Lol my people I have a problem. For the first time in a long time, I have been unable to reach a conclusion on an issue. Let me explain, so everyday of my life things happen to me, I experience things, I watch things, I feel things.I always like to think about all those things that have happened to me and draw "conclusions". These conclusions help me a lot. These conclusions do not necessarily become convictions, because I am the kind of person who continually refines and criticises "my beliefs".
Anywayz, I watched the Avatar movie and as Enoch said on his personal blog that movie had overtones that most people who were intellectual should be able to get. Basically, everything that happened in that movie made me think about the Native Americans in America. If you have not watched the movie, I suggest that you go watch it. Well that movie just got me to thinking about whether genocide/mass murder in some cases is justified. The native americans were primitive, they did not believe in the owning of land, their own culture was severely different from that of Westerners who sought to take over America. My point is this, if the Native Americans had been allowed to do what they were doing undisturbed it is very safe to say that I would not be typing on a keyboard right now and neither would I be overseas right now. I mean I feel like it's time we face facts, the white man back then was smarter, more curious, more inquisitive and certainly more knowledgeable than other "races" at that time. That is why they were able to go through the industrial revolution and hence we came to have factories, economies began to boom and small by small all those things led up to where we are in the world right now in terms of technology, science etc. Anywayz, incase I've lost you guys, all I am trying to ask is whether the abuses suffered by the Native Americans at the hands of the Europeans was worth it in order for us to get what we all enjoy today? Was the sacrifice worth it? Would we have been better off if the Native Americans had been allowed to do what they do without interference? For some reason I also thought about where Jesus said in the bible "Greater love hath no man than this, that he lay down his life for a fellow man". So I then replaced that quote with this "Greater love hath no ethnicity than this, that they lay down their lives for mankind".Lol the ethnicity in this case being the Native Americans.The only thing wrong with my line of reasoning is that the Native Americans never laid down their lives willingly, they were murdered, killed and almost exterminated. They suffered all this so that the Europeans could own lands, do explorations, build roads,hospitals, etc. And am asking, at the end of the day. Were their deaths worth it? This is the question that was bothering me and it's making me think to hard this late night. Normally, in other cases of genocide I am like "Genocide is completely wrong and unjustifiable". But I find myself justifying or at least trying to justify the genocide that happened to the Native Americans. If they weren't killed, there would certainly have remained primitive, they would have worshipped whatever they worshipped then, stupid superstitions and taboos would have existed.
I always laugh when Africans always say stuff like "Oh the white man is not smarter than us". Yet we as a continent let the white man come into our continent and convert us to their own religion?Christianity? Islam?etc are all foreign religions. It just makes me wonder how "fickle" the african man must have been that they were not willing to die for their convictions/beliefs. We were paganists and from being pagans we've gone to being christian, muslims etc. And the funny thing is,we've even become more religious than the people who brought the religion to us.Ain't that a bitch? Biggest church in the world with a capacity to sit 50k people is in Naija. Africans take their adopted religions seriously and it amazes me how we sound so convicted with our "newfound beliefs".Am very sure if the asians had colonized us we would be buddhists by now or Hindus. Hiss. Anywayz sha I came across this quote by Stendhal "“All religions are founded on the fear of the many and the cleverness of the few.” Back up this quote with Desmond Tutu's quote which says"When the missionaries came they had the bible and we had the land, they said let us close our eyes. When we opened it, we had the bible and they had the land". As Africans we can like to recognise when we are being "FUCKING MANIPULATED". Now am not advocating that we abandon all religion, but try to always make certain that your religion is 100% about love. Your religion should never bring harm/sorrow/misery to a large portion of people. EVER!!Once your religion, starts preaching hate and division then switch over to "reason" and get back on track.
Lastly, have you ever heard people say that the bible is not a book that should be taken literal? Well I am here to ask, who decides what parts of the bible should be taken literal and what parts should not be taken literal? Our Pastors?Bishops?Popes?All these supposed "men of God" are one or two steps away from a Tiger Wood scandal waiting to happen. And where am from books which are not supposed to be taken literally are called FICTION. Maybe the bible should have been divided into Fiction and Non-Fiction. Instead of Old testament and New Testament. Una no gree??
72 comments:
Us? Easily manipulated???? Blasphemy! LOL.
Call it brain washing. We have European education, wear european clothes, speak their language ...what did you think would happen?
Btw - FIRST.
