Coli black capitalists, how do you feel about Climate Change?

[Micky Mikey]

Do you guys understand with the USA rejoining the paris agreement they'll probably just resort to the same carbon colonialism that China and Europe are already doing.

Which basically means Africa is likely gonna be the dumping ground for all pollution life in developed nations produces, while being handicapped as far as being able to emit carbon for their own development?

And as far as mass migrations that's a normal part of human development, people used to live in parts of the Sahara, they don't anymore.

What really matters is Africa having well developed urban centers to house those people.

But no, we have nomadic herders from the Sahara migrating into neighboring agricultural communities and violent ethnic conflicts happening. Because somebody convinced people that Africans just love being poor farmers and don't need the conveniences and developments of the modern world.

Carbon Colonialism: How the Fight Against Climate Change Is Displacing Africans

Time will tell. We'll know by the mid 2020's where the world is headed. And yes, mass migrations are a normal part of human history. However, mass migrations occuring over such a short period of time generally leads to instability. And I am not sure if African countries will have the infrastructure to withstand. All the crises that the continent will face will 'retard' any ability for it to compete on a international playing stage. There simply isn't enough time. But hopefully you're right and I'm wrong.

 

[ignorethis]

I’m paying for my daughter to get a degree in Atmospheric Science right now, so one day she can be apart of the solutions.

Capitalism has allowed me to pay her tuition with going into debt.

You have the right idea.
Because right now even if the whole world followed strict carbon restrictions, global warming would only slow slightly.

So the obviously answer is our tech to capture and reuse CO2 has to advance.

Make CO² valuable somehow and global warming would be history by the 22nd century.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

An EU-beholden negro that has probably never stepped foot on the continent. Your globalist talking points don't mean anything.

No renewable energy sources is capable replacing fossil fuels now.

I don't know if you know anything about industry in developing nations, the power grids are shytty so they run smaller industrial machinery off fossil fuel generators.

Well, at least your SN is apt, you're caping for a system entirely pushed by white supremacy and simultaneously trying to pretend that the system they have done EVERYTHING to keep black and brown folk from adopting is really theirs.

I don't know why you even mentioned EU, what do they have to do with the conversation?

There are numerous changes that need to be made, not just the long-term issue of replacing fossil fuels, but the lack of infrastructure is a major reason to adopt the newest shyt rather than doubling-down on shyt that is already getting phased out. Why make massive investments in outdated technology that isn't even going to last until the next generation?

West Africa produces crude but doesn't have the tools to refine it correctly, which leads to retarded shyt like Nigerians paying the same for gasoline as people in a top-tier country like the USA.

And corporate interests already had their reason for suppressing refineries in West Africa, but now it's a double dose of corporations not wanting Africans to refine their own oil and climate change preachers considering development of fossil fuel facilities a sin against the global order.

Give Africans the same economic weapons as everybody else and watch how quickly things change.

Who is going to "give" Africans these economic weapons, and you tell me, how quickly will things change? Indians have all the "economic weapons" the west has, and so now they have the most polluted cities in the world AND still have hundreds of millions starving in the worst poverty in the world. Capitalism has created hundreds of Indian billionaries while the poorest people are still fukked.

Your anti-capitalism has no place in West Africa because West Africa always embraced free trade going back to trans-Saharan trade routes.

Giving a poor man in the village the ability to effectively make bricks with machinery instead of by hand will do more good for Africa than any of your ivory tower, European Socialist, BS ideas.

We're not talking about trade routes brother.

Socialism has a long history in west africa, going back to Abdoulaye Ly, Kwame Nkrumah, Leopold Sedar Senghor, Julius Nyerere, and Modibo Keita. Claiming that socialism is an "EU" thing when the EU doesn't even practice socialism and when EU countries were some of the main ones trying to STOP Africa from going socialist is just nonsensical.

The debate between capitalism and socialism isn't about trading. It's fundamentally about priorities.

