What are you trying to prove, exactly?

The UK also sent back that terrorist for having cancer, so it's not like it's a one-sided jewfest.

A lot of the horrible conditions in Africa are the result of the slave trade/European colonization.

considering they make 56% of 44k which is ~23k instead of 440$?

yea i think thats hell of a deal

Except you're a retard who keeps blatantly ignoring people mentioning over and over again that colonization and the slave trade are the only reason that Africa is in such poor shape.

The ignoring things isn't a big shock, though - can't spell ignorance without ignore.

im glad you agree you are ignorant and ignore what i have said; this isnt a topic about describing yourself, dont be so cocky.




dont be full of it kid.

I donno about that one. Medieval Africa sounds like a shitty place too, or in general.

lol, nice "NOU."

You are saying that African-Americans are better off than they would be without the slave trade because they are better off than Africans. If Africans weren't dicked over into a much much worse position than they would have been otherwise, then there's no way of knowing how much better off they would have been in their own countries.

That's the logical failure you keep perpetrating when people correct you and you somehow think they're not addressing you. If Africans would have been left to their own devices and hadn't had all of their resources stolen from them (and if they hadn't continued to be stolen from them to this day) then there's no way of knowing how much better or worse off they'd be in comparison to African-Americans today.



You'd be shocked at some of the areas that were in pretty good shape around the time of increased European expansion. There were plenty of societies throughout Africa that were fairly close to being on par with Medieval Europe, mostly thanks to the spread of Islam.

However i think those islamic societies didn`t exactly get the bad end of the stick, if anything they were the ones with the means to go capture people and sell em off. They would have had the means to defend themselves.

This post was edited by FORt-HOBO on Oct 4 2009 05:04pm

I thought I replied to this. My bad.

Anyway, the correct answer is 'guns.' They might have been in a decent position at the beginning, but thanks to a few misunderstandings and not realizing the brutal and inhuman way they were going to get treated by Europeans, they got the wrong end of the barrel if you get my drift.

Mmmm, i still am willing to believe that islamic states back then did have access to gunpowder technology(ie fall of constantinople)
how much this technology evolved for them is a different matter, and at this point i am willing to concede that i don`t know enough about the material.
The rando black people definitely woulda been pownzored though.