The Tribalism of Human Nature

Like The Roman · 26-09-2007, 09:24 PM

Missed out? They have interacted with Europeans and Asians for centuries.

Quote:

Well, the Polynesian peoples managed to discoverer the South Seas long before any Europeans ever did. The Aborigines of course lived in complete isolation from the world upon settling where they did.

Yes the Aborigines were isolated, but were they responsible for their own isolation? Surely when they reached the edge of their 'civilization' they must have wondered what lay beyond? The next step is to build boats and set out on a voyage of discovery.

Quote:

Most of them were not left with a decent infrastructure though. Britain may have been kinder than other nations in Africa (particularly Belgium) but it was by no means a saint. Now, I am not blaming all of Africa's problems on Europeans - but it must be said that those before us were a cause of some of the problems today.

Some of them were left with an infrastructure they could develop and prosper from. They haven't.

Quote:

I find Botswana to be an interesting example. A nation where white people make up less of the population than in either Zimbabwe or South Africa and which earns roughly 4,000 dollars more per year per capita than South Africa does (putting it above Argentina!).

Argentina's nothing to aspire to, is it? Perhaps this, however is the exception that proves the rule.

Quote:

This next point is also extremely important. Africa has a huge epidemic on hand that most of the rest of the world is completely free from - AIDS. So, after thousands, if not millions, of years of isolation from the rest of the world - upon Africa finally gaining contact with the West (or should I say, the West gaining contact with it) and having a few hundred years of occupation it finally may just be able to stand on its own two feet when the majority of the continent is hit with roughly a 30% rate of infection from AIDS. Mix this in with bad governance and poor leadership and you have the situation you have today. Imagine if 1 in 3 of the British population were infected with HIV/AIDS and then try to imagine what the economic and social impact of this would be.

It does. Though when government officials suggest that the cure for AIDS is found at the local greengrocers it doesn't help contain the virus.

Quote:

More than 60 international experts on HIV/Aids have called for the resignation of the South African health minister because of her stance on Aids.

Manto Tshabalala-Msimang tells those with HIV to eat garlic and beetroot.

BBC NEWS | World | Africa | Aids experts condemn SA minister

Quote:

Mugabe of course didn't have the same starting position that Stalin did, furthermore he didn't have the resources, population or wealth that Russia did. Even before Stalin's purges Russia had a much better starting position than Zimbabwe. I of course am not defending that vile man and opponent of liberty - Robert Mugabe, but am merely making a point.

Mugabe took over a stable, relatively advanced Western country known as the 'Bread Basket of Africa', the USSR was in a very poor state after their revolution, was ostracized by much of Europe and the USA and let's not forget that serfs were only emancipated in the late 1800s. Let's not forget the effects of World War II also. Look at how many million died and the damage to their cities?

Quote:

Hitler was hardly someone new either. What about Leopold of Belgium or Isabella of Spain? The only difference is, these vile people had a better original position from which to carry out their nefarious deeds. Bear in mind, that Europeans have killed more than any other race, so if that is a sign of civilisation then I believe we have our work cut out. Of course, it could be argued that the only reason we have killed more is because we have had more people to kill as a result of farming and industry. Remember though, sub-Saharan Africa - although having limited farming - never had the chance for animal domestication that those in North Africa, Europe and Asia had. Domestication was extremely important for the advance of humankind.

Yes, unfortunately one problem with having a greater IQ is that we figure out more efficient ways to kill and subjugate our own people and others - which is why we enslaved Africans and not the other way around.

Also, you might ask yourself why African tribes, captured and solf their brethren into slavery...the lack of a written African history deprives us of rwal comparison on that score.

Smidgey · 27-09-2007, 10:18 PM

Quote:

Africa had contact with arabs back in 700 AD, approx. Millions of years? I don't think so, though even if that is true, the generation after they made contact they should have been able to adopt the new technologies they were introduced to...unless you're suggesting some sort of hereditary disadavantage, of course.

A tiny sliver of Africa had contact and as mentioned in previous postings, did rather well out of it.

Sorry, I should change millions of years to hundreds of thousands. The human race has existed for hundreds of thousands of years. Millions was an exaggeration on my part.

Quote:

That's a list of European inventions from one of the smallest European countries. How many African inventions can you find? Despite the greater population, I'll wager you can't find as many of equal significance.

A tiny nation which had the perfect conditions for this advancement, especially during the Scottish enlightenment. Africa, as I have argued, never had this advantage.

Quote:

Some of them were left with an infrastructure they could develop and prosper from. They haven't.

Some have, many have not. The reasons are also mentioned above - bad government and AIDS. I feel like we are going around in circles here.