Which do you prioritize, the financial profit of individuals or the health and welfare of the entire community? Which is better to emphasize, the domination of all by a few or the sharing of resources amongst the entire tribe?

Which of THOSE seems more innately African to you?

 

[Professor Emeritus]

the issue i keep running into whenever i have this discussion is the same recurring issue in all other aspects of socialism, which is that the correct "solution" requires everybody to make the right decision.

the general argument ive heard is that given that most social leftists are pro climate and see the capitalistic industrial complex as the dominant pollutant to the environment, a socialistic government would theoretically slow the reliance on environment-destroying endeavors in the name of profit (fossil fuels, etc)

the problem being that this view assumes that everyone involved in the decision making process feels the same way, much like every other problem with socialism; its such a theoretical concept because it operates in absolutes and only works in relatively developed and wealthy countries in which society universally has the same problems and its not some folk struggling to pay bills in contrast to some folk struggling to choose a colorway on their next phone

capitalism is definitely the worst possible economic system for combatting climate change, but socialism would not only have to be globally instituted which is damn near impossible, it also has all the other problems that come with it including lack of conformity unless forced

Obviously there is no decision-making process that is without difficulty. But the fundamental advantage socialism has in the political process is that unlike capitalism, it doesn't automatically give all the power to the people who fukking over society the worst. Capitalism virtually ensures that political power will be held by the richest people in society, the ones who are most willing to screw everyone else over for profit, and enables them to continually increase their power via the same means. There are no guarantees that a socialist nation will do the right thing, that can't happen for any system, but at the very basis at least the fundamental direction is to better spread economic benefits and thus spread economic and political power, such that the entire community has greater ability to have input on the decision, rather than just the worst people controlling everything.

 

[Kyle C. Barker]

I'm late e the party, but I think we would have adopted green technologies sooner if the federal government incentivized it more.

But yeah climate change is a huge issue for sure

 

[ignorethis]

Time will tell. We'll know by the mid 2020's where the world is headed. And yes, mass migrations are a normal part of human history. However, mass migrations occuring over such a short period of time generally leads to instability. And I am not sure if African countries will have the infrastructure to withstand. All the crises that the continent will face will 'retard' any ability for it to compete on a international playing stage. There simply isn't enough time. But hopefully you're right and I'm wrong.

They 100% will not have the infrastructure to handle it if they follow the wishes of western Climate Change preachers.

If they kill all their current leadership and replace them with leaders that actually want to progress Africa instead of dikksuck the European elite. Then industrialize. They stand a chance of avoiding the decades of war Africa is heading towards.

Well, at least your SN is apt, you're caping for a system entirely pushed by white supremacy and simultaneously trying to pretend that the system they have done EVERYTHING to keep black and brown folk from adopting is really theirs.

I don't know why you even mentioned EU, what do they have to do with the conversation?

There are numerous changes that need to be made, not just the long-term issue of replacing fossil fuels, but the lack of infrastructure is a major reason to adopt the newest shyt rather than doubling-down on shyt that is already getting phased out. Why make massive investments in outdated technology that isn't even going to last until the next generation?






Who is going to "give" Africans these economic weapons, and you tell me, how quickly will things change? Indians have all the "economic weapons" the west has, and so now they have the most polluted cities in the world AND still have hundreds of millions starving in the worst poverty in the world. Capitalism has created hundreds of Indian billionaries while the poorest people are still fukked.





We're not talking about trade routes brother.

Socialism has a long history in west africa, going back to Abdoulaye Ly, Kwame Nkrumah, Leopold Sedar Senghor, Julius Nyerere, and Modibo Keita. Claiming that socialism is an "EU" thing when the EU doesn't even practice socialism and when EU countries were some of the main ones trying to STOP Africa from going socialist is just nonsensical.

The debate between capitalism and socialism isn't about trading. It's fundamentally about priorities.

Which do you prioritize, the financial profit of individuals or the health and welfare of the entire community? Which is better to emphasize, the domination of all by a few or the sharing of resources amongst the entire tribe?