Lol brain washing is the same thing. We know our roots, we know where we came from.
Let me ask u this lily, if the african man had been the first to colonise the earth, would those very same people adopt our beliefs?
Hahaha! So we didn't worship or know about God before the white man came? I'm not trying to be sarcastic or anything like I really wanna know if Africans believed in God before the white man came to colonize us.
I sha think that the same way the white man figured out how to do things would have been the same way other races (Africans included) would have figured things out for themselves. I mean the Egyptians built the Pyramids, the Chinese have their Great Wall and we used to have those Groundnut Pyramid thingys in Kano haha! I don't think the white man helped us, the Egyptians or the Chinese build those. That's something right?
Lol @ groundnut thingys..
The problem is superstitions..
We africans where to superstitious..
Honestly it really does take daft ppl to believe that it is good to kill twins
how do we decipher contingent ramifications??? but questions of actions and inactions can be posed without absolute remorse and i think that is why we can question the actions of colonialism and leave the contingent question of what the world will be without subjugation to a perpetually suspended reality...
It seems to me that you're saying the whites are superior to all other races. Because they were more industrial did not give them a right to destroy other people. It's not like they were ever trying to help us. They didn't even see blacks as humans.Yes they were more inquisitive but it's not like any other race couldn't have done what they did. The reason it was them was more of a cultural thing. They were more greedy and weren't fulfilled while other races at the time were content with their way of living which is what matters most. It's not technological advancement that equals a self-fulfilled life. We weren't easily manipulated and neither were the Natives we fought back but they had weapons. If they only came with their hands, I'm sure we would have taken them down. And with the whole religion thing it's not like we had much of a choice but to convert. The whites were never that religious because they were using it to their advantage. And you make it seem like we haven't always been religious. Even before the whites came to our land, religion was our way of life so just because it's now a different religion doesn't mean that's gonna change.
@Anonymous
Take it easy with us mere mortals. Reading all that english nearly wan suspend my brain.
@Azazel
Heard a theory once that man originated from Africa and that Caucasians were originally albino outcasts banished to the Northern hemisphere.
As the theory goes, life in the tropics needed little to nil planning to survive, consequently, we weren't engaging our brains as much as the outcasts that had to battle winter, hurricanes, earthquakes and other oyibo difficulties.
Supposedly, that act of banishment and the higher demands survival in the temperates had on the mammalian brain, set the outcasts on the cognitive fast-track.
If that theory is true, Our stupidity came back full circle to bite us in the ass with the horrors of the middle passage. But then I guess they did deserve their payback.
Maybe I'm yarning dust and James Watson was right when he postulated that we Africans, are just on average, congenitally dumber.
@ Anonymous, English abeg o!
anyways azazel are u sayin we shld justify ethnic cleansing or whatever with technological development, i'm with Lady X, who says the NAs couldnt have gotten "there" on their own?
LoL, Azazel...still at it, I see. Long time sha o!
I thought I was the only one that noticed the unnecessary grammar Anonymous was blowing. Enoch does that make me "congenitally dumber"? I wonder what Mr Watson would have to say about that.
Neo: Aha! We agree on something!
@ Anonymous
Lmao I concur seriously with Neo.
U can like to speak in English hhahahahaha. Like i finished readin ur comment, and headache catch me.
Mgbeks long time my sister..
Merry Christmas in advance my sister.
Lady X
Hahah see me see grammar in high places..
So Suru the whites were using it to their advantage, and we being the "mugu's" that we are have now adopted their religion and are nowmore religious than them..Doesn't something sound "stupid" there?
I think as a race, black people and other minority races are content with our surrounding. Before the europeans came, our ancestors didn't bother to venture out, we master our environment and carry on with our daily lives in contrast, white race were and still are goal minded people. They were just not content. They are always looking for something new, new innovation. Both has it's pros and cons. To hold the belief that whites are superior and we are inferior is dangerous. This was what led to the enslavement of thousands of Africans because Europeans believe that they were savages that needed to be christianized and this is also the reason why Africans hold whites in such a high esteem. I have noticed that Africans would treat a white better than they would treat their own people. I think it is sad that we hold this mentality. Many blacks believe they can't do anything and only whites can, having this kind of mentality only inhibits progress and as long as we think like this Africans will always be easily manipulated.
