[smokey_circles]

So we're clear, I'm not proposing the west do any kind of reparations. You just won't calculate it and the damage is already done, a pay cheque isn't going to help. But you are wrong. I'd prefer it if they just left, take their corporations with them. They don't have to return anything, just go.

Firstly, I am referring to the whole continent. The west didn't just destroy one nation, they took us all out (except Botswana, and hey wouldn't you know it: They're mostly fine. Strange that, must be a fluke). It's ridiculous to think we would have self-corrected after the colonials left, especially in a few decades.

The west created power vacuums, committed coups to remove leaders who didn't want to hand over land and money (and instead wanted to invest it into our own future) and pulled us into wars we had nothing to do with, just to further their own commercial interests. It's not just mineral wealth that was taken from us. They also divided the land they didn't have any right to amongst themselves. Some good arguments about how responsible the west is for the middle east's current crisis. I also feel like this argument ignores a lot of the CIA's activities over the past 5 decades...

America's wealth was greatly enhanced by the railways built by the slaves they stole. How much of that came back to Africa? Oh yeah, none of it. That counts as wealth theft, but I'm happy to agree that this starts to get messy quickly and isn't very productive.

I have to laugh at the 'The west stole enough' line. They nearly stole everything, and it continues to this day. The gold, the fucking Cullinan Diamond, the minerals used to create phones. They all come from labor in Africa, and very little of the generated wealth comes back. That seem balanced or appropriate to you, or does it seem there's a power gradient? We all know about the supply chain issues at companies like Apple, I'm not sure how you can argue that the damage isn't still ongoing.

> South Africa's biggest roadblock to prosperity is not the west

The west excludes us from global economic activity all the goddamned time. In extreme cases that includes assassinating leaders who want to punt them out of Africa. And hey, look at that, Shell is busy sonar blasting our coastline for fucking oil. Great. You think we're gonna see any of that money? Not a chance. Nevermind the destruction they're causing, at least the westerners can drive their cars around. But hey, we should just pull ourselves up by our bootstraps, right?

Here's a nice example: Take omicron. The west banned travel from here because we reported it first. This is pretty simple to work out: We are world leaders in infectious disease management, due to the amount of infectious diseases we have to manage. Experts in the field have been explaining this to (apparently) deaf audiences for a while now. It's not great to have so much experience in identifying and managing infectious diseases, but we do. The west could (and should) learn something from us. I learned the other day that _nothing_ has killed more Americans in the same timeline as COVID has, not even the civil war. Admittedly I doubt that civil war claim and I suspect we just don't know how many people died as a result of the war. Still, COVID is up there.

A lot of the west seems to think Africa is just fundamentally flawed. We're not, it's just hard to act independently or in our own interests under the capitalist boot.

To be fair, it's not just the West. China is busy creating the next silk road through crafty debt tactics. Once again: Something the West could do to help us, but won't. Which is going to cost you a great deal more in the long run (we're used to poverty, I don't see modern America handling it well).

----- EDIT

Removed a lot of "you's" because I am not actually upset with anyone in particular. But the west has 0 understanding of what they did here, they elected to whitewash history instead. Plenty of scars to disprove the narratives.

It's also worth noting I'm a white south africa. I know a great deal about this whitewashed history because most older white south africans spout it, despite all the evidence to the contrary. Happy to continue this debate, I really don't mean it to be aggressive (but I love this country and I will passionately defend the defensible parts of it)

[piethesailorman]

An american southerner with some nitpicks, specifically to one or two spots in your post.

1. The slaves were (largely) in the south until the abolishment of the instutution in the mid 1860's. Despite railroads being a Northern business("free as in freedom" labor) well before then. The heyday of railroad construction through out america began with the well know northern robber barrons of the 1870's 80's and 90's. In other words, no, slaves did not build the railroads; poor people from anywhere did; whites, recently made free(and poor) blacks, and in the american west, asians.

2. (As i understand it, someone show me otherwise) Africans who were shipped to America were not stolen from Africa. The western part of the continent was experiencing the introduction of the idea of nationalism. Certain west african tribes went on a warring land grab, and stole from other west africans. The conquering ethnicities didnt want the subjected ethicities around, and traded them for various goods at port to american northern shipping business. They, in turn, sold those individuals to southern traders in exchange for raw materials which then went on to the northern merchantile industry to then trade various final goods to nationalists in west africa for...

Anyway, just my two cents.

[lelanthran]

A lot of your argument relies on the assertion that the West took resources from Africa.

And yes, while that is true to some extent, it is not the whole story.

> America's wealth was greatly enhanced by the railways built by the slaves they stole.

IIRC (and wikipedia agrees: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade) the slaves were bought by the west. The theft was done by native Africans for the most part.

Africans enslaved other Africans and then sold them.

Should the west have refused to buy those slaves from Africans? Certainly, but it was not the West that, for the most part, enslaved and then sold the African slaves.