Which of THOSE seems more innately African to you?

India poverty rate has been dropping consistent for the past 30 years, but you consider that a failure because it's producing billionaires.

A ten to twenty percent decline in poverty isn't something to scoff at especially when we see the poverty rate and unemployment rates increasing all through Africa.

The trope is really true, y'all don't care about the poor, y'all just hate the rich. Or maybe you're just ignorant of how terrible developing nation poverty is and the idea of 100-300 million people escaping it doesn't move you.

Report: India Lifted 271 Million People Out Of Poverty In A Decade [Infographic]

India Poverty Rate 1977-2021

Luckily hating on someone because they have more then what you think they deserve is something that rightfully gets you shamed and outcast in African cultures. So your ilk will likely be on the receiving end of a barrel in an Africa ran by Africans.

And yes people share resources amongst their tribes in Africa, we don't need a state apparatus to force us to do that, especially a state apparatus that has a 50/50 chance of being ran by a group that doesn't like your ingroup.

You don't even understand that the "state" in itself is considered oppressive to several major Africa cultures, but you guys are trying to sell Africans that increasing the power of the state is a good thing.

We're not all westerners that need the government to take care of us.

Secondly, you ignored all the articles I posted by Reuters, Scientific American, and TheHill, with various quotes from energy officials in different African nations stating that Africa needs fossil fuels to develop at a rate fast enough to catch up with the rest of the world. But the random dude on the internet knows better because the white people told him so.

I keep bring up the EU, because once you step out of your US left-right paradigm, they're the main enforcers of climate change hysteria right now. You smooth ignored all the facts and articles I posted because it goes against the Greta Thunberg BS a liberal cac implanted in your head whether you cognizant of that fact or not.

Like I said stop speaking on shyt you don't understand, if their was an alternative to fossil fuels for industrializing Africa, somebody would already be on it and they'd be some of the richest people on Earth.

nikkas want to talk ivory tower fantasy BS, when there are people suffering and kids kneeling over and dying right now.

Moral masturbation for peons that think the world needs you to save it. Give everybody access to the free market and allow people to save themselves.

Then let the people of those nations decide if climate change activism is something they need to worry about, instead of forcing them into it because you know what's best for the simple-minded Africans.

Most africans aren't worried about climate change, they don't need you to be worried for them.

If you care about black people on this earth at all, the industrialization of Africa by Africans is the single most important issue and I don't know how you can argue otherwise.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

They 100% will not have the infrastructure to handle it if they follow the wishes of western Climate Change preachers.

If they kill all their current leadership and replace them with leaders that actually want to progress Africa instead of dikksuck the European elite. Then industrialize. They stand a chance of avoiding the decades of war Africa is heading towards.

Because when the wars and genocide start bre

You realize that the century of following capitalist wishes isn't working for shyt, so why are you talking about hypothetical "this is what listening to climate change preachers would do" instead of looking at what obeying the capitalists HAS done?

The European/American elite has done everything possible to promote capitalism in Africa and to block socialism at every opportunity. That's the reality.

It's incredible that you're somehow blaming the current fukked-up situation on imaginary enemies that have had zero power, while preaching that your salvation will be the exact fukking system that got Africa here in the first place.

India poverty rate has been dropping consistent for the past 30 years, but you consider that a failure because it's producing billionaires.

A ten percent decline in poverty isn't something to scoff at especially when we see the poverty rate and unemployment rates increasing all through Africa.

And yes people share resources amongst their tribes in Africa, we don't need a state apparatus to force us to do that, especially a state apparatus that has a 50/50 chance of being ran by a group that doesn't like your ingroup.

How do you simultaneously note the dire situation of poverty in Africa and then try to act in the very next sentence like there's no problem? Africans have been subjected to the whims of capitalists for centuries, if they don't need something different, then why hasn't the situation gotten better yet?