I don't think the end justified the means. Just because the US is a prosperous nation does not mean that the killings of Native Americans were justified. if Native Americans were never killed, you are right we wouldn't be here right now, but at the same time, history wouldn't be as we know it. we would be living a different kind of life probably in a different continent and who knows how that would have been?
@ Anonymous the question then is, whether it is better tohave been in the history we would never get to know, or whether the history we now know is the better one?
Lol sometimes Enoch I believe that we africans are sometimes just congenitally dumber..
It just baffles me, how a people can be so superstitious and daft sometimes. Bear in mind that I did not say that we africans are the "dumbest". But sometimes, u just get lil glimpses of why teh white man is just more civilized and more rational than us. The idea of "democracy" could never have originated in Africa
I don't know whether you question can be given an answer. How can I choose one between two when I have only experience one. I don't know which one is better but either way, sucessful nations can be built without mass killings.
Then give me an example in history where a successful nation was built without bloodshed? Slaves? etc.
"subjugation to a perpetually"
See English! Speak the thing jare. Na dem send you go school. lol
Ahh I really have to think about my response then come back to leave it.
Azazel: That would have to be Mars. Although I'm not quite sure Mars counts as a Nation.
Lmao Lady X
Forreal my sister.
Nice Anon
Abeg wetin? @ least the person fit try come down to our level of english..
I no get time to dey open dictionary.The weather to cold
Azazel
LOL leave him/her alone. Proper English doesn't hurt no one. he he he heee
When I watched Avatar I couldn't help but think about Africa and colonization. One of the key things that got to me was the inhumanity in their hearts. They had a goal and wanted to accomplish it not minding who got in the way.
Can we as Africans be gullible? Yes we are. I think the greater part of that stems from ignorance, not being open minded and/or lack of education.
Nigeria they say is getting better but at what expense? A lot of these foreign countries are robbing us blind in board daylight all in the name of developing and equipping us and this is the 21st century! Yet we still let that happen.
Most importantly, some of our problems or if not most of our problems are innate in us. We still have that mentality of " the white man way is better" Most of us do anyway. This is the reason women and men bleach their skin. Fair skinned women are considered more beautiful in the mainstream and even in everyday people's mind.The same western world that tells you that being skinny is in are the most morbidly obese in the world.
The highest money makers for the Catholic church are their counterparts in Africa. It has the largest followers. Without Africa Catholic and the church of England( Anglican)will have no money!
I think the fanatical tendencies that we have back home comes from the hopelessness a lot of people feel. The feeling of not knowing what to eat or what the future holds brings people closer to God in a kinda " there in hope in God" sort of way.
Now let me stop rambling!
But then Nice Anon
What made we africans ignorant and the europeans enlightened? Weren't we all human beings?
Why did we have to be the gullible ones?
And all that "drawin closer to God' makes us easier to be manipulated..
Before the white men came, what were our beliefs? What were our traditions? Where we or where we not satisfied/content?
U know what? Life is a mystery in itself and I have found that the more I stay trying to figure out every historical and current event , the more i develop a migraine and so I am learning to take things for just what they are tag along this life till d day I drop.
Religion is such a very touchy subject which gets people easily up in arms but I am not afraid to dabble into the political aspect of it...cos to be quite frank it is really indeed politics.
I choose to believe in God because somehow it makes life less difficult and meaningless for me but I refuse to shove my beliefs down other people's throat, neither will I worship a pastor or condemn those who are atheists.
I say Live your life!
Damn she just outed you! Better delete that 1st comment LOL
I didn't "out" him.
His blog addy clearly has his name.
i dont think we were stupid.i think we were naive, the whites had already discovered the act of manipulation.
and you really should read the story of the native americans really well, they later signed a treaty to sell their lands but they were swindled out of the agreement.
we had gods before they came, we knew there was something superior, something way above us before they came, why did we kill twins?why did the Nazis kill the jews?why did pharaoh kill all the first born sons in the bible?cos we are human beings and we always want something or someone to blame, we love figuring things out,we like saying 'hey that is the root of our problems'.the Africans believed that twins were evil and there might have been coincidences to prove them right, maybe mothers died while giving birth to them, they needed something to blame.it doesn't make them stupid, it makes them human.
