the over crowded areas, blah,

So, taking control of their nations by force and stirring up decades of hostility from guerrilla groups, along with the inevitable casualties that any invasions would take, only to find ourselves as a nation overstretched and unable to deliver on your promises is a better idea? The thought of forcing people to be part of the British Empire, whilst simultaneously denying them British Citizenship on the basis of the country in which they were born is 'questionable' to say the least.

ignorant of history quote, not even worth a reply, read a history book mate, i can recommend a LOT if u want.Talk to an African and see just how great colonization was for them. Seriously. A history book is by a historian, but an opinion from someone who's been there is worth a lot more.

ignorant of history quote, not even worth a reply, read a history book mate, i can recommend a LOT if u want.

Hang on, if colonialism and imperialism was such a good force for Africa, then why is it in such a mess now in its wake?

I think we brits just want something to be proud of again. You try going from one of the greatest empires in history to that little island that follows America around.

The sun never sets...

The US is in part to blame for the role it played in the slave trade, which is something the African colonies experienced in a manner that no other place to be colonized did. The US screwed up plenty in Liberia.
So did many other countries in the Americas, notably Brazil. Brazil did not wallow in pity, unlike the Americans. Oh btw, Liberia was more or less a spill over effect of emancipation. The elite in that country were freed slaves and their decendents. It disgusts me to think that scum like Charles Taylor had anything to do with America.