/hi/ - History and Culture

Why is Africa backward ? Historian 19/07/06(Sat)21:18 No. 15171

File 156244070746.png - (272.63KB , 496x315 , 1562410963955.png )

I would like us to discuss why Africa is backward. As far as I know, this is the first man to have arisen in the continent. Before the arrival (man) on the territory of e.g. Europe it took several thousand years, so Africans should be developed a few thousand years ahead of other human races, but it happened the other way round, and the indigenous inhabitants of Africa together with a group of Australian Aborigines and tribes living in the rainforests of the Amazon are among the most backward human groups on Earth.

Why native Africans havent been able to form a functioning civilization after several thousand years ?

Historian 19/07/06(Sat)22:53 No. 15172

>the most backward human groups on Earth.
You assume they're backwards. Civilisation as you would call it is the result of an amalgamation of power. These cultures never sought power beyond their means and thus never formed the basis of the civilisations we have today, and the society we will have, if the liberal anarchists get their way.

Historian 19/07/07(Sun)08:13 No. 15173

File 156248001163.png - (876.97KB , 900x568 , Africa Today.png )

>Africa: Now
Oh you

Historian 19/07/13(Sat)03:27 No. 15174

Hmm,You must have forgotten Carthage, Egypt, and Axum. Maybe you thought those were just really really southern Europe. I can see how your broken racist brain may have confused that.

Historian 19/07/16(Tue)03:15 No. 15175

>>804719919
>>804721764
>>804724191
>>804727997
>>804727900
ORIGINAL FULL HD PIC

Historian 19/07/16(Tue)04:53 No. 15176

>>15174
He also forgot to include Zimbabwe's ancient civilization, which, due to the lack of readily accessible metals and rock suitable for quarrying (a common trend in Africa), was essentially built on large earthen mounts and used fired clay and other earth-related materials, all of which occurred so long ago they eroded until only the mound remains (a similar situation existed with the Mississippi mound builders).

"European" civilizations of equal age were also using biodegrable building materials which is why so little information exists about them. Notice how much information comes out after they find ancient Celts who were buried in peat bogs thousands of years ago.

Historian 19/07/18(Thu)19:12 No. 15177

File 156346996980.png - (642.26KB , 520x658 , 1d052be23939a3bbcd2307450a032fbf1a812edb34eaf8c342.png )

>>15176
Let us not hide FACT that black Africa for disputable reasons brought practically nothing to the civilization resources of the world - gunpowder, silk, porcelain, etc. is China, law, administration, Rome, philosophy and historiosophy Greece, mathematics and astrology and astronomy Mesopotamia, etc. (sorry for simplifications but this is how it looked like) - in the case of black Africa, despite the knowledge of iron or circles, civilization achievements are at a much lower level than the achievements of the Maya, Aztecs, Incas.

Historian 19/07/19(Fri)02:39 No. 15178

File 156349679236.jpg - (21.94KB , 480x360 , Inigo.jpg )

>>15177
>FACT
You keep using that word.

I do not think it means what you think it means.

Historian 19/07/31(Wed)09:28 No. 15184

why are all the coloureds' civilizational structures fortifications when the whites' are temples and statues and shit?
exceptions can be made for the incan/mayan/aztecs or whoever it was at tenochtlan except they can't be because that was for human sacrifices and therefore can't be civilized

the reason is because they're not civilized

Historian 19/08/06(Tue)19:33 No. 15187

File 156511283124.jpg - (509.66KB , 1600x1200 , pyramids-of-giza-egypt-1239953_1600_1200.jpg )

Historian 19/08/09(Fri)08:30 No. 15188

>>15184
Are you seriously trying to make the argument that Europeans are/were peace loving and made churches and temples and never built anything for violence or human suffering? Wow man, when you troll you troll stupid. Dont get me wrong that is some effective shit, but boy is it stupid.

Historian 19/08/09(Fri)08:30 No. 15189

Historian 19/08/11(Sun)06:51 No. 15190

File 156549908249.png - (0.97MB , 821x973 , Existence Is Pain.png )

>>15189
There's a reason stupid people are more likely to be racist.

Because it's a stupid ideology.

Historian 19/08/15(Thu)04:13 No. 15198

>>15184
What particular groups of people are you referring to? Since trade wasn't that big back then (you know how it is, slavery and serfdom) common people outside of the ruling party couldn't accumulate wealth.

>>15190
Race egalitarian denialist soy virtue-signaling numales are on par in terms of being mental pygmies with outspoken "racists"

Historian 19/08/16(Fri)19:17 No. 15201

File 156597582792.jpg - (113.59KB , 767x768 , Doesnt Exist.jpg )

>>15198
>8ch incel wordsalad
pic related

Historian 19/09/06(Fri)21:15 No. 15221

>>15198
You used a bunch of words but said nothing.

Historian 19/09/06(Fri)22:44 No. 15223

>>15171
The Africans weren't and aren't unusual in their level of development. The indigenous peoples in north America and Australia, Slavic and Germanic tribes, several island nations, and many other cultures existed in a similar state for a very long time.

Historian 19/09/07(Sat)00:12 No. 15226

>>15174
It's been scientifically proven that ancient Egyptians more closely resemble modern whites than modern africans. So no, they weren't kangs n sheit

Historian 19/09/20(Fri)13:17 No. 15233

>>15226

That they had modern European DNA, which we've always known. Ancient Egyptians were basically mixed of African, European, and Semetic roots.

They, like Phonecians, were heavily semetic, however.

Historian 19/11/09(Sat)03:47 No. 15264

>>15226
They're closest to Arabs and Jews though. And just because they aren't black doesn't mean they aren't African. You did use an epic maymay though so my argument is moot

[Return] [Entire Thread] [Last 50 posts]