Hitler killed the jews because he wanted the German people to have some people to blame for the poor economic situation during that time, you cant tell me hitler was stupid, do you know how many attempts on his life that he survived?
we allowed the whitemen to come into our countries and use us and teach us their ways cos they offered us things, they offered us things to blame, they gave us an alternative from the little gods who wanted blood, they gave us a superior God who wouldnt want a sacrifice, they made us trust them, then they enslaved us...bottom line:we overcame didnt we?
i refuse to believe the whiteman was ever superior to the black man, they just had a greater start, they started running even before the gun shot was fired while we waited a little too long to follow.
that doesnt make us stupid.it just doesnt.
Lol Dith as u are busy living ur life, other people will be busy killin other people because other people don't believe in their religion. Hence why it is important todiscuss these things o.
@Lady X
Hmmm lol..We can like to embrace "anonymity" on blogsville.
@ Leggy..
Merry Christmas in advance o
They didn't sign a treaty 2 sell alloftheir lands, and most of those treaties were "forced" treaties. I'vedone research on them hun.
Naive is the same as ignorant and it's the same as gullible. Fact of the matter is that we were stupid.
Huh @ the white man offered us things to blame?
U can't be serious, we already had enough things to blame.We africans were already superstitious as it is, before the white man came. We had evil forests, we blamed ogbanje's.. We had evil twins..
We had enough things to blame.
Umm how did the white man secure a headstart? Doesn't that mean hewas faster and we were extremely slow? For lack of a better word, we were savages and they were civilized
Ur right! It is very important to discuss these things but it becomes very discouraging sometimes when it feels as though all of these discussions, political rallies et al, are going in vain. I guess I am in one of those "whatever" moods today.
Traditional and religious beliefs are very hard to overcome is what I was trying to say.
Dith
I feel it, but think about this though. If we don't talk about stuff like this and raise awareness.
One day that's how fanaticism will spread and u'll see muslims killin christians, or christians killing muslims. Over simple misunderstanding.
Someone said that the whites were not really religous. Thats a lie. Take History course of European civilization post Roman Empire until Colonization, and you will see that religion governed every iota of their lives. But the enlightened few used religion to make themselves rich. REeligion was used as a reason for colonization.
As for us Africans, of course we had out religions, ask your elders they will tell you. Even the word CHuckwu for Igbos, does not mean God in the christian sense, it means God and it was used for the pagan god.
Whites were not smarter, they just had different priorities. The European continent was too small for its population, as a result it resulted in constant warfare. Which resulted in advances in technology out of necessity, thats why they had guns and we did not.
@ Azazel
Back to the whole Avatar thingy. No matter what the outcome is, genocide is never justified. Even if it resulted in the technology and what not. If we did not have the technology, we would not know what we were missing. And whats so great about technology? Leads to more stress, less human contact, and less peace.
Realist..
I don't remmeber ever saying the whites were never really religious..
All i said is that we've become more religious than they are in many aspects.
Realist surely ur not implyin that we africans never went to war also? We fought all the time, what u talking about? Just because nobody was there to record it does not mean we didn't fight as much. Again this shows why the white man was smarter,they were able to keep recorded history. We were not.
Azazel, i didnt say you. I said, i read somewhere in this thread. Only my second post was directed aty you.
Yes we fought, but not to the extent they fought. The continent is so big, we could easily just move. The European continent could not hold its inhabitants. Look at the size of both continents. Plus the fact we are blessed with so much natural resources. Europe had few natural resources, so the few they had, they fought tooth and nail for it. Look at the ancient world powers, Greece and Rome; what natural resource did they have? Only their population. They had to fight for the few they had.
You can not compare it to the fighting we did.
About the whole recording of history stuff. That does not measure intelligence. The Egyptians did not record how they built the pyramids, does that take away from the brilliance of the pyramids?
Europe had resources they just used it all up.
How as a realist can u compare the fightin they did to the ones we did? Where are the records? Where is your proof?
Ah but then how do we know the architects of the pyramids wereegyptians?
The architects could very well have been arabian? Persian? Etc.
So that my friend is why "records/books" are needed..
This just goes to show again, that the europeans were mentally"ADVANCED".
My prrof is just logic. Wars are generally fought when different groups of people interact with each other, willingly or unwillingly. Africa is a bigger continent than Europe, which would lead to fewer interactions.
People fight for food. Africa had better lands for groing food than Europe. Ancient Greeks and ROmans even used to get a lot of their food stuff from North Africa, This interaction led to the 3 Punic wars. This is another reason why Europe would have more wars.
I have yet to think of a logical reason why Africa would have more wars than Europe.