A large portion of the drop in Indian "poverty" has come from landed villagers selling their land to developers and moving to the city. Since poverty is measured by daily income, these laborers are technically not "impoverished" anymore - but they've lost their land, their culture, and are living in heavily polluted slums where they pay rent or squat on land they don't own rather than having their own land they can pass to their descendents.

Much of the positive gains in India came from the implementation of new crops due to the Green Revolution (driven by NGOs, not by capitalists) and by government implementation of expanded public education and health care (private hospitals in India refuse to serve the poor). Neither of those were driven by industrialization. In fact, the current Indian government, which is extremely pro-capitalist and pro-business, is also extremely anti-minority, anti-poor, and increasingly totalitarian.

Where do you think that will get Indians in the long run? Their cities have become the most polluted in the world, the vast majority of the population is losing their land to developers, almost all of their natural land is gone, and the government is becoming increasingly totalitarian with more and more power centralized among the pro-capitalist anti-minority tyrants....but you think that's all okay because profits have temporarily increased. You think that will last?

 

[Cynic]

Coli Capitalists, how do you feel about the existential threat about Climate Change and how unregulated capitalism is destroying the environment? Like the CO2 emissions killing the quality of air we breathe, to deforestation of rainforests in Brazil that affects the quality of life, to coastal areas about to be flooded permanently to rising sea temperatures with melting ice caps?

Yes, a lot of you denounced socialism and regulated capitalism because you want black folks to get economic power and reparations (I'm still for reparations, btw) from whites, but what good is that, if the planet becomes inhabitable in a few short decades for most people? How can black folk ball out when a lot of land is underwater and quality food is scarce?

So rugged capitalism the ONLY answer to a long term future for blacks?

@Rhakim
@2Quik4UHoes
@BigMoneyGrip
@gabbo
@neotheflyingone
@CorporateTrapper
@Gold
@Booksnrain

These are issues that will impact the entire human race.
Climate change is inevitable our impact will be negligible.
We will perish as a species like others have done before
us and the earth will continue.


Nothing you can do personally about it unless you move to
the global south and buy large swathes of land and start
planting trees at a loss.

But there's no profit motive in this aside from tax schemes.


Focus on things you can control and have leverage over.
Your skills, your values, your relationships, your health
and your finances and your philanthropy.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

if their was an alternative to fossil fuels for industrializing Africa, somebody would already be on it and they'd be some of the richest people on Earth.

nikkas want to talk ivory tower fantasy BS, when there are people suffering and kids kneeling over and dying right now.

Breh, did you think that through before you posted it? By your own logic, why haven't capitalists used Africa's abundant fossil fuel resources to industrialize the continent and become "the richest people on Earth" in the process? Obviously, capitalists aren't that interested in industrializing Africa.

Those kids are suffering and dying right now because capitalism has failed them. Why are you ignoring that?

 

[ignorethis]

Breh, did you think that through before you posted it? By your own logic, why haven't capitalists used Africa's abundant fossil fuel resources to industrialize the continent and become "the richest people on Earth" in the process? Obviously, capitalists aren't that interested in industrializing Africa.

Those kids are suffering and dying right now because capitalism has failed them. Why are you ignoring that?

Stop talking about things and places you don't understand.

Free market capitalism has never existed in modern Africa.

Majority of the governments of Africa are left-leaning have been that way for the past 20-30 years, you can easily look these things up.

Shut up, no free market capitalism exist in Africa. Actually capitalism would fix Africa in less than 50 years, but if you never been to continent or tried to participate in industry on the continent you wouldn't know this.

Most the nations are kleptocracies, that hide behind ”central planning" to explain why they have their economies so heavily restricted when they obviously aren't meeting the needs of the people.

The reason is because controlling who has the money is the most important thing to Africa's ruling class and their white masters.

Any ethnic groups pushing true ethno-states like what everybody else on the earth has... Yea, no money for you guys, keeping Africans in dysfunctional multi-ethnic nations was the whole point of borders the Europeans drew.

You believe that African resources should be used to feed the people on the land it comes from... Yea gotta make sure y'all stay poor, wouldn’t want y'all funding or spreading any revolutionary thought.

