cant get ripped off when its free with cookies paid under the table.

for real tho getting semantic about dominated vs. exploited vs. suppressed is a really dumb tactic. but to even claim Europe hasn't dominated africa is absurd, they were successfully dominated for hundred of years. by literally ANY definition of domination.

Lol use language properly. I noticed you're proudly displaying 'Enlighted Atheist' in your profile. Could be a total coincidence, but vast majority of time I engage on of your types it's basically engaging the meme ACHUALLY in human form.

Another quick history lesson, Romans never really made it to the sub-Sahara, which this discussion was really about. The North Africans that Rome dominated-- oops sorry 'exploited and suppressed' eventually got exploited and suppressed by the Arabs who either killed displaced or breed out the local inhabitants, that's why most North African countries today are Arabs. So this concept that these inhabitants mostly Arabs now would remember some oppression by the Romans (a millennia later) is pretty nonsensical. In reality most sub-Saharan Africans have suffered much worse from the north of the Sahara neighbors.

I mean you could of just said, the Euros exploited the Africans for the last 400-500 years and it's an argument most would not really fight against, because it's incredibly difficult to prove one way or the other. I don't really understand choosing this pedantic hill.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Aug 22 2023 10:18am

I knew you wouldn't believe me.



No it isn't. Semantics, the way you're using the term, is getting into arguments over unimportant distinctions. There is a huge difference between exploitation and suppression vs domination. That makes it an important distinction.

Yes, for centuries Europe has dominated Africa, but the conversation you butted into was about me saying millenia not centuries. So you aren't helping.



Apparently you need yet another English lesson. Those words aren't incompatible. I'd like to introduce you to the concept of quitting while you're behind. You aren't capable of getting ahead so the more you try the more of a fool you reveal yourself to be. Therefore it would behoove you to quit now.



Ah the classic ad hominem. Incapable of argument you turn to implied insults. Truly pathetic. I know your kind well.



No it was not. It was about white men supposedly being better for improving Africa than black men. Maybe you should learn how to pay attention.



Just because Europeans aren't the only ones who fucked Africa doesn't mean Europeans didn't fuck Africa. Grow an argument.



You're the one with a pedantic issue with my so-called pedantic hill so maybe you should quit while you're behind.

being semantic about semantics, lol.

europe has dominated africa for thousands of years, too.

its not just that you're needlessly semantic, you're also just wrong.

I'll let you argue that point with ofthevoid it isn't a hill I care to stand on.

lol


Have a good day man.

i mean u made the claim, so u can just say "i misspoke" and i'll not stress it any further. thats honestly what should have happened right away lol, instead you went into "i choose my words VERY carefully, and you need to learn english". all for something you dont care to stand on? lol, weird.

No I didn't.

did trudeau take away paraphrasing along with freedom?

Trudeau is irrelevant.