We know Egyptians built it, because the Pyramids were built during the middle Kingdom (2030 to 1640 BC) some were built in the old Kingdom. And during that time the Pharoahs where Egyptians, so we know that they built it. The pyramids are burial chambers for the Pharoahs.
they gave us something to blame that made sense. thats the different, theirs made sense,theirs didnt involve so much blood sheds. we killed ogbanjes, what if their bouts of sicknesses were just sicklecell?see?blame the diseases, not the kids.
they introduced christianity...a religion that tells us of a superior being who is always there for us, all seeing, and doesnt even need a sacrifice...just imagine it..a small god who asks for sacrifices everytime we commit one tiny little sin and one who lets us make our mistakes and proceeds to forgive us each time we are sorry.
and you call them gullible?!it made sense!!it made their lives easier...it stopped the deaths.and they were gullible for accepting the whiteman's teachings.
in late rome they drove in nails into people who as much as complained of depression, any form of psychological disorders at all!!but hey, lets not talk about that, lets talk about how the africans killed the babies.
and then they stop killing babies and accept christianity...oh gosh!the africans are so stupid and gullible!!
noone knows why the whites overtook us in civilisation, noone will ever know the truth, you werent there, i wasnt there, you will never know what really happened in those days.these are just speculations.
the whiteman is not in any way smarter than i am, they rarely even pass me in class, so im just going to believe that these genes dont lie.
dont glorify one race above the other just to sound logical.racism and slavery were made to sound logical too, thats why it was legal.
you should read up on the penn treaties, they were an agreement on both parts and you said 'most' of those agreements were forced, which means some werent.why did they still feel like they had to cheat the ones who came to them willingly?
there is no justification for meaningless murders.genocide in whatever form cannot be logicalised, it is plain wrong.it was just wrong.the fact that we have civilisation doesnt justify genocide, we are human beings, we could have found a way and mind you the indians just occupied some of this land called america, they were super powers before america was discovered, there were already inventions before america was discoverd.the roman empire was there, the british, the scottish and most of the inventors today were made by these countries.
you dont justify greed.you dont justify genocide.thats just plain wrong.
merry christmas to you too eche.
Realist..
Wow @ which would lead to fewer interactions? Why would that lead to fewer interactions? War is notfougth because ppl interact more with ppl.It is fought for greed, selfish and other stupid reasons.Come on now, u know better.
Oh their own "blames" made sense but ours never made sense? Really? Wouldn't that mean that they were smarter? If they could come up with things to blame that made sense and we couldn't?
Before our precious lord Jesus came, the jews used to kill animals for their sins. Does that mean that the jews were now as stupid as we were?Read the old testament and u will testify to the stupidity of the laws the jews had.
Good point @ u don't justify greed and genocide..
And who is eche?
eche is the url of your blog...i was wishing everyone who contributes towards the blog a merry christmas.
and no, it doesnt mean they were smarter, they just happened to come to africa and look at it from an outsiders perspective. i refuse to believe that caucasians are smarter than africans, atleast they are not smarter than me.my test scores dont lie, and im african, i can trace my lineage to wayyy back..and did you know that part of your intelligence is determined by genes?i like to think my genes dont lie.
its okay azazel if you really believe that caucasians are smarter but i dont believe that...thats just ridiculous.
Hmm ok leggy..
Just making sure.
I said they were smarter than us..
obviously when they indoctrinated us and thought us, the students were able to become smarter than the masters..
But we are notreally there yet, there are still more successful white ppl dan black ppl innit? Even Asians are more likely smarter than us, in many areas.
Am not a self hatin african, it's just that the things black ppl say and do sometimes just makes a brova wonder.
Hope Dith didn't out Azazel. If anyone outs anyone, I vote we tar and feather em :) Or throway them for river in true african ogbanje treatment. lol :)
L8nite musing. Incoherence overdrive. This post might not make sense2some. Brace4impact.
Someone mentioned that "her genes don't lie." Something about being a spartan in the classroom and went on to conclude that means Africans aren't dumb. Beg to differ. It's much more complicated than that.
Being "smart" is a highly loaded term. It's some part genetic, some part nurture. And even when you have the best of both these worlds, motivation provides the icing on the cake.
Running circles around whiteboys in class can mean anything from you being genuinely cognitively superior to just being more experienced in the kind of "cognitive processes" tested or, perhaps, just more Hard-working/motivated, or one of many other things. Academic achievement is not an absolute measure.