Only in Nigeria/Africa could a party with jihadist sympathies masquerade as an economically left-leaning "progressive", party with Western support, because all that is required for the Western Hegemony to support an African government is a promise you won't do anything radical like... generate too much wealth for your general population.

Majority of the continent of Africa is begging for free market capitalism, but we're stuck with shytty "centrally planned" economies that don't work because our European socialist overlords have a plan for "controlled growth" in Africa, and African economies need as much red tape as possible to prevent any smart blacks from capitalizing on the market inefficiencies and gaining economic/cultural/political power.

But keep pretending you understand what's going on in the world or on a continent you've never stepped foot on.

The DRC is literally ran by a "socialist" party right now, but in Africa we see what socialism has always led to, an uber-elite political class. In Africa the richest people aren't the industry leaders, it's the politicians, and its some dumbasses in here that think that's the better alternative.

People pretend Africa is fukked up because Africans don't know what to do, nah plenty of people know exactly what to do... They're just not allowed to do it.

You guys always say this, but all socialism eventually looks like this.

The ruling party in the DRC is part of Socialist International, they didn't just tack it on their name.

Hell most of the political parties with any power in the DRC are socialist leaning. Hell, the some of the wealthiest people probably consider themselves socialist.

All those well meaning socialist with money and power, and things aren't getting better.

That's because they're no different than their European socialist counterparts that feel that they must "do what they can to help the lesser people", all while being the lower classes biggest enemy by making economic moats so wide, barriers to entry so high, and so much corruption/nepotism/cronyism, you have to have political power or connections to do any business.

"You have to have political power or connections to do any business" seems to be a reoccurring thing in most Marx-leaning nations, but nah it can't be a pattern.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

You don't even understand that the "state" in itself is considered oppressive to several major Africa cultures, but you guys are trying to sell Africans that increasing the power of the state is a good thing.

We're not all soft westerners that need the government to take care of us.

Who said anything about increasing the power of the state? You're just pushing anti-socialist talking points. Socialism doesn't necessitate any greater state control than capitalism, it's a question of WHO exerts that control. In modern capitalism, state control is taken by a small minority of rich people who either use lobbying power or direct entry into politics to direct the state in their own favor. Socialism doesn't ask that the state have any more power, it simply asks that that power be wielded more evenly to benefit the entire population instead of merely favoring the wealthy.

Secondly, you ignored all the articles I posted by Reuters, Scientific American, and TheHill, with various quotes from energy officials in different African nations stating that Africa needs fossil fuels to develop at a rate fast enough to catch up with the rest of the world. But the random dude on the internet knows better because the white people told him so.

The first article you posted was just an opinion piece written by one person from "The Breakthrough Institute" and a second from the "Center for Global Development". "The Breakthrough Institute" is an anti-environmentalist group run by a rich white american whose dad was general counsel for the US Department of Energy. The "Center for Global Development" is a neoliberal American think tank run mostly by former World Bank officials. So which one of us is doing the "cause white people told him so" route?


Your second article has people agreeing with the exact shyt that I've been telling you:

Ghana is poised to double its 2,800 megawatts of capacity in the next five years, and 10 percent of that will be composed of solar energy. Mahama said he won't rule out coal but argued that Africa must work to leapfrog the dirty power that brought modernization to the West.

"Climate change is real, and Africa stands to suffer the most," he said. "We can't take the same paradigm that America did or Europe did or even China did. We need to look at the conditions of the day and develop according to those conditions."

Did you even read that before you posted the article?

Yes, the article says that in the short-term, it's not possible for Africa to abandon fossil fuels entirely. But NO ONE here has argued for that. It's a strawman argument that allows you to keep caping for the same capitalist system that has kept Africa in poverty until now.

You smooth ignored all the facts and articles I posted because it goes against the Greta Thunberg BS a liberal cac implanted in your head whether you cognizant of that fact or not.

