Posts by confusedandalone

52

Are first world countries to blame for the bulk of third world squalor?

by tootired2care in

throughout several past threads various posters have emphatically made the point that countries like great britian, united states, france etc.

basically countries where white people exist, are to blame for the poverty in many other third world nations.

some have even went so far as to suggest that the first world is to blame for all third world conditions.. i often see excuses such as these for why a country refuses to provide clean water, some food and basic sanitation for its people:.

confusedandalone

Qcmbr - how about if I show you similar numbers for deaths for every single Latin American country or african country where 10 -30% of the populations were slaughterd or made into slaves? Please tell me what makes this example extreme?

Britian and France and Portugal carried out similar murderous sprees everywhere they went?

Look at the Native AMericans who were nearly wiped out. I would love for you to take your argument to them and explain hwo the decimation of their people had positive effects. This from someone who grew up in Rhodesia of all places.

Something tells me every nation that was invaded and had people enslaved would have prefered to have been left alone to see what they could have become on their own. What is worse they deserved that option.

Its like saying what it the natives of Zimbabwe would have come into your home and raped your mother and sisters and Aunts and killed your father then turned around and enslaved you all. Then later on saidm, "Hey there are some benefits to this so don't worry about it."

52

Are first world countries to blame for the bulk of third world squalor?

by tootired2care in

throughout several past threads various posters have emphatically made the point that countries like great britian, united states, france etc.

basically countries where white people exist, are to blame for the poverty in many other third world nations.

some have even went so far as to suggest that the first world is to blame for all third world conditions.. i often see excuses such as these for why a country refuses to provide clean water, some food and basic sanitation for its people:.

confusedandalone

"Confused - the difference in my viewpoint is that countries are responsible for themselves - we can't keep excusing their failure to progress using victim language. I think people are more empowered than that."

How are they responsible for themselves when other countries bomb them into the stone age or forcibly take their resources? I ask again you are telling me that Congo would have been better of having 50% of their poopulation murdered and another 10% rendered useless than if they had been left alone to continue they way the were???

PLEASE FOR THE LAST TIME ANSWER THIS QUESTION.

=================================

trillaz - "Western money is no longer dependent on a tangible backing. I'm sure any country would like to do the same to its citizens but doing that Today in a 3rd world country would be seen as a human rights violation."

you see this type of post here shows an individual who has an understanding of history and how the world actually works and not revisionist historians who gloss over every aspect of history to make the powers that be look squeaky clean.

" the US made it illegal for citizens to hold amounts of gold."

it also amazes me how easy the government changes the rules whenever they like

52

Are first world countries to blame for the bulk of third world squalor?

by tootired2care in

throughout several past threads various posters have emphatically made the point that countries like great britian, united states, france etc.

basically countries where white people exist, are to blame for the poverty in many other third world nations.

some have even went so far as to suggest that the first world is to blame for all third world conditions.. i often see excuses such as these for why a country refuses to provide clean water, some food and basic sanitation for its people:.

confusedandalone

India for years prior to Industrial Revolution were very very powerful economically and militarily. They did suffer greatly under colonialization but they did not fall as much as most other areas conquered by Europeans. The conditions of Latin America and most of Africa were not the same as those in India and China prior to this period. There were a number of extremely powerful african empires as well as Latin American empires but not on the scale of India or China. Let us not forget the Sahara and how that seperation from other parts of Africa slowed the development of Sub-Saharan Africa as well. There were many wealthy african nations as well. Even today as you look at Northern African nations many are on a huge upswing and nations such as Ghana and Nigeria are doing well to a degree.

In a couple of generations if there is not to much meddling and the educational systems are allowed to improve Africa as well as a number of Latin American countries will begin to progree. For the most part many African literacy rates surpass those of India. The problem is there is no real industrial presents. Not to mention the Thugs who ruled over them embedded within the education systems that they were monkeys and sub-human and raped them of their culture and language. The same can be said of the native peoples of Latin American nations as well.