That's to say, smarts are multidimensional. Having a facility for LTM (Long term memory) is mostly sufficient for "crystallized intelligence" which is most critical for good grades.
"Fluid Intelligence" (capacity to solve novel problems), on the other hand, draws less from LTM and makes more demands on STM(Short term memory), WM (Working memory), Spatial reasoning, "associative hierarchy", neuronal response-time and so many other blah blah blah...
In my experience, academic work is LTM loaded and seldom balances these out.
And even if you have all these, Are you representative of an entire race? Perhaps you're just an outlier? If you insist on African classroom hegemony, take a look at where we rank in academic achievement.
Apologies for all the mumbo jumbo. Just want to make it clear that as far as painting a broad brush on races go, when it comes to intelligence, classroom glitter is less meaningful than taking stock of the the real world, where the ultimate game for dominance is being played. With that measure, Africa gets a very resounding F! aka KPONDO!
U can argue we are simply not motivated or adequately trained to play but it's not an optional game and so it's a very well deserved F.
This does not mean we are inferior. I'm just saying it's a better measure.
As far as the main question of the blogpost goes, one can only speculate but I think Realist is on to something with the lopsidedness in organized warfare theory.
Security and the lust to conquer has always been the seat of advancements in human endeavor. It still is today.
@Azazel, I am so glad this isn't about blaming the white man for everything. I do have a problem with your assumption that it was only by getting rid of the Native Americans that the Westerners were able to progress. They would have probably made the same amount of progress if they had stayed in Europe. If they hadn't wiped out the native americans you would still have your laptop, cell phone, car, etc. It was more about expanding the empire. The technological advances came later.
"try to always make certain that your religion is 100% about love"
There is no such thing as a religion that is 100% about love because there is no human that is 100% about love.
With that said, I think the reason Africans switched to Christianity so "easily" is because it made sense to them at the time. A religion that preached equality, respect, surviving on hard work, a God that answers everyone without exhorbitant payments to a "dibia" or "babalawo", etc. Why wouldn't that sound good to the average African circa 1800?
The fact that Africans have now "overtaken" the original proponents of these religions is simply proof that Africans are collectively an "optimistic" and sometimes sadly "naive" group of people. Africans have not truly suffered anything. As Enoch said, life there was relatively easier. There was no need for us to develop the same mentality as the Europeans, and we have seen the consequences.
This whole surge in religion in Africa is actually history repeating itself. The same way the colonial masters used religion to ensnare people into working for them and doing things for them--that is the same way that pastors use religion to ensnare people into giving them money. Azazel this should make you happy, because these pastors are a sign that slowly some Africans are wizening up to the western capitalist way of success.
The problem here is not that Africans are not "smart" enough. There is simply not enough "fight" in the average African person. How else would you explain all the dictatorships (covert and overt) on that continent?
Lol EDJ
Sorry ur point about no human being 100% about love. What does that mean? So we shouldn't strive to be 100% about love because no human can be 100% about love? See even u christians self cannot even follow the teachings of Jesus. Wat a shame.
@ Enoch
But so we africans were less inclined to feel security conscious and lust after things that led to war?
I honestly do not believe that, I mean there might have been lesser wars, but we africans definitely fought our share of them.
Edj it's not only christianity that appealed to them, Islam appealed to them as well. Or does islam teach people the samething?
All am saying is that for a people that claim to be "great". We are definitely to quick to drop our strongly held beliefs.
LOl not havin enough fight and not being smart sound the same to me. A smart person would figure out a way to fight oppression without resortin to fightin always..
Or maybe africans are just plain lazy pacifists.
I have been reading this fallacy for a while and not stopping to correct this, but you know that christianity is not an European religion right? Its a middle eastern religion. The Jews of those days are not like the Jews you see today. The Jews you see today, are the European converts to Judaism. The Jews of those days (and they are still around)looked a lot like Osama Bin Laden.
So why where the Europeans so stupid to accept a middle eastern religion over their own?
No the major cause of war is different civilizations of people interacting with each other. Its through these interactions that greed and all other stuff take place. Why did Europeans fight Native AMericans? Because the Europeans landed here then realised a different civilization. This interaction led to greed and what not. Why did the Europeans come to America? Because every known European land had been conquered and its resources drained. Nations had no where to expand, because next door was an equal, so as a result they looked for new land. Back to my point, Africa's land is way much more bigger than Europe, so it will lead to fewer interactions.