> And hey, look at that, Shell is busy sonar blasting our coastline for fucking oil. Great. You think we're gonna see any of that money? Not a chance. Nevermind the destruction they're causing, at least the westerners can drive their cars around. But hey, we should just pull ourselves up by our bootstraps, right?

Who'd you vote for?

Because I can all but guarantee that the Shell paid money for whatever they are doing, and if you are not seeing any of that money, it is going to the leaders who sold Shell those rights.

So yeah, "The West" is buying resources at fire-sale prices from Africa, but they they're paying your leaders, and if you don't see a cent of that money, it is not the West's fault.

If your are unhappy that the resources are being mined relentlessly and you are getting nothing in return, then ask yourself where that money is going. If you think the land is being destroyed, ask yourself why you voted in leaders who took the money in exchange for destroying the land.

> But the west has 0 understanding of what they did here, they elected to whitewash history instead. Plenty of scars to disprove the narratives.

I'm South African, always have been. We have plenty of scars, but a significant number of them are self-inflicted. We vote along tribal lines (white man bad, black man good) and are then surprised when we don't see a cent of all the money going to our politicians.

[zohch]

> If your are unhappy that the resources are being mined relentlessly and you are getting nothing in return, then ask yourself where that money is going. If you think the land is being destroyed, ask yourself why you voted in leaders who took the money in exchange for destroying the land.

I would bet money that the majority of the revenue of mineral sales actually goes to South Africans and not foreigners, and I would even bet money it is more than 75% of the revenue.

[lelanthran]

> I would bet money that the majority of the revenue of mineral sales actually goes to South Africans and not foreigners, and I would even bet money it is more than 75% of the revenue, based on how shitty South African mining shares are.

Maybe; I don't really know the details behind the sale of mineral rights but I DO know that they are never given away for free and that usually they are sold to the highest bidder. Maybe in the case mentioned by GP (Shell) the mineral rights were sold below what the market would have borne.

My heart breaks for the South African masses; and then I talk to them, and every impoverished person I speak to is certain that they would be worse off if they voted differently. Vote another party in power? Never - the party that has failed to govern South Africa effectively since 1994 is still in power!

South Africa's poverty is, at this point, self-inflicted. I have more than a few ideas on how this can be solved, but none of the solutions involve a) Race or b) kickbacks, so you can forget about SA digging itself out of this hole.

[zohch]

> My heart breaks for the South African masses;

My heart used to break for them, but really, why shed a tear, this is what the South African masses vote for, and this is what they get good and hard, and god forbid anyone stands in their way of them getting it as good and hard as they possibly can get it before civil war finally burns the country to a cinder, at the very least they can find comfort in knowing south africans would have burned most of the county down before a civil war erupts:

- Why are South Africans burning schools in Limpopo? (https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-africa-36225502)

- Why Cape Town's trains are on fire in South Africa (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-45990981)

- South African university set ablaze in student protest (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/25/south-african-...)

Burning their country down seem to be their national passtime, or at least while they are not lynching foreigners. But I'm sure one of them will come along to blame the west for this also.

[yunohn]

> Certainly, but it was not the West that, for the most part, enslaved and then sold the African slaves.

Surely the righteous West could’ve freed those slaves and not fought to keep them for centuries?

If you read the wiki link further, you’ll see that they paid Africans to find slaves, because they couldn’t survive on their own - amidst warring tribes and diseases. They would transport slaves as cargo, resell them throughout the West, indenture them in plantations and factories, make a racial caste that would propagate for centuries, mistreat them and kill them, and so on. It’s absolutely insane to frame colonialism in a callous manner such as you have, in 2021!

> Because I can all but guarantee that the Shell paid money

This should be investigated by the Western govs that Shell works with. Everyone knows this is happening all the time. How are they allowed to bribe poor countries, in the first place?

> you are getting nothing in return, then ask yourself where that money is going

Politicians in the West are also equally corrupt, on all sides, and none of their earnings are distributed to the people. What kind of weird argument is this?

> I'm South African, always have been

Doesn’t matter. You still seem to misunderstand colonialism’s effects, and post modern colonialism as it stands today.

[lelanthran]

> Surely the righteous West could’ve freed those slaves and not fought to keep them for centuries?

Where did I claim that the West was not at fault?

(The rest of your argument relies on this sort of strawman so there's no need to respond to it).

[yunohn]

There is no strawman?

Your whole post relies on blaming SA for what happened to them, using their fellow SAfricans who exploited them (alongside the West) as a fall-guy. That’s a very unfair characterisation of colonialism and its modern effects, like I claimed in my post.

Further, similarly to the way you dismissed the West for purchasing slaves, you skipped over Shell getting away with bribing the poorer previously colonised country.

[lelanthran]

> Your whole post relies on blaming SA for what happened to them, using their fellow SAfricans who exploited them (alongside the West) as a fall-guy. That’s a very unfair characterisation of colonialism and its modern effects, like I claimed in my post.