52

Are first world countries to blame for the bulk of third world squalor?

by tootired2care in

throughout several past threads various posters have emphatically made the point that countries like great britian, united states, france etc.

basically countries where white people exist, are to blame for the poverty in many other third world nations.

some have even went so far as to suggest that the first world is to blame for all third world conditions.. i often see excuses such as these for why a country refuses to provide clean water, some food and basic sanitation for its people:.

confusedandalone

" Indian civilization was continuing to advance over the centuries before the whites showed up."

- Look at the Maya and Inca and Olmec and Aztecs! Look at what they accomplished and the knowledge they had. The technological advancements they made. Then it comes to a full stop and people regress. That happens when you are made a slave and not allowed education and a complete loss of your culture. After a single generation think of what can be lost.

-As stated before the multitude of african civilizations that built all sorts of huge buildings engaged in astronomy like the aztecs and native americans.

- Look at the Arabs

- Look at India

Then colonialism comes in and its like a full stop on the development of these nations

52

Are first world countries to blame for the bulk of third world squalor?

by tootired2care in

throughout several past threads various posters have emphatically made the point that countries like great britian, united states, france etc.

basically countries where white people exist, are to blame for the poverty in many other third world nations.

some have even went so far as to suggest that the first world is to blame for all third world conditions.. i often see excuses such as these for why a country refuses to provide clean water, some food and basic sanitation for its people:.

confusedandalone

trillaz - " So there is an infrastructure catch-22. Why build where there is going to be no return? So what do those small countries have of wealth that they can offer to the outside world? "

Excellent question! If you look at South America, Africa, the Middle East and Asia the natural resources of these countries are abundant. The problem is most of the nations that were colonizers made insane amounts of moneyu off the natural resources of the lands lited aboev. As a matter of fact that is where most of European wealth came from. They had complete control of the resources of these nations until they gave these nations independence. However even after independence most of the mines and resources were owned by private European companies so they just continued to rape these countries of the resources they had up until today in many places.

Look at Jamaica for instance. They received thier independence not to long ago and they have a wealth of natural resources. However Foreigners own the majority of them. Such as Alcan. They literally turned acres of Jamaica into an acid pit with the runoff from the work they did there. The resorts most of which are owned by foreigners as well. The little they are able to have on thier own islands ends up being sold off to China. The roads in Jamaica needed repairing and they had to borrow from China and sell off gobs of land to do it. Which is shameful after the way that Britian raped the native people of everything they owned. The Arawaks are nearly gone.

Looking at Africa is even worse. Looking at Central and South America is worse. As I stated above how can someone expect a nation like Congo to thrive when 50% of the population was killed of FOR NO REASON and another 10% were mutilated just because... I really wish some of the people railing against these people would have answered that question.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congo_Free_State <---- I know no one has time to read books about this but this wikipedia article touches on a number of poitns.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/52/MutilatedChildrenFromCongo.jpg/220px-MutilatedChildrenFromCongo.jpg <--- Look at what happened to natives who did not meet rubber quotas

These African countries many are barely 50 years old. Where was America 50 years into its countryhood. Not to mention the fact that Americans where not in a time period where technology reigns supreme as it does today. What most it be like to recieve a country to control and you have no one who really wants to help and those that do are really just depleting your resources and stirring up trouble even after you are supposedly independent. More importantly the wealth of colonialist contries came on the backs of slaves they never paid. It is alot easier to build a grand and bountiful country when you have free labor.