Quote:

Argentina's nothing to aspire to, is it? Perhaps this, however is the exception that proves the rule.

Argentina used to be one of the richest nations on the planet. Unless you are going to argue that those of Latin origin also have lesser IQ?

Figures of speech are hardly arguments for historical or scientific fact.

Quote:

It does. Though when government officials suggest that the cure for AIDS is found at the local greengrocers it doesn't help contain the virus.

Again, bad governments. It just happens that our government doesn't have some massive epidemic to deal with. I guarantee if it did, it would probably cause millions of more deaths before it managed to get anything right.

Quote:

Mugabe took over a stable, relatively advanced Western country known as the 'Bread Basket of Africa', the USSR was in a very poor state after their revolution, was ostracized by much of Europe and the USA and let's not forget that serfs were only emancipated in the late 1800s. Let's not forget the effects of World War II also. Look at how many million died and the damage to their cities?

It was still a worse starting position than the one Stalin had. Also, Mugabe has led his country to ruin after having a few 'good' years in power. Not all of the African countries have gone down this route.

I also don't believe you are making as big an issue out of the AIDS epidemic as you should be. I cannot stress enough how much economic damage an epidemic that causes the average living age to be barely above 40 would do to the economy. The fact that Botswana, even with this epidemic, has managed to bolster its economy so much that it is not that far off from Portugal is nothing short of amazing.

Quote:

Missed out? They have interacted with Europeans and Asians for centuries.

The majority of Africa has barely had contact with the rest of the world in terms of the scale of human history. It has hardly fair to compare their 200 years to our 10,000 or more.

Quote:

Yes the Aborigines were isolated, but were they responsible for their own isolation? Surely when they reached the edge of their 'civilization' they must have wondered what lay beyond? The next step is to build boats and set out on a voyage of discovery.

That is just what they did do, they were settlers from other places. They originally came from lands to the North by boat from other cultures that sought land and space beyond. The aborigines also had no incentive to expand because they never had the same population pressures that we in the West did.

Quote:

Also, you might ask yourself why African tribes, captured and solf their brethren into slavery...the lack of a written African history deprives us of rwal comparison on that score.

Europeans did this too, they just stopped when racial slavery began when they explored a continent that was backwards in technology from thousands of years of isolation.

Like The Roman · 02-10-2007, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smidgey

A tiny sliver of Africa had contact and as mentioned in previous postings, did rather well out of it.

Sorry, I should change millions of years to hundreds of thousands. The human race has existed for hundreds of thousands of years. Millions was an exaggeration on my part.

A tiny nation which had the perfect conditions for this advancement, especially during the Scottish enlightenment. Africa, as I have argued, never had this advantage.

Some have, many have not. The reasons are also mentioned above - bad government and AIDS. I feel like we are going around in circles here.

Argentina used to be one of the richest nations on the planet. Unless you are going to argue that those of Latin origin also have lesser IQ?

Figures of speech are hardly arguments for historical or scientific fact.

Again, bad governments. It just happens that our government doesn't have some massive epidemic to deal with. I guarantee if it did, it would probably cause millions of more deaths before it managed to get anything right.

It was still a worse starting position than the one Stalin had. Also, Mugabe has led his country to ruin after having a few 'good' years in power. Not all of the African countries have gone down this route.

I also don't believe you are making as big an issue out of the AIDS epidemic as you should be. I cannot stress enough how much economic damage an epidemic that causes the average living age to be barely above 40 would do to the economy. The fact that Botswana, even with this epidemic, has managed to bolster its economy so much that it is not that far off from Portugal is nothing short of amazing.

The majority of Africa has barely had contact with the rest of the world in terms of the scale of human history. It has hardly fair to compare their 200 years to our 10,000 or more.

That is just what they did do, they were settlers from other places. They originally came from lands to the North by boat from other cultures that sought land and space beyond. The aborigines also had no incentive to expand because they never had the same population pressures that we in the West did.

Europeans did this too, they just stopped when racial slavery began when they explored a continent that was backwards in technology from thousands of years of isolation.

We could go on arguing about this.

If one looks at black progression or rather the lack of it in western societies -for example their lack of advancement in education, then it seems apparent that they are hindered by something. The left would be inclined to say it's racism, but then how does one account for the success of non-whites such as the Chinese or Indians?

It's the same in South America, the USA and Europe. Criminality has also been linked to low IQ, so my bet would be that should statistics be available in the UK, that blacks would commit proportionately more crime...would you be able to perhaps research crime in the US to compare and see if this substantiates either one of our arguments?

Of course one could argue that blacks come from impoverished backgrounds, however more whites in both the USA and Europe will have similar social circumstances...I'll see what I can find.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode