Should Europeans Colonize Africa?

[Mercury]

Since independence from colonial powers, Africa hasn't been doing so well. That goes without saying. And now China is spreading it's influence throughout the sub-sahara. So how about Europe starts protecting Africa from the Chinks while profiting from Africa's resources and cheap labor? What do you guys say? Should Europeans reclaim some of their former colonies?

[The Lawspeaker]

We should consider it.. but what about the Natives ?

[Racial Observer 1814]

NO. All it lead to the first time was trouble.

[Mercury]

We should consider it.. but what about the Natives ?

Some in the chatbox earlier were advocating genocide or exiling of the natives. But I'm obviously uncomfortable with that. Just leave them there and let Europeans rule over them.


NO. All it lead to the first time was trouble.

I won't pretend to know the history of European-owned Africa, but what trouble did it cause? I thought the trouble in Africa mostly stems from post-colonial conflicts. According to Jared Taylor, the parts of Africa colonized by European powers were the prosperous ones. Some even called West Africa the "Japan of Africa" at a time.

[Gaztelu]

(Mass) Colonization is a step in the wrong direction. Militarization, however, makes more sense.

Establish military bases in the continent (especially in the East) and increase investment in the right places. Destabilizing the Horn of Africa should also be a top priority.

[The Lawspeaker]

Some in the chatbox earlier were advocating genocide or exiling of the natives. But I'm obviously uncomfortable with that. Just leave them there and let Europeans rule over them.


Meh no thanks. I don't really like to repeat that exercise. It we could get the place without the natives then hell: we should go for it (I'd be one of the first to volunteer !) but those natives are already there and I don't think it's very appropriate to kill them all in this day and age.

[Mercury]

I won't pretend to know the history of European-owned Africa, but what trouble did it cause? I thought the trouble in Africa mostly stems from post-colonial conflicts. According to Jared Taylor, the parts of Africa colonized by European powers were the prosperous ones. Some even called West Africa the "Japan of Africa" at a time.

This is the clip:

oiqaNDRSgIA

[Damião de Góis]

We already have. They didn't want us there so we left. I think it's time for them to do things on their own, if they can.

[The Lawspeaker]

We already have. They didn't want us there so we left. I think it's time for them to do things on their own, if they can.
And if they can't they will go the way of the dodo one day and then we come back to take over the place. :thumb001:

[Mercury]

And if they can't they will go the way of the dodo one day and then we come back to take over the place. :thumb001:

I think it's kind of tragic that Whites tried civilizing them and took them out of their native element. Just like what we did to the native Americans. Now they can't handle Western-styled civilization and have high rates of alcoholism, sexual abuse, unemployment, etc... We have to accept that our way of life doesn't work for all people. And we shouldn't try to force our way on others.

But colonizing them, taking some natural resources and protecting them from Chinese influence is justifiable.

[Nglund]

Depends what kind of colonisation you're talking about. If you mean settler colonisation, then why not? But are we currently able to apply said policy?

[The Lawspeaker]

But colonizing them, taking some natural resources and protecting them from Chinese influence is justifiable.
We should just take the natural resources before the Chinese do and watch Africa collapse.

[Peyrol]

The only thing to do for Africa is a rigid demographic control, as in China.

[The Lawspeaker]

The only thing to do for Africa is a rigid demographic control, as in China.
Here is the solution: no more development aid and no help during crises. Let's see how many children they will make then.

[Comte Arnau]

Only the Northern African shore, so that we can call the Med Sea Mare ******* again and take profit from the gas and sea resources. European-looking Riffians and Kabyles who convert and wish to stay will be accepted, the rest will be forced into the Saharan Desert, with their Tuareg brothers. There'll be an increase of jobs in order to protect the whole Southern Med Border. Priority in the distribution of the lands will be for the European nations which once were in possession of those lands. :)

[Peyrol]

It's interesting see that, after the independence, some countries weren's so bad as now...Cote D'Ivoire had a high quality of life and a good alphabetization, same for Nigeria before biafran war...also Somalia, immediately post independence (1960) wasn't so bad...there were many italians (more than 200,000 people) and the industrialization worked good in the first decade.