Country	Independence Date	Prior ruling country
Liberia, Republic of	26 July 1847	-
South Africa, Republic of	31 May 1910	Britain
Egypt, Arab Republic of	28 February 1922	Britain
Ethiopia 1 , People's Democratic Republic of	5 May 1941	Italy
Libya (Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya)	24 December 1951	Britain
Sudan, Democratic Republic of	1 January 1956	Britain/Egypt
Morocco 2 , Kingdom of	2 March 1956	France 2
Tunisia, Republic of	20 March 1956	France
Ghana, Republic of	6 March 1957	Britain
Guinea, Republic of	2 October 1958	France
Cameroon 3 , Republic of	1 January 1960	France
Senegal, Republic of	4 April 1960	France
Togo, Republic of	27 April 1960	France
Mali, Republic of	22 September 1960	France
Madagascar, Democratic Republic of	26 June 1960	France
Congo (Kinshasa), Democratic Republic of the	30 June 1960	Belgium
Somalia, Democratic Republic of	1 July 1960	Britain
Benin, Republic of	1 August 1960	France
Niger, Republic of	3 August 1960	France
Burkina Faso, Popular Democratic Republic of	5 August 1960	France
Côte d'Ivoire, Republic of (Ivory Coast)	7 August 1960	France
Chad, Republic of	11 August 1960	France
Central African Republic	13 August 1960	France
Congo (Brazzaville), Republic of the	15 August 1960	France
Gabon, Republic of	17 August 1960	France
Nigeria 4 , Federal Republic of	1 October 1960	Britain
Mauritania, Islamic Republic of	28 November 1960	France
Sierra Leone, Republic of	27 April 1961	Britain
Tanzania, United Republic of	9 December 1961	Britain
Burundi, Republic of	1 July 1962	Belgium
Rwanda, Republic of	1 July 1962	Belgium
Algeria, Democratic and Popular Republic of	3 July 1962	France
Uganda, Republic of	9 October 1962	Britain
Kenya, Republic of	12 December 1963	Britain
Malawi, Republic of	6 July 1964	Britain
Zambia, Republic of	24 October 1964	Britain
Gambia, Republic of The	18 February 1965	Britain
Botswana, Republic of	30 September 1966	Britain
Lesotho, Kingdom of	4 October 1966	Britain
Mauritius, State of	12 March 1968	Britain
Swaziland, Kingdom of	6 September 1968	Britain
Equatorial Guinea, Republic of	12 October 1968	Spain
Guinea-Bissau 5 , Republic of	24 September 1973 (alt. 10 September 1974)	Portugal
Mozambique, Republic of	25 June 1975	Portugal
Cape Verde, Republic of	5 July 1975	Portugal
Comoros, Federal Islamic Republic of the	6 July 1975	France
São Tomé and Principe, Democratic Republic of	12 July 1975	Portugal
Angola, People's Republic of	11 November 1975	Portugal
Western Sahara 6	28 February 1976	Spain
Seychelles, Republic of	29 June 1976	Britain
Djibouti, Republic of	27 June 1977	France
Zimbabwe, Republic of	18 April 1980	Britain
Namibia, Republic of	21 March 1990	South Africa
Eritrea, State of	24 May 1993	Ethiopia

52

Are first world countries to blame for the bulk of third world squalor?

by tootired2care in

throughout several past threads various posters have emphatically made the point that countries like great britian, united states, france etc.

basically countries where white people exist, are to blame for the poverty in many other third world nations.

some have even went so far as to suggest that the first world is to blame for all third world conditions.. i often see excuses such as these for why a country refuses to provide clean water, some food and basic sanitation for its people:.

confusedandalone

As usual you are wrong. Let's discuss prejudice. You stating there were no successful civilizations anywhere colonialist went and that what they brought to people was better than what they had. That is the expression of a white ring whackadoodle. Look at what your people did... they go to zimbabwe and take land from people and make them second class citizens and slaves. Then alter the education of these people's children and yell them all the great monuments that their own people built were actually built by Europeans because africans were not smart enough to have done these things.

This was institutionalized white washed revisionist history. It made people forget centuries of their own accomplishments and made them feel that they were subhuman.

Your mom's take on the farming issue was also foolish. The indigenous people there were local farmers providing for family and tribes and small markets. White farmers who raped them of the land had a goal of mass farming with yield being the only concern. After all these people farm the land for centuries prior to your arrival and they were fine. Again it was colonialist greed that made it a problem.