Like I said stop speaking on shyt you don't understand,

I've been posting on here for 6 years and my credentials and life experience are well-established. Before embarking on this made-up bullshyt about where I got my ideas or what I do or don't understand, it might have benefitted you to put just the slightest effort in figuring out who you were talking to first.

 

[TheBigBopper]

Frankly, I don’t give a shyt about it.

 

[ignorethis]

Who said anything about increasing the power of the state? You're just pushing anti-socialist talking points. Socialism doesn't necessitate any greater state control than capitalism, it's a question of WHO exerts that control. In modern capitalism, state control is taken by a small minority of rich people who either use lobbying power or direct entry into politics to direct the state in their own favor. Socialism doesn't ask that the state have any more power, it simply asks that that power be wielded more evenly to benefit the entire population instead of merely favoring the wealthy.





The first article you posted was just an opinion piece written by one person from "The Breakthrough Institute" and a second from the "Center for Global Development". "The Breakthrough Institute" is an anti-environmentalist group run by a rich white american whose dad was general counsel for the US Department of Energy. The "Center for Global Development" is a neoliberal American think tank run mostly by former World Bank officials. So which one of us is doing the "cause white people told him so" route?


Your second article has people agreeing with the exact shyt that I've been telling you:

Did you even read that before you posted the article?

Yes, the article says that in the short-term, it's not possible for Africa to abandon fossil fuels entirely. But NO ONE here has argued for that. It's a strawman argument that allows you to keep caping for the same capitalist system that has kept Africa in poverty until now.





I've been posting on here for 6 years and my credentials and life experience are well-established. Before embarking on this made-up bullshyt about where I got my ideas or what I do or don't understand, it might have benefitted you to put just the slightest effort in figuring out who you were talking to first.

Name you credentials when it comes to the state of Africam politics and infrastructure.

You don't even know who the richest or most powerful people in Africa are, nor their political affiliations. But you understand what is hurting Africa and what it needs.

You have proven you don't even understand how African Economies work outside of what you've read from secondary and tertiary sources.

You're doing what all wanna be socialist do in debate, verbose moral grandstanding with no realistic plan, just ivory tower BS.

The closest Africa has ever came to free market capitalism is the greater African economic zone that just came to fruition this year.

And you literally made a point not to post the paragraph right before the Mahama quote you posted, where it stated he refused to rule out fossil fuels because even he knows it's needed, he just ain't have the heart to say it because he doesn't want to have a bad standing with his UN friends.

You understand 2800 megawatts isn't shyt, and majority of that energy is being produced by fossil fuels still? And Africa needs about 100 of new fossil fuel plants to be able to keep up for the next 50 years, let alone the 100+ years it'll take for a realistic energy alternative for Africa to develop.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Name you credentials when it comes to the state of Africam politics and infrastructure.

You don't even know who the richest or most powerful people in Africa are, nor their political affiliations. But you understand what is hurting Africa and what it needs.

You have proven you don't even understand how African Economies work outside of what you've read from secondary and tertiary sources.

You're doing what all wanna be socialist do in debate, verbose moral grandstanding with no realistic plan, just ivory tower BS.

The closest Africa has ever came to free market capitalism is the greater African economic zone that just came to fruition this year.

Now, since you're the one throwing out accusations, what are your credentials in energy technology and environmental degradation that allow you to make the definitive claims of exclusive knowledge and superiority that you've been throwing out?

And you literally made a point not to post the paragraph right before the Mahama quote you posted, where it stated he refused to rule out fossil fuels because even he knows it's needed, he just ain't have the heart to say it because he doesn't want to have a bad standing with his UN friends.

Why would I quote that, when I've literally never said that Africa needs to rule out fossil fuels immediately? You are trying to divert from the discussion on socialism and keep moving the goalposts.

Stop talking about things and places you don't understand.

Free market capitalism has never existed in modern Africa.

You sound EXACTLY like one of those hardcore pro-capitalist right-wingers. "When capitalism fails, just keep saying that we aren't capitalist enough yet!"

