Can anyone give me a QRD on why Europe abandoned the colonization of Africa? Was it just because of the faggot >muh their rights to self determination virtue signalling liberal LARP or did they just gave up trying to domesticate niggers and failing every time? No need to go deep into the History, just a quick summary.
I feel bad for how better things could be on Africa if it has been continuously improved by Europeans. It's so strange reading about Whites from 19th/early 20th centuries and seeing how little of their virtue and glory their descendants still have. It's almost as if they were completely genocided a hundred years ago and these pussy faggot lefties we see in Europe/America today are just artificial clones.
Appreciate the answers and I'll also ask a QRD on Rhodesia if you have the time/patience.
Because you can’t do overt colonialism anymore, the plan is the far less honorable tactic of dehumanizing everyone while telling them they are special snowflakes, then labor/energy farming the slaves who don’t know they are slaves.
David Jones
In my flag's case it was because JKF (the bullet was too quick of a death) joined with the USSR to fund the nog rebels and go against us in the world's stage. Even though our based colonial soldier chads were btfoing the rebels left and right, it was too much for our coffers plus the commie insurrection happening at home, thus ending salazarism.
Eli Brown
The inhumane af chinks are making african nogs beg for the return of the huwhite man and my sides cant take it much longer.
Daniel Scott
Some western elites have control there still but generally speaking we don’t have the demographics needed for colonization now. Colonization happened when European fertility was extremely high and there was excess men to send overseas while the rest of the world wasn’t as populated as it is today.
We’re in demographic transition today, it won’t be until next century when Europeans and White North Americans get back to high fertility and that’s not accounting for the inevitable ethnic cleansings that could take a lifetime or more in the west due to immigration. Colonization wouldn’t return until like, 2200’s in that case at the earliest
>we don’t have the demographics needed for colonization now. Colonization happened when European fertility was extremely high and there was excess men to send overseas while the rest of the world wasn’t as populated as it is today. Wut? We were outmanned af by every subhuman (and even peak european) groups and we owned half of the world. How we did it, you ask? Technology always wins.
Lincoln Allen
>JFK It's so crazy it was that recent. I created the thread somehow imagining they left much earlier, before the 40s It's so crazy how much the world shifted in the second half of the last century
Watch the documentary "africa addio" if you can. I think essentially Europe had a strong will to expand until the world wars demoralised us all
Logan Hughes
>Was it just because of the faggot >>muh their rights to self determination correct. the Elites after ww2 lost their balls and by 1960s elites were just faggots that wanted to show black people are just like humans
We left africa because it was deemed unethical to kill all the africans. Who wants to live with niggers?
Ryan Carter
>>JFK The faggot did it on the grounds of muh imperialism bad all the while double down at the same time on vietnam, etc. >It's so crazy it was that recent That's why there's always hope to a quick af CROSS-COUNTER
The part where the nogs are teaching their masses about the biological inferiority of wypepo is funny af
Nathaniel Miller
Of course colonizers were outmanned, it’s not like there was no one living in other countries. But look at the difference in fertility, there’s no excess of men when the fertility in the west is below replacement, it was above 4 children per woman in rich European countries until the 1800’s. China today has an excess of men and now they have a soft-colonization of Africa while us westerners are in a multi-century long demographic transition where we slowly select for breeders. In doing so our IQ will also drop for a few centuries, which is why even if western fertility went back up it still wouldn’t directly lead to colonization because we don’t innovate right now. Colonization’s peak was a convergence of peak fertility and peak IQ
redpill me on the commie insurrection. are there any good books on it out there? everything on wikipedia doesn't make sense, as if it was just one angry general who was afraid of demotion who set everything off.
Parker Fisher
>Who wants to live with niggers? You (((dutch))) wanted to, hence e.g. the whole S.A. shitshow. Most european nations barely had people living there. The e.g huwhite minority in rhodesia was a really small populace -- just fyi the only 2 countries backing up the huwhites in the Bush War were Portugal... and Israel kek. And Sweden supported the nogs so now karma is biting them.
