What are the reasons for African lack of achievement in Africa?

[Consept]

There's plenty of books and materials to research this topic. Why not look at them and come back and educate us, it's not hidden information. Hint: Africans are dumb is prob not the answer 

[Hardkill]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

I explain much of this in: How Society Evolves.

IQ is less a function of race and more a function of social development and wealth.

Why is most of Africa behind in social development compared to most other parts of the world?

[Jake Johnson]

1 hour ago, Sempiternity said:

 

Thanks

[abundance]

6 hours ago, Avalon said:

I get it.

The evil white man has put the black man down in Europe and in America.

But what are the reasons for AfrIcan lack of achievement in Africa? A place where there is relatively no white people.

Genuinely interested.

Dude stop hiding behind questions that we all know have malevolent intentions and just admit you don't like black people. If you were genuinely interested in African history you'd search through the numerous resources online or in your local library. I can't help but think your intentions here are nefarious in nature and your real aim is to express your hatred for non-white people under the guise of asking silly and half baked questions. You aren't intelligent and we aren't naive.

Edited March 26, 2021 by abundance

[Raphael]

I live in an African country and I consider it to be more developed than most countries on the planet. Of course, it's not as developed as Europe or North America and people are mostly at stage blue, but it's overall better than Asia, South America and the rest of Africa. I consider it to be safer than the US. We don't get shot in the street and we have free health care for everyone.

I don't think that European exploitation of Africa is the only reason for the general lack of development. Europe was already more advanced than most of Africa before the first encounters, Europe was already at stage blue where Africa was mostly at stage purple.

Leo mentioned in the past that the geography and difficult natural conditions of the continent is behind the low development, I agree with him and I think that it's the best explanation so far. Many things influences human development: geography, meteorological conditions, the plants and animals around, even the food that people eat.

 

Edited March 26, 2021 by Raphael

[How to be wise]

@Avalon Before Europeans came, Africa was only a few thousand people spread across a massive continent. No communication with anyone (unlike the rest of the world) and few in number. It was more or less non existent until the 19th century when Europeans pretty much reached all the tribes and villages of Africa. So you could say that Africa began just a few centuries ago. And already it’s catching up to the Middle East, which has a few millennia of a head start. Given all this, it’s definitely been one of the best regions at growing.

[knakoo]

16 hours ago, Avalon said:

Does anyone know of a way of discussing African lack of IQ without breaking forum rules?

Ok so the following is very politically not correct to say :

I remember reading in Sapiens : A brief history of humankind, that our descendants mated with neanderthals in europe and other type of humans in Asia. (because of DNA presence)

https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/understanding/dtcgenetictesting/neanderthaldna/

"The percentage of Neanderthal DNA in modern humans is zero or close to zero in people from African populations, and is about 1 to 2 percent in people of European or Asian background" 

Obviously history and geography played a huge role, but could this not explain a difference in IQ as well ?

[Rilles]

7 minutes ago, knakoo said:

Ok so the following is very politically not correct to say :

I remember reading in Sapiens : A brief history of humankind, that our descendants mated with neanderthals in europe and other type of humans in Asia. (because of DNA presence)

https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/understanding/dtcgenetictesting/neanderthaldna/

"The percentage of Neanderthal DNA in modern humans is zero or close to zero in people from African populations, and is about 1 to 2 percent in people of European or Asian background" 

Obviously history and geography played a huge role, but could this not explain a difference in IQ as well ?

Wow, you people will bend over backwards to find some evidence for your race theories, huh.

[TheAlchemist]

56 minutes ago, knakoo said:

Ok so the following is very politically not correct to say :

I remember reading in Sapiens : A brief history of humankind, that our descendants mated with neanderthals in europe and other type of humans in Asia. (because of DNA presence)

https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/understanding/dtcgenetictesting/neanderthaldna/

"The percentage of Neanderthal DNA in modern humans is zero or close to zero in people from African populations, and is about 1 to 2 percent in people of European or Asian background" 

Obviously history and geography played a huge role, but could this not explain a difference in IQ as well ?

For that to be true, at least the following assumptions would also have to be true:

A) Neanderthals had significantly higher IQ that homo sapiens

B) The genes that enable higher IQ were genetically transferred to humans from Neanderthals in significant amounts and they are affecting cognition in humans. 

Those are some highly shaky assumptions, whereas the assumptions about how the differences can be explained by sociological and geographical reasons are way stronger. So it's not impossible, but it's not really plausible either, so I don't see any reason to go creating these hypotheses in that direction, unless there is a vested interest to "prove" some races "superiority" over another or some other divisive motive..  And it doesn't require much thinking to realize how that kind of behavior is problematic for society and humanity's progression.

Edited March 26, 2021 by TheAlchemist

[knakoo]

39 minutes ago, TheAlchemist said:

For that to be true, at least the following assumptions would also have to be true:

A) Neanderthals had significantly higher IQ that homo sapiens

B) The genes that enable higher IQ were genetically transferred to humans from Neanderthals in significant amounts and they are affecting cognition in humans. 