[Mercury]

Depends what kind of colonisation you're talking about. If you mean settler colonisation, then why not? But are we currently able to apply said policy?

Settler colonization sounds much too risky. No colony stays tied to the motherland forever. And you'll be left with a bunch of Whites in Africa who may come under persecution from the indigenous populations.

[Nglund]

Settler colonization sounds much too risky. No colony stays tied to the motherland forever. And you'll be left with a bunch of Whites in Africa who may come under persecution from the indigenous populations.

Like the United States right? :swl

[Insuperable]

cmon we can not even do what this forum stands for not to mention conquering North Africa
We are all children on this forum:D

[Peyrol]

cmon we can not even do what this forum stands for not to mention conquering North Africa
We are all children on this forum:D

:D

http://www.tusciaromana.info/6NotiziarioImmagini/Articoli/2010/1009/TripoliItaliana-610x458.jpg

[Libertas]

The only thing to do for Africa is a rigid demographic control, as in China.

If ever a continent needed something equivalent to a Chinese-style ONE-child policy it's Subsaharan Africa.:mad:

[riverman]

Of course.

[dralos]

we should stay in europe and try to colonize europe some more

[The Lawspeaker]

The question is: what areas should we take ? I think we should have South Africa and in case the Germans aren't interested we should take Namibia as well. But only if the natives are no longer around or can be (in the case of most Bantu who are themselves invaders) driven back into Africa.

[Peyrol]

The question is: what areas should we take ? I think we should have South Africa and in case the Germans aren't interested we should take Namibia as well. But only if the natives are no longer around or can be (in the case of most Bantu who are themselves invaders) driven back into Africa.

Libya: we were 23% of the population until 1969.

[The Lawspeaker]

Libya: we were 23% of the population until 1969.
So what would Italy do if it would take over Libya ?

[Peyrol]

So what would Italy do if it would take over Libya ?

Oil ? :D

And maybe settle all the immigrants here instead of the mainland. :laugh:

[The Lawspeaker]

Oil ? :D

And maybe settle all the immigrants here instead of the mainland. :laugh:
:wink What about repatriating the immigrants and repatriating the Libyans to the Sahara ? :D

[Peyrol]

:wink What about repatriating the immigrants and repatriating the Libyans to the Sahara ? :D

Mario Monti says that "islamic immigrants are a big richness for Italy"...so...i can only dream about "La quarta sponda" (fourth shore, Libia).

[dralos]

this all could happen if europe had like 1billion or more true europeans who felt very close to eachother like americans nowadays or chinese

[Libertas]

Mario Monti says that "islamic immigrants are a big richness for Italy"...so...i can only dream about "La quarta sponda" (fourth shore, Libia).

Another airheaded liberal, Monti!

The Muslims are certainly a richness for Italy hanging around parks and railway stations. LOL

[Peyrol]

Another airheaded liberal, Monti!

The Muslims are certainly a richness for Italy hanging around parks and railway stations. LOL

9dkR4whPT7g

ega625B83k4

http://media.ilgiornaledivicenza.it/media/2009/01/19_4_are_f1_89.jpg

http://www.adnkronos.com/IGN/Assets/Imgs/I/islamici_duomo_preghiera_web--400x300.jpg

[The Lawspeaker]

Mario Monti says that "islamic immigrants are a big richness for Italy"...so...i can only dream about "La quarta sponda" (fourth shore, Libia).
For now. One day Monti might go the way of the early socialists under Mussolini and knowing Italians as a tough-as-nails people that might happen.

[Peyrol]

For now. One day Monti might go the way of the early socialists under Mussolini and knowing Italians as a tough-as-nails people that might happen.

...or maybe turning Italy under the direct control of Goldman-Sachs and the Rothscilds.....ooops, he has already done this :laugh:

[European Loyalist]

Europeans have let africans colonize their nations.

The Christian democrat party which is part of the ruling coalition in the Netherlands says that immigration enriches their country and they are trying to increase the amount of immigrants. http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2011/10/immigration_enriches_the_nethe.php

Nations who care so little about their own ethnic people won't engage in aggressive nationlism. They would prefer to bend over for the muslims.

