sub-Saharan's and diplomacy.

[Nist]

I met a Somali today that spoke Russian. It wasn't the first time that I met an African speaking Russian. I noticed that almost all Africans that I meet was multi-lingual. Maybe It's because Most African great empires grew from trade.

African soil isn't the best place too grow stuff in. There where, also, never any good crops too grow. So It was really hard to create a surplus from farming. So many tribes was forced to have an different social structure where talking and understanding was very important.

What do you guys think?

[Igu]

That's because they have been colonized, I speak 3 languages (+1 lately, but it does not count, I'm speaking about the masses) since I was kid because my people have been colonized by every empire bordering the mediterranean.

[CooCooCachoo]

igu said:

That's because they have been colonized, I speak 3 languages (+1 lately, but it does not count, I'm speaking about the masses) since I was kid because my people have been colonized by every empire bordering the mediterranean.

If by colonized, he means helped with economic assistance, than he's absolutely correct.

[Melnorme]

That's an advantage of the weak - the strong nations can afford to know only their own language, and everybody else must tow the line.

As a result, the weak can capture niche roles as international merchants/diplomats - if they are smart and ambitious enough.

[Nist]

igu said:

That's because they have been colonized, I speak 3 languages (+1 lately, but it does not count, I'm speaking about the masses) since I was kid because my people have been colonized by every empire bordering the mediterranean.

Does that really explain why an African country bumpkin knows mandarin or Japanese

[Nist]

melnorme said:

That's an advantage of the weak - the strong nations can afford to know only their own language, and everybody else must tow the line.

As a result, the weak can capture niche roles as international merchants/diplomats - if they are smart and ambitious enough.

Hmm, does this theory explain why this was so in pre-colonial Africa? Like the empires of Swahili, Songhai, Etc couldn't be called weak.

[Melnorme]

nist said:

Hmm, does this theory explain why this was so in pre-colonial Africa? Like the empires of Swahili, Songhai, Etc couldn't be called weak.

Well, can you present evidence that many of the inhabitants of the old African kingdoms were multilingual?

In any case, I didn't mean 'weak' in the literal sense. Any nation that is short of a dominating regional empire probably has some level of multilingualism in its population.

[penetratorx]

nist said:

African soil isn't the best place too grow stuff in. There where, also, never any good crops too grow. So It was really hard to create a surplus from farming.

Strange then that the British were able to make parts of Africa so productive and make Kenya the worlds biggest exporter of coffee and Ghana the biggest exporter of cocoa, and Zimbabwe (Rhodesia) was known as the breadbasket of Southern Africa.

Of course now the people of Zimbabwe have been liberated from the evils of colonialism they are being reduced to bankruptcy and starvation !

[Nist]

penetratorx said:

nist said:

African soil isn't the best place too grow stuff in. There where, also, never any good crops too grow. So It was really hard to create a surplus from farming.

Strange then that the British were able to make parts of Africa so productive and make Kenya the worlds biggest exporter of coffee and Ghana the biggest exporter of cocoa, and Zimbabwe (Rhodesia) was known as the breadbasket of Southern Africa.

Of course now the people of Zimbabwe have been liberated from the evils of colonialism they are being reduced to bankruptcy and starvation !

*Sigh* Most plants, are from other parts of the world. All that wasn't there before.

I know nothing of Zimbabwe, but I don't think it was that easy. Whites gone= poor country.

[penetratorx]

Coffee originated in East Africa, but it matters not where the plants originated from the fact is that Africa contains some of the most fertile lands in the world but also the most corrupt incompetent leaders.

[mmmkay]

I met a Somali today that spoke Russian. It wasn't the first time that I met an African speaking Russian. I noticed that almost all Africans that I meet was multi-lingual. Maybe It's because Most African great empires grew from trade.

U.N. secretary general Kofi Annan:



I actually thought about this too a while ago. It seems sub-saharan africans have +10 bonus in trade and dipomacy ;D but incur -5 penalty in curruption? LOL

I think you might be on to something casue I sorta noticed it too. But your right about the soil thing. Most of africa except for patches is in-fertile. Most fertile areas are the areas around uganda, south africa, the nile valley, and nigeria. Other than that its mostly tough livin for farmers. Africa in fact, was very sparesly populated untill the colonial era.

Much of sub-saharan africa does seem to suffer from corruption and incompetence and the people are overly accepting and docile of such conditions. If A highly intelligent, centralized leadership seized power, africa has the manpower, size and resources to challenge china for world power status, though it is somewhat unlikely.

[Igu]

nist said:

penetratorx said:

Strange then that the British were able to make parts of Africa so productive and make Kenya the worlds biggest exporter of coffee and Ghana the biggest exporter of cocoa, and Zimbabwe (Rhodesia) was known as the breadbasket of Southern Africa.

Of course now the people of Zimbabwe have been liberated from the evils of colonialism they are being reduced to bankruptcy and starvation !

*Sigh* Most plants, are from other parts of the world. All that wasn't there before.

I know nothing of Zimbabwe, but I don't think it was that easy. Whites gone= poor country.

It is that easy, I can even apply on my own country: Algeria, French gone=somalia with oil.

[Igu]

mmmkay said:

If A highly intelligent, centralized leadership seized power, africa has the manpower, size and resources to challenge china for world power status, though it is somewhat unlikely.

that happened with the whole of southern Africa, the "highly intelligent, centralized leadership seized power" were the Europeans.

[mmmkay]

that happened with the whole of southern Africa, the "highly intelligent, centralized leadership seized power" were the Europeans.

That is irrelevant. Those countries are no longer colonies, and must rule themselves, obviously england is not going to re-colonize them. So again, if an indigenous or african-american leader took to the task of buildings those countries up under an effective leadership they have the resources to challenge the other up-and-coming powers such as china or india.

[Nist]

mmmkay said:

that happened with the whole of southern Africa, the "highly intelligent, centralized leadership seized power" were the Europeans.

That is irrelevant. Those countries are no longer colonies, and must rule themselves, obviously england is not going to re-colonize them. So again, if an indigenous or african-american leader took to the task of buildings those countries up under an effective leadership they have the resources to challenge the other up-and-coming powers such as china or india.

The pan-African dream is just that. A dream. Just like communism, liberalism or EU , it only looks good on paper. There are too many ethnic differences in Africa too become a empire. The only way that could happen is if a African country began too take over the other countries by force.