Lincoln Brooks
>Was it just because of the faggot >>muh their rights to self determination No. It was mainly a matter of two factors: the unprecedented types of rebellions that were hard to understand or manage for Europeans (specifically the Mau Mau rebellion), and the fact that African colonization never quite panned out to be as profitable as it looked on paper due to the sheer amount of extra upkeep and effort that had to be spent since the native Africans rarely had the drive or ability to maintain the new infrastructure themselves. Even after decades of massive and expensive education and training efforts, the population never substantially improved or adjusted well to first world standards, and the sheer madness of the revolts and rebellions in the early 20th Century through the 50s caused European powers to second guess their ambitions for turning African societies into successful and prosperous colonies. It was after the Mau Mau rebellions that Europeans started to accept that they really didn't understand Africans and that colonization might not work there. It was this retrospective look at it that started the existential perspective the West has now about colonization, and from that came the idea of empathy for the natives, not the other way around. The original idea was to uplift them into a much better state, like what happened with India and the Americas, but after it failed time and time again in Africa, the West began to question the real effect colonization had on native populations.
Christopher Carter
>The part where the nogs are teaching their masses about the biological inferiority of wypepo is funny af then they immediately cut to black people watching white women dance at strip clubs and seeing white women naked like they are from a fantasy land was fucking kino
Cooper Davis
Another thing I would like you guys to comment is on how quickly they dismissed whole fields like eugenics and phrenology as "dumb pseudoscience". The whole wikipedia article about it is a huge butthurt cope about how fake and pseudoscientific it is. It's so unreal how serious, intelligent evolutionists today pretend all inter-racial differences present in all animals are somehow absolutely absent in humans. How did they manage to brainwash these people - actual doctors and scientists - so quickly? Universities can't be THAT powerful, can they?
>Watch the documentary "africa addio" if you can. Will do, m8. Thanks.
>Of course colonizers were outmanned We were outmanned by A LOT in every regard and faced the peak empires with significant success, from pajeets to nips to the even european ones. It was all about tech and skill -- our ships were peak and our seamen were rugged gigachads chewing bacalhao.
there's not much to know, really. An aging leader, a never ending war, the 2 top dogs financing the commies, etc. and then the gay af carnation revolution. But most of our commies werent THAT commie per se, rly -- they just wanted something else after the whole decade-old ordeal e.g. my father was a paratrooper in the colonial wars, then came back home around the revolution and took part of it, then went to the funeral of Salazar and payed his respects -- now misses Salazar with a passion.
Evan Brown
kek right, in a >if wypepo so inferior y they look so godly kinda way. a must see
Landon Walker
No kek africa addio is a proper documentary. Watch it hue, you'll love it
Caleb Ward
This is a really interesting point, and I've never been able to find a logical and scientific connection between how phrenologists and such thought and how current day scientists think about phrenologists and the like. Probably because the current day opinion isn't a logical or rational one, and was simply formed by throwing out whole fields of study after WWII for specifically political reasons. I'm aware that phrenologists and ethnic scientists of the past were wrong about certain things, but it seems impossible to know for sure what was correct and what was incorrect these days because all the studies were just abandoned and never followed up on in a genuine fashion. We can learn a lot from these old theories, but unfortunately, because the baby's been thrown out with the bath water, it can be incredibly hard to parse what is probably true about them and what is probably not. Kind of like how the banning of narcotics in the 20th Century severely stunted our scientific understanding of them because they were banned when the field of research was so new.
Lucas Rivera
Europeans were too greedy and short sighted and wanted to employ africans as cheap labour rather than just displace them. And now European birth rates are too low to colonise anywhere. And Rhodesia was never going to work blacks were 95% of the population.
Jaxson Taylor
Starting from the 1910s USA did everything to destroy the European powers, the "decolonization" was part of the plan. Nothing to do with self determination or freedom or anything, as you can see it went really bad for Africa and the European powers effectively lost their powers.
Adam Baker
Wrong. It was extremely profitable. Just look at agricultural outputs for places like Rhodesia for example. The problem was control and international communism. These faggots did not want strong new nations free of their debt-slavery and so funded rebels to destroy the fledgling nations.