Every European nation who you blame for the current situation in Africa is capitalist. Every African nation of any power is capitalist. NO socialist has done anything to keep free market capitalism out of Africa. If Africa has not had a free market, it's because the capitalists have not wanted it to have a free market. Blaming the current situation on powerless socialist boogeymen because your capitalist heroes have failed you is transparent bullshyt.

Tell me, who is the ONE socialist who is the most responsible for Africa's current issues?

 

[ignorethis]

Look at that wild goalpost shift - you claimed I didn't understand fossil fuels and industrialization, when I have a degree in biophysics and have spent extensive time in developing countries including working with local development experts and well as doing extensive reading and writing on environmental issues along with personally talking to experts in the subject. I understand African politics and infrastructure the same way you and anyone else does - by reading and speaking to Africans.

Now, since you're the one throwing out accusations, what are your credentials in energy technology and environmental degradation that allow you to make the definitive claims of exclusive knowledge and superiority that you've been throwing out?




Why would I quote that, when I've literally never said that Africa needs to rule out fossil fuels immediately? You are trying to divert from the discussion on socialism and keep moving the goalposts.






You sound EXACTLY like one of those hardcore pro-capitalist right-wingers. "When capitalism fails, just keep saying that we aren't capitalist enough yet!"

Every European nation who you blame for the current situation in Africa is capitalist. Every African nation of any power is capitalist. NO socialist has done anything to keep free market capitalism out of Africa. If Africa has not had a free market, it's because the capitalists have not wanted it to have a free market. Blaming the current situation on powerless socialist boogeymen because your capitalist heroes have failed you is transparent bullshyt.

Tell me, who is the ONE socialist who is the most responsible for Africa's current issues?

Lol if you think mainstream European political thought leaders aren't socialist you're even denser than I thought.

The same hegemony pushing globalism, climate change hysteria, "controlled growth" in developing nations, are one hundred percent pushing socialism.

The same spirit that led to colonialism and missionary work is behind socialism, "we must enlighten the the ignorant and save them from themselves", when we've seen the good socialist have done in the world. We see all the good the socialist are doing in the DRC, when they have had complete political control for 20 years. The people suffer while they infight, debate each other for the media, and live very nice lifestyles compared to their non-politically connected counterparts in the slums.
Reviewing DRC’s poverty estimates, 2005-2012: Unprecedented GDP growth without trickle down - Democratic Republic of the Congo


Africa wasn't colonized by individuals, it was colonized by state hired or state-run companies. The state.

And lol the example everybody uses for the standard of working socialism, the Scandinavian nations, literally sent the worst terrorists in African history to the continent.

Lol the birthplace of socialism is the same birthplace as the colonizers. Lol the thoughts you regurgitating are literally created by colonizers lmao.

Rich Europeans with an evolved version of "The White Man's Burden" are the main bankrollers and creators of socialist thought.

Hell, most of the ideology was born out of a lazy white man who leeched off his friends, let his kids starve to death before he did, and own mom called him a lazy useless bum.

But this is the salvation you guys want to bring Africans. When you don't even understand Africans.

Talking to random developers doesn't give you enough knowledge about Africa to diagnose it's ills.

Africa is filled with privileged, cosmopolitan, socialist-leaning people like you, y'all are useless in a place that needs actual work done. Get out the way so we can pay somebody to do the work well, and pay for the tools to do it well.

I already posted how majority African economies are very much centrally planned by the state, with heavy regulation on almost all forms of business, which leads to bureaucracy that locks majority of the population of participating in business and industry.

If Southern Nigeria didn't have the abiity to send it's best out to other nations and bring the fruits of capitalism back, Nigeria would not only be a worst hell, but a couple ethnic groups probably wouldn't be here right now.

You want Africans to expand the state when the state is already failing and we've seen Marxism fukk up nations with way more going for them than African nations.

It's fine, I'm tired of posting. The tower of babel will fall as always.