[The Lawspeaker]

Europeans have let africans colonize their nations.

The Christian democrat party which is part of the ruling coalition in the Netherlands says that immigration enriches their country and they are trying to increase the amount of immigrants. http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2011/10/immigration_enriches_the_nethe.php

Nations who care so little about their own ethnic people won't engage in aggressive nationlism. They would prefer to bend over for the muslims.
Still trying your little flamewars, boy. If you know our system so well then you would also know how "popular" the CDA is atm ? That's right - they have 21 seats (after losing 20 in the last elections) and now they would get... 14 (http://www.ipsos-nederland.nl/content.asp?targetid=621) if elections would be held today.

One can say that the CDA is like mere filler in the coalition because the VVD can't create a government on it's own.

[Stars Down To Earth]

No, I am against senseless imperialism and interfering with other races. Leave them to their own fate, FFS. It only leads to a connection between the rulers and the subjects.

If you have to colonise, then get rid of the natives and settle the empty land with your own people. The ultimate aim of colonisation should be to extend your own nation into these distant lands, not to rule over a population of racial aliens who are nothing like you and will never stop resisting your rule. There's a reason why our settled colony Australia is a clean, decent, successful nation, unlike India and our former African colonies.

Fuck the "white man's burden" and fuck humanitarianism. The only way to improve Africa would be by cutting off all foreign aid and letting these people evolve by themselves. (And if we absolutely need Africa's natural resources, we should have as little contact with the African population as possible.)

[Damião de Góis]

I would like them to prosper actually. I'm tired of seeing hunger pictures and misery on tv.

And if they live well in their countries, they don't immigrate ;)

[Mercury]

I would like them to prosper actually. I'm tired of seeing hunger pictures and misery on tv.

And if they live well in their countries, they don't immigrate ;)

How would colonization prevent them from prospering?

[The Lawspeaker]

How would colonization prevent them from prospering?
The problem is though that if we would colonise a land of full of bloody natives those natives might end up killing some colonists or even coming here...

[Mercury]

The question is: what areas should we take ? I think we should have South Africa and in case the Germans aren't interested we should take Namibia as well. But only if the natives are no longer around or can be (in the case of most Bantu who are themselves invaders) driven back into Africa.

I would be nervous about Germany expanding, even if it is outside of Europe's borders.

[Contra Mundum]

I think it would be a great idea to colonize and even take over africa. It's a very rich continent in natural resources.

[Mercury]

Like the United States right? :swl

I don't think we're psychologically prepared to colonize the world with settlers. Hopefully it will not be necessary to carry out any form of ethnic genocide upon native Africans. Cutting off foreign aid would do most of the work.

[Styggnacke]

Europeans have let africans colonize their nations.
I think you New Worlders have a bigger problem with African descended people. :rolleyes:

[Racial Observer 1814]

I won't pretend to know the history of European-owned Africa, but what trouble did it cause? I thought the trouble in Africa mostly stems from post-colonial conflicts. According to Jared Taylor, the parts of Africa colonized by European powers were the prosperous ones. Some even called West Africa the "Japan of Africa" at a time.



What trouble?

A basically permanent excuse for Africans and their White liberal sympathizers to blame Europeans for the current post-colonial woes of the continent. We "Made" them a mess because our territorial borders did not respect their tribal ones. Trying to make them French, British, Portugese, Dutch, Spanish, etc messed up and destroyed their traditional cultures. We just left abruptly and did not "Train them" properly in modern nation-building. Need I continue?

A vengeful, "You invaded/colonized us, now we are doing the same to you" attitude on the part of the Africans. Basically they feel they have the "Right" to come to the West because we colonized them.


Training them in our ways will give the not revenge-minded ones the idea that they belong in Paris, London, Lisbon, etc since we are trying to turn them into us anyway.


Those are the biggies, and frankly I am very surprised that the question of "What problems?" in relation to this idea would be asked on a forum like this one.