Ah Realist nice of u to spot that..
But then I counter that by saying "Protestanism" is not a middle eastern religion but a religion that originated in Europe.
And before u say that protestanism and catholicism are both the same thing, then I would say if they are the same thing, then why so 'different'?
But u do not know the population of Africa @ the time, so pray tell how do u know it would lead to fewer interactions?
Protestanism is not a religion. Its a division in christianity, along with the Eastern orthodox Church, Anglican Church and Catholicism.. Christianity is the religion. But that is just semantics. Most Missionaries that came to Africa were catholic. It was the Catholic countries that colonised Africa (Spain, Portugal and France). Even England that was Anglican had a lot of Irish Catholic Priest that came as missionaries to Western Africa.
Just because we do not have the numbers does not mean we can not deduct it. If Africa was over populated, Deforestation would have begun way before it did. All those distinct species would have been killed long a go. Humans would have moved into the the rain forest and savannah. An increase in human civilization leads to a decrease in forest lands. The amount of uninhabited land that was in Africa before Europeans came (and in some places still is) shows that Africa and not come close to its population limit. Unlike Europe that had reached this limit in the 14th century.
Nah realist Protestanism is a religion.
most missionaries that came to africa where catholics? really? Care to substantiate or verify that with common statistics?
Are u saying that the European continent had more of a population than we did @ that time?
LOL... its like saying Shia, and Sunna are too different religions. Protestanism is not a religion. Its a division in Christianity. Research it.
I have told you why more catholic missionaries came to Africa. The countries that colonised aftica were catholic countries. You can research that if you want. And even England that was an Anglican (another division not religion) country still had a major catholic presence in the countries they colonized. Look at Nigeria for example. It was catholic missionaries that first came. Thats most Igbos at one point where catholic (parents grandparents). I use Igbos because the east of Nigeria had the most missionary presence than any other area. You keep asking for numbers, when you can rationally come to the same point. I could ask you for numbers to back your point up but that would be stupid because it is clear that either the stats do not exist for either our position or we are too lazy to find them. Only logic can be used.
I did not say Europe had more of a population. You are failing to understand what i am typing. I said the population limit of Europe had been reached, that is why they had to explore and out of their continent. Africa has way more land and more natural resources so it can hold a whole lot more of a population than europe.
@Azazel how can you think Protestants and Catholics have two separate religions? For someone who bashes Christianity you sure don't know a lot about it.
@Azazel, for someone who is smart, you sure don't like it sometimes. How are protestant and Catholicism two different religion? It's just two different sects, but they both call themselves Christians, so please explain your views.
I don't think Africans are dumber than Europeans. I think fundamentally, the problem is how the two races as a whole operates. Europeans are goal minded people, which was why they started writing things down a long time ago, but Africans are not. If that is smartness, then I guess they are smart. Many Europeans cannot survive under the conditions that Africans could. The oral tradition that Africans had was not an easy thing to do. You had to remember generations worth of history and pass it along. If you believe the whites are smarter than you, well thats your problem, but that mentality is not going to move the black race along.
Ha..
Edj u know very well that I know that protestants and catholics both claim to be "christians"..
aM TALKIN about the substance of their teachings right now. If the two things are one, then why so 'separate'? How can people claim to be of one religion yet differ so much? it's preposterous.
Realist.
Catholics came to igbo land and so did protestants.. How can u successfully say that tthere were more catholics than protestants? Am not the one makin the claim, u are the one. The onus is not on me to back up anything, am just challenging your argument.
@ Anonymous
Lol where the africans the only ones to practice oral traditions? U think the europeans didn't do the same? U think the latinos or the asians didn't do the same? Such folly.
It doesn't take a smart person to remember stories, anybody can do that.. On the other hand, it takes a smart person to 'record' history.
so Africans are stupid and dumb including you, your mother, your father and aunts, uncles and siblings. well I got it thanks. Moving on to the next blog.
Oboy, while Carl Von Clausewitz and Sun Tzu before him were piecing together genius-class treatises on war, we were still chucking spears. I don't think we even had recorded language by the time. I can't claim to know what ingredients caused the deficit in warfare bw Europe and Africa but Realist is making a lot of sense. What's the point of fighting and possibly losing your life when land boku next door?
By "security and lust to conquer being the seat of advancements", I was simply pointing out that war is the avant-garde of knowledge. Advancements in the sciences and arts are aggressively catalyzed by warfare. This is not news. Einstein might have given us e=mc2 but it took the existential threat of WWII for Richard Feynman, Robert Oppenheimer and other crazies of Manhattan project fame to harness the powers of the sun and give us le bomb. Fine tuning the accuracy of missiles gave us GPS. Hitler's intent to keep the minds of the masses on a leash led to Joseph Goebbels birthing "propaganda" the fore bearer of commercials. The list boku.
This model hasn't changed. It's true now. Was true in the 40s. Don't see why it wasn't always true. My money is on Realist.
As for adopting foreign religions, I don't see whats tricky there. If you already had the inclination to believe in what you have no evidence for, switching faiths to that practiced by men that arrive in metal birds while the most you could ascend was the height of a palm tree should not jar your senses. Surely, theirs must be the true God.
Azazel. The whole amount of missionaries from christianity, protestant thing is not relevant to the discussion. So i am not going to bother to research it.
But Christianity and protestantism are not two different religions. They are divisions. They believe in the same God, call him the same name, largely use the same religious text. You do not see muslims saying Shia and sunna brand of Islam are two different religions.
Lol @ Anonymous..
Such a childish statement. No manners.
@ Realist.
I was even beginning to wonder how we got into arguin how many missionaries were sent to africa.
I see shia and sunni muslims killing themselves, surely there must be a difference between them if they would resort to killing themselves?
@ Enoch
Hmm ok i can't argue against that logic. But ur assuming that all the fought for was for land and resources? Some of these people fought just for the glory of it all.
And I definitely see ur point about warfare being the catalyst to a lot of them inventions. True True.
The split between Shia and Sunna started over and argument on who would succeed Mohammed after he died as the leader. Shias wanted his cousin and son in law to succeed him. But Sunni's picked someone else. The struggle that ensued led with Ali being assasinated and the Sunni's winning. This caused a division and certain tribes chose either to be sunnis or shiites. They havesome doctrinal differences also. But they are still the same religion
@ Realist.
Back to the topic though
I came across a quote that says ' There are two kinds of men. The ones who make history and the ones who endure it'.
Is it possible to say that the europeans are the ones wo madde history, while we the africans are the ones who endure it?
@Azazel, how are catholics and protestants different? Both believe Jesus is the son of God who died for the sins of humanity and will return one day.
There is no serious difference in the "substance" of their teachings.
@Azazel
Yes there is no argument to that. But it does not mean that the Europeans were smarter than the Africans. They just had the advantage of certain circumstances that forced them to be advanced in war. Which turned out to be the crucial factor.
Africa did not have the same factors that forced them to be that technological advanced in war. The major fuel for advancement, is necessity. There was no necessity for Africa before the Europeans came.
well we fit talk sey Oynibo man smart pass us- after all see the gap btw them and us. But i think if they never came to Nigeria/Africa- we wld be better off?
Chai u guys can COMMENT sha! I read every1s comment from d begginning and got so confused! LOL
@ Azazel Avatar was a great movie, but the way I interpreted it was the way the zulu warriors of about 200 conqured thousands of british fighters who has suffisticated weaponery as opposed to thier swords and knives because they knew the land better.
The same happened in certain eastern european countries that could not be captured by nazis because they fought better in the freezing cold than the German soldiers.
I do not think it is ever justified to masacare a people becuase of a a supposed "greater good". What has all this so called technological advancement brought us that humans have not lived satisfactorily without for hundreds of years??
Besides millions of people still live as others did hundreds of years ago because they do not have access to these "advancements". I watched a documentary on Paupa New Guinea, one of the most remote places on earth, and they have lived the exact same way for hundreds of years!
Thats my 2 cents!
Miss B
If the people in that place have lived the same way for all those years..
Then it's not hard to reach a conclusion that we african savages would have lived the same way for all those years. if the oyinbo had not come to pay us a visit
lol @ no serious difference in the substance of their teachings..
EDJ u really believe Jesus is about unity or division? Obvuioyusly one of those sides are going to get it all wrong and find themselves in hell.
@ Tigeress
Lol how would we have been better off? Na we go invent internet? Or computer?
@ azazel so wld living as "savages" be that if you didnt know any other way?? in 100 years times they probably look back at us now as living as "savages" too
Good point.
But we ourselves know what it is like to live in a civilization. They don't. Hence why they are savages
Post a Comment