Now let's talk prejudice. My best man in my wedding is white. My current neighbors who we go on vacation with are white. Etc... they are also well aware of my feelings and realize that I am informed and not a racist.

You on the other hand grew up in rhodesia which like Congo was governed by a bunch of racist Europeans that believed in wholesale killing and it seems you are in agreement with those actions.

Why would you ignore the facts about Leopold and congo? Based on what you said what he did was better for the land of Congo because they were just tribal pwople.

Explain how an invading European force Killin 15 million of 30 million inhabitants of a country is better for them. You can always just ignore that again or wait for someone else to support you with more exciting news of how africans and indigenous people of the Americas were just savages that needed to be colonized

52

Are first world countries to blame for the bulk of third world squalor?

by tootired2care in

throughout several past threads various posters have emphatically made the point that countries like great britian, united states, france etc.

basically countries where white people exist, are to blame for the poverty in many other third world nations.

some have even went so far as to suggest that the first world is to blame for all third world conditions.. i often see excuses such as these for why a country refuses to provide clean water, some food and basic sanitation for its people:.

confusedandalone

White washed history is what prevents the truth from coming forward.

The very fact that you mention your Rhodesia upbringing nullifies anything you say.

52

Are first world countries to blame for the bulk of third world squalor?

by tootired2care in

throughout several past threads various posters have emphatically made the point that countries like great britian, united states, france etc.

basically countries where white people exist, are to blame for the poverty in many other third world nations.

some have even went so far as to suggest that the first world is to blame for all third world conditions.. i often see excuses such as these for why a country refuses to provide clean water, some food and basic sanitation for its people:.

confusedandalone

Yes first world nations hold a huge amount of blame for it and nearly every educated person knows this.

First world countries went into these nations enslaved the people, took the resources and killed millions of people.

Most Third world countries did not even receive thier independence from these nations till the 1960's.

The rulers for many of these nations were corrupt put into place by the first world nations.

As stated before how can you expect countrioes like the Democratic republic of congo to ever get themselves together when the disgusting figure Leopold literally killed 30 to 50% of the population and mutilated another 10% percent.

Why even ask such a question

2

Is it possible too.

by confusedandalone in

1. delete private messages so that there are not pages of them in my inbox or atleast be able to sort them.

2. use something besides gravatar .

3 add a like button.

confusedandalone

1. Delete private messages so that there are not pages of them in my inbox or atleast be able to sort them

2. Use something besides Gravatar

3 Add a like button

4. Have a profile or edit profile. It seems some people can have one and some can't or something

5. Is there a way to change ones email address

6. Is there a way to reset my password

32

Well it look like AG Eric Holder is finally stepping down.

by tootired2care in

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/09/25/351363171/eric-holder-to-step-down-as-attorney-general.

happy day - our incompetent race baiting ag who refuses to actually do his job, and prosecute high crimes right under his down in the irs is finally stepping down.

good riddance!.

confusedandalone

" Only if you're ignorant of history. The country was created between 1775 and 1787, the KKK didn't come into existence until 1865. Several "founding fathers" (Benjamin Franklin, John Adams for example) were anti-slavery."

Playiong with dates to solidify your point makes no sense since we were playing with a hypothetical situation. It also shows how desperate you are to add glittery and sparkly legacies to some of the most brutal and genocidal men in the history of the world.

You clowns always only think of slavery and yes most of the founding fathers had slaves and profitted off slavery. These are more grimey facts that most White American makes like you do not want to admit to. Let us throw out the cruel treatment of slaves for a minute. Do you want to discuss the Native American Genocide committed by these men?

Didn't they also dislike Jews. Seems they were collectively far worse than Hitler if we go by policies and death counts.

Soo in essence if Holder had been behind some plot to kill people by the millions then he would have been doing his job.

After all that is what makes this country great right?