[GeistFaust]

I think we should be more focused on the colonization of foreign peoples onto European soil before we start to turn our attention to other countries. Our ambition in regards to our own countries is lax and too stagnant in order to achieve a collective effort to colonize on any large scale. The meaning of colonization has taken on a different meaning these days, and is less about a direct form of socio-cultural and socio-political dominance over other peoples.


It has more to do with the socio-economic control of others through the framework of Global Capitalism, which America is doing a good job at. America has set up a monopoly and hegemony where other countries self-interests are kept in check so as to not run wild in relation to America. I think that if the European countries attempted to unite to counter this America hegemony it could lead to a socio-economic colonization of different countries.


I think that if we want to colonize Africa we better hurry up because China is doing so at an alarming pace. I think that if we do colonize Africa again we should implement racial laws and make sure to segregate the populations. We will turn the local populations basically into slaves where they will be forced into a blue collared lifestyle.


I think that we should give these indigenous peoples any sense that they belong to the same country by the fact that they are colonized by them. This connection with other countries would give the indigenous peoples a false sense of belonging to a certain ethnic group, which would give them an open door to defiling that ethnic group through race-mixing.


These people don't have a pure or strong concept of ethnicity or race and they equate it with the socio-political boundaries which define a country. I think it would be hard to knock this fallacious and primitive concept out of their mind if we did colonize them, because of the mass globalization and Westenization of all the peoples in the world.


I think it would do us a great disadvantage to try to colonize both on the homefront, and because an over ambitious approach could lead to the same results if we do not carefully regulate the process of colonization from a racial standpoint.

[Mercury]

A basically permanent excuse for Africans and their White liberal sympathizers to blame Europeans for the current post-colonial woes of the continent. We "Made" them a mess because our territorial borders did not respect their tribal ones. Trying to make them French, British, Portugese, Dutch, Spanish, etc messed up and destroyed their traditional cultures. We just left abruptly and did not "Train them" properly in modern nation-building. Need I continue?

Europeans have done everything they could to train them how to build a nation. Even after official colonization ended some nations still sent advisers. Tribal borders are tricky because tribes are constantly on the move. That's the consequence of having semi-nomadic lifestyle.

Like I said earlier in the thread, it may have spread white guilt and allowed the Left to justify mass immigration. But a Neo-Colonialist Europe is a West that has overcome White guilt and rid itself of that disease known as Liberalism.


Training them in our ways will give the not revenge-minded ones the idea that they belong in Paris, London, Lisbon, etc since we are trying to turn them into us anyway.

Training them to be European-like would be a retarded idea, save for some of the more civilized Africans. It didn't work for the Aussie abos, it didn't work for the Native Americans, and it hasn't worked for Negroids. The fact is, Science is increasingly becoming aware that behavior is actually largely hereditary. Capitalism and Western Civilization just won't work on many tribal people.
http://www.amazon.com/Mystery-Capital-Capitalism-Triumphs-Everywhere/dp/0465016154

[Mercury]

I think that if we want to colonize Africa we better hurry up because China is doing so at an alarming pace. I think that if we do colonize Africa again we should implement racial laws and make sure to segregate the populations. We will turn the local populations basically into slaves where they will be forced into a blue collared lifestyle.

Well that is my biggest concern. We have a real racial competitor out there (East Asians, more specially China) and we need to make sure they don't inherit the world. I can't believe the West is just standing by as the Chinese expand their operations throughout Africa.

[Thunor]

If we colonize Africa, we should do it for the resources and land if we need it. Not for the sake of "educating the natives" or some other neo-conservative bullshit.

Basically, I agree with this:


No, I am against senseless imperialism and interfering with other races. Leave them to their own fate, FFS. It only leads to a connection between the rulers and the subjects.

If you have to colonise, then get rid of the natives and settle the empty land with your own people. The ultimate aim of colonisation should be to extend your own nation into these distant lands, not to rule over a population of racial aliens who are nothing like you and will never stop resisting your rule. There's a reason why our settled colony Australia is a clean, decent, successful nation, unlike India and our former African colonies.

