Is this the reason why africa is so backward?

They didnt have many interactions with europeans and (most) Asians until recently. They were pretty much isolated.

Attached: MDLPsubsaharan.jpg (280x215, 19.44K)

>Morocco cas dark as Tanzania on the map

No, unfortunatly its due to genetical intelligence diffrences

then why blacks underperform wherever they are?

That's probably part of it; the most developed parts of Africa were the ones which had contact with the Middle East, while the more isolated parts were more primitive. But I doubt that's the only reason.

how is south America not backward? literally all the top murder capitals barring south Africa are all south american cities

>t. black
Africa cant even check murder rate

>how is south America not backward
I dont think the thread is about south america not being backward lol
But anyway
1. South america is way richer than africa
2. Its not like africa is safe either, nigeria's murder rate is 34, brazil's 19

Retard

Attached: ran12.png (533x619, 41.67K)

Plus even If South africa is violent as shit, all subsaharan africans like to ilegally immigrate there, because its the richest ssa country, truth is south africa is just competent enough to collect data, something that countries like Congo cant

Nah i do unironically think that central n south american are more violent than africa tho. Its not about who cant count or who is dumber, its just about social cohesion thing, africa overall (except south africa) have more social cohesion than central n south america.

>social cohesion
Can you elaborate further? Africa has a different, civil war every year, the most recent ethnic-based genocides happened there except that bengali tribe in myanmar, all the biggest countries (except North africa) have balkanization like problems (see Nigeria, Ethiopia, Cameroon) etc.
Do you mean specifically inside every local tribe? If yes then i could see some sense.

Yes, for the most part. Nothing is caused by just one factor, but isolation plays a big role. Premodern Africa got shitter the further they were from areas of contact (e.g Mediterranean or Arab Gulf)
>truth is south africa is just competent enough to collect data, something that countries like Congo cant
This is likely not as significant as you think. I don't doubt error in measures in places like Congo would be much higher in error due to how fucked up it is, but much of Africa is at least capable of getting somewhat accurate data, especially in urban areas, which can be used to make estimates of missing data. Also many "homicides" in African shitholes like Congo are caused by political instability and terrorism which I don't think is counted in homicide rate

That's not really true at all. Africa had a decent share of interactions with Asia and Europe throughout history.

Exactly, those conflict are mostly ethnic based. Just show how committed they are to their own ethnic group/tribe. Intratribe/ethnic they dont really killing each other.
In congo most violence happen in eastern congo border, where clashing between different african ethnic and races happen there. The rest of congo rarely have conflict bc they mostly bordering with the same ethnic group

Anything outside the North Africa-Horn though? Genuine curiosity, given your flag i assume you know more about african history than me

>but much of Africa is at least capable of getting somewhat accurate data
I dont think so desu. In almost all data-based maps, (most of) Africa is either on deadly red or grey (no data of). Its pretty coommon to see fog of information from africa in these maps (as a fellow intposter i know you get what i mean)

bump

Africa had plenty of available crops and beasts of burden to create agricultural civilisations. Europeans showed up and did it within generations what the Africans couldn’t do in thousands of years.

we wuz kangz

Attached: 1655178214187.webm (576x1024, 1.76M)

lol

Attached: GCSE data .png (546x430, 56.38K)