No, I did not claim that, I am saying that the voters in South Africa are voting in policies based on color and racial lines, not based on their self-interest.

> Further, similarly to the way you dismissed the West for purchasing slaves,

I did not dismiss the West for purchasing slaves (I said that they should not have), I merely pointed out that native Africans were enslaving their neighbours (and worse) well before they started selling their slaves to the West.

> you skipped over Shell getting away with bribing the poorer previously colonised country.

I did not;

1) No accusation was made that Shell was bribing anyone,

and

2) I pointed out very clearly that mining rights are usually SOLD to the highest bidder by the state. If the state does not then use that money for its citizens, you can hardly blame the source of the money. Since the state is legitimately elected by the voters, the voters have only themselves to blame when their leaders (whom have been in charge for the last 30 years almost) take all the money.

[kwhitefoot]

> China is busy creating the next silk road through crafty debt tactics. Once again: Something the West could do to help us, but won't. Which is going to cost you a great deal more in the long run

This is something that bothers me too. The west seems to be totally ignoring China's activities in sub-Saharan Africa.

[zohch]

> > South Africa's biggest roadblock to prosperity is not the west

> The west excludes us from global economic activity all the goddamned time.

And yet you fail to cite one example of this. I don't see how this is true, but by all means, maybe try again and cite an actual example. And just for clarity, an example of restricting travel in a god damned pandemic is not an example of "systemic economic exclusion", it may be an ill conceived policy choice, but the west is also not responsible for your pathetically low vaccination rate which likely helped the new variant come into existence.

> And hey, look at that, Shell is busy sonar blasting our coastline for fucking oil. Great. You think we're gonna see any of that money? Not a chance.

Definitely the voters who vote for the politicians who license and allow this have nothing to do with this, right?

> It's also worth noting I'm a white south africa.

Nope, not worth noting.

[SamoyedFurFluff]

> And just for clarity, an example of restricting travel in a god damned pandemic is not an example of "systemic economic exclusion", it may be an ill conceived policy choice, but the west is also not responsible for your pathetically low vaccination rate which likely helped the new variant come into existence.

I’m not from Africa nor am I from America so I don’t think I have a horse in this race but I think this is the sort of rhetoric that the guy is critiquing. It has a clearly skewed understanding of the power differentials of the pandemic and then blames the nations with less power for being able to pull less strings.

Firstly, it makes total sense to me that preventing travel from a region just because it discovered a variant, when that region is apparently world reknowned in its ability to study infectious disease, is a policy born out of ignorant xenophobia. There’s no evidence that this thing started in the regions that were banned or that omicron hasn’t already spread internationally at that point, only that one of the nations with a world class variant detection system sounded the alarm.

Secondly, damn are we really gonna blame colonized countries on low vaccination rates when vaccine access is still being hoarded, it’s production still close sourced, and antivax movement is still strong in western nations?

[zohch]

> It has a clearly skewed understanding of the power differentials of the pandemic and then blames the nations with less power for being able to pull less strings.

A stupid but justifiable policy from the past 2 weeks cannot be a good example of why South Africa is spiraling the toilet. Sorry. Pick better examples. South Africa has been spiraling the toilet way before COVID.

> Secondly, damn are we really gonna blame colonized countries on low vaccination rates when vaccine access is still being hoarded, it’s production still close sourced, and antivax movement is still strong in western nations?

Who exactly is South Africa colonized by currently? And further:

- EXCLUSIVE South Africa delays COVID vaccine deliveries as inoculations slow ( https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/exclusive-south-africa-... )

- South Africa Asks J&J, Pfizer to Stop Sending Vaccines “It is entirely owing to hesitancy,” Crisp said. “We have plenty vaccine and capacity but hesitancy is a challenge. Unfortunately it means that many unvaccinated people may have an unhappy festive season and will possibly result in hospitals being congested.” (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-24/s-africa-...)

- South Africa's low vaccination rate is NOT a supply problem and vaccine hesitancy is stifling demand so much that it had to delay delivery of doses, say experts - but the rest of Africa still needs more doses ( https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10248699/Low-vaccin... )

Let's not pretend like South Africa has a vaccine supply shortage, because that would be a lie.

[SamoyedFurFluff]

I never said that SA had a vaccine shortage I’m saying are we really gonna blame SA when 1) there’s no evidence of wrongdoing on their part except to use their world reknowned infectious disease institutions to discover an existing variant that had entered their populace; 2) other nations are equally if not more flawed?

My understanding is the only reason SA even sounded the alarm was that they were smart enough to proactively be scanning for variants aggressively. They frankly did the world a favor and the world responded by assuming those poor African fucks are gonna dirty everyone with their disease.

[zohch]

> They frankly did the world a favor and the world responded by assuming those poor African fucks are gonna dirty everyone with their disease.

Do you not get how viruses work? Many western nations has or had travel restrictions from other western nations.