Fuck the "white man's burden" and fuck humanitarianism. The only way to improve Africa would be by cutting off all foreign aid and letting these people evolve by themselves. (And if we absolutely need Africa's natural resources, we should have as little contact with the African population as possible.)

[Mercury]

If we colonize Africa, we should do it for the resources and land if we need it. Not for the sake of "educating the natives" or some other neo-conservative bullshit.

Well I wouldn't call it Neo-Conservatives, all European powers did their best to try and civilize the savage. We know it has failed with many indigenous people like the Native Americans. I say we should go no further than giving them Christianity and banning barbaric practices like cannibalism, mutilations, etc.. but for the most part, leave the natives to their own culture. Westerners will be the ones to rule the nation, protect them from outside influence, and profit from their resources.

[European Loyalist]

I think you New Worlders have a bigger problem with African descended people. :rolleyes:

Yes because the Maghreb is physically separated from africa right :rolleyes:

and no in my country there are very few blacks. the vast majority of non-white immigrants are south and east asians. same with australia.

[Edelmann]

I think you New Worlders have a bigger problem with African descended people. :rolleyes:

Not really true of Canadians last I checked.

[Incal]

Not really true of Canadians last I checked.

It seems you never visited Little Jamaica :D

[StonyArabia]

You really can't colonize North Africa. The people there would continue to resist as a collective force, and it would be similar to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict only more magnified, and they will not cease until they will remove the colonists from their homelands. It was well known that the Berber tribes in North Africa did not welcome the European colonists with open arms. European settlments were often attacked by the Berber tribesmen, and this was a clear message to the Europeans to leave their lands. However the only area of North Africa was to be colonized was the Canary Island, where miscegenation occurred between local Gaunache females and Iberian males, and many Canarians display the North African features.

Manifia Berbers of Libya who gave the Italians headache Omar Al-Mukhtar nicknamed as the Lion of the Desert. He can also be called a military genious. He was captured by the Italians and hanged in 1931

http://s18.postimage.org/o92kdjj2h/omar_mokhtar_arrested_by_italian_fascists1.jpg (http://postimage.org/)
jpeg image hosting (http://postimage.org/)

In Algeria Abdu Al-Kader a Kabyle Berber who fought against the French and raided French Settlements. As well another military genious

http://s16.postimage.org/s3ve2i8mt/283.jpg (http://postimage.org/)
image upload (http://postimage.org/)


In Morocco, a Riffian Berber who resisted both the French and Spanish incursions in his country. Abdul Karim Ibn Khattabi, another military genious, and whose tactics influenced Ho Chi Minh, Mao Zedong, and Che Guevera

http://s13.postimage.org/5bnejnw9j/Abdulkarim.jpg (http://postimage.org/)
image hosting gif (http://postimage.org/)


Thus colonizing North Africa is rather a fantasy and if one it becomes a reality it would end up being a nightmare.

[Albion]

As tempting as it sounds, I don't like the idea of colonising inhabitant lands. The thing with Africa is that it's quite annoying just looking at all the wasted potential of that continent. If we look at similar places such as Australia we can see how Europeans could have made it. If only.... :(

It's a shame that Madagascar isn't uninhabited, that'd be a nice place to settle. The Ethiopian and Kenyan Highlands along with South Africa and Rhodesia look suitable too, it's just a shame about the people.

It'd probably be better for Russia to just open up Southern Siberia to European settlers as the climate (presumably) warms. It has falling birth rates but is actually underpopulated unlike most of Europe.

[Äike]

Us, Europeans should take over the world. Let's send Eastern-Europeans to colonize Africa and Asia, thus increasing the European presence there and improving native Europe.

[Midori]

Us, Europeans should take over the world. Let's send Eastern-Europeans to colonize Africa and Asia, thus increasing the European presence there and improving native Europe.

Why only Eastern Europeans? :tongue

[Virtuous]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7P6rEctIsU

[Äike]

Why only Eastern Europeans? :tongue

They cause problems in Europe. For instance, my country is full of Eastern-European immigrants and they're the cause of most problems here. Crime, HIV etc. you name it.