Those are some highly shaky assumptions, whereas the assumptions about how the differences can be explained by sociological and geographical reasons are way stronger. So it's not impossible, but it's not really plausible either, so I don't see any reason to go creating these hypotheses in that direction, unless there is a vested interest to "prove" some races "superiority" over another or some other divisive motive..  And it doesn't require much thinking to realize how that kind of behavior is problematic for society and humanity's progression.

A) doesn't have to be true. Neanderthals could have had similar IQ but special cognitive strengths. 

But yeah I agree overall it's a shaky hypothese. 

[GreenLight]

On 2021-03-25 at 10:56 PM, John Doe said:

If you believe all of black Africa is dirt poor and living in poverty, then you only have your own ignorance to blame. Botswana is more advanced than some all-white east European shitholes. That's because they had good leadership, which is what matters in the end.

Rwanda is doing pretty well too, they do not have the GDP per capita of Botswana, but they have better standards of living than even some Asian countries. Nigeria is growing at an exponential rate. 

That was interesting.

I wonder how african infrastructure will look like in the future. As we advance more technologically and their GDP increases. They also do not have much old infrastructure in the way and possibly a real modern utopia can be built.

[John Doe]

1 hour ago, GreenLight said:

That was interesting.

I wonder how african infrastructure will look like in the future. As we advance more technologically and their GDP increases. They also do not have much old infrastructure in the way and possibly a real modern utopia can be built.

The possibilities are endless. There is so much untapped potential in that continent. If malicious foreign actors who topple governments and establish puppet dictatorships for their own gain, and those who do not care about the African people can be kept away, there is a definite possibility that real change can happen, even within a few decades.

11 hours ago, How to be wise said:

@Avalon Before Europeans came, Africa was only a few thousand people spread across a massive continent. No communication with anyone (unlike the rest of the world) and few in number. It was more or less non existent until the 19th century when Europeans pretty much reached all the tribes and villages of Africa. So you could say that Africa began just a few centuries ago. And already it’s catching up to the Middle East, which has a few millennia of a head start. Given all this, it’s definitely been one of the best regions at growing.

@How to be wise This idea that African history began only after Europeans came is laughable. Eurocentric garbage. Just one example - Aksumite Empire - 400 BC. Do some fucking research, Jesus Christ.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aksum

 

[Epikur]

@John Doe

Btw apparently the ethiopian language is a semitic language and 40% of ethiopians are ethnically semitic.
 

[Consept]

12 hours ago, John Doe said:

This idea that African history began only after Europeans came is laughable. Eurocentric garbage. Just one example - Aksumite Empire - 400 BC. Do some fucking research, Jesus Christ.

 Was gonna say similar, it goes to the lack of education in the western of anything past European history 

[Rilles]

2 minutes ago, Consept said:

 Was gonna say similar, it goes to the lack of education in the western of anything past European history 

It depends on your perspective. It is a fact that Sub-Saharan Africa hasnt had many empires, you can pretty much count them on one hand, North Africa is different, they have been going hard for 5000 years. The reason why is like I said earlier, the Sahara that cut them off from the rest of the world and the Congo which barely Europeans could trek through until they started using malaria medicine and boats to trek around the continent. 

[Epikur]

24 minutes ago, Rilles said:

It depends on your perspective. It is a fact that Sub-Saharan Africa hasnt had many empires, you can pretty much count them on one hand, North Africa is different, they have been going hard for 5000 years. The reason why is like I said earlier, the Sahara that cut them off from the rest of the world and the Congo which barely Europeans could trek through until they started using malaria medicine and boats to trek around the continent. 

I think the next one should be the empires of the Aborigenes in Australia

[Rilles]

2 minutes ago, Epikur said:

I think the next one should be the empires of the Aborigenes in Australia

Next what?

[Consept]

40 minutes ago, Rilles said:

It depends on your perspective. It is a fact that Sub-Saharan Africa hasnt had many empires, you can pretty much count them on one hand, North Africa is different, they have been going hard for 5000 years. The reason why is like I said earlier, the Sahara that cut them off from the rest of the world and the Congo which barely Europeans could trek through until they started using malaria medicine and boats to trek around the continent. 

It does depend on perspective, what do you make of the western African King Mansa Musa, who is considered the wealthiest individual in human history only 800 or so years ago?

[Rilles]

5 minutes ago, Consept said:

It does depend on perspective, what do you make of the western African King Mansa Musa, who is considered the wealthiest individual in human history only 800 or so years ago?

Dont misunderstand me, Im not knocking any achievements. Im aware of Mali, Songhai and other empires, Im just saying its a fact that there werent as many as in Europe, Middle-East and Asia, and also they developed fairly late, probably because of trade/contact with Islam. 

http://geacron.com/home-en/

Look at this map and scroll to the 1400s.

Now Im sure African culture in general is very rich, I havent studied that very much, perhaps I will.

[Epikur]

10 minutes ago, Consept said:

It does depend on perspective, what do you make of the western African King Mansa Musa, who is considered the wealthiest individual in human history only 800 or so years ago?

Compare that with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Carthage