Why is African so poverty stricken?

[mad_scientist]

Hi Scienceforumers,

 

The international community have spent trillions and trillions of dollars in aid to Africa in programs designed to alleviate poverty however Africa still lags behind most countries in a variety of measures. Corruption, disease, social injustice, poverty and many other issues are at the forefront for many African communities today.

 

Researchers have spent some time studying the DNA of Africans and have concluded that many Africans have a predisposition to a variety of genetic diseases such as sickle-cell anaemia on top of many others. Studies of African-Americans in the USA have also shown that having an African background can increase the likelihood for someone obtaining a disease. Many in the international community are deeply worried and frightened that Africa will never catch up with the rest of the world and that things may actually be getting worse in some countries!

 

It has been confirmed that Africans lack Neanderthal DNA that people from other continents have. It is estimated that non-Africans possess 2-4% Neanderthal DNA on average. Furthermore, East-Asians have 30% more Neanderthal DNA than Europeans. With the rise of East-Asian economies, many have speculated that East-Asians may be genetically superior to Europeans and Africans due to their higher percentage of Neanderthal DNA which may have increased the genetic fitness of East-Asians in particular. Many have also speculated that East-Asians are genetically superior due to their higher genetic variability which is known to increase genetic fitness over time.

 

My questions are the following:

1) which ethnic group worldwide is least susceptible to genetic disease?

2) does being East-Asian give one a pre-disposition to being intelligent?

(if not, then why is hong kong, Singapore , south korea, japan, china and Taiwan ranked highest in terms of average IQ? Is this all cultural or could it be due to superior genes that Africans/Europeans do not possess?)

3) is there such a thing as an inferior ethnic group?

4) which ethnic groups are most closely related to each other genetically speaking?

5) I have heard that race does not exist but ethnic groups do. what does this mean exactly?

 

Hope some people here can help with my questions!

 

Thanks,

mad_scientist

 

[Manticore]

You ask questions about "ethnic groups", then, in the final one you admit that you don't know what "ethnic groups" means.

I think this thread has committed suicide.

[Lord Antares]

With the rise of East-Asian economies, many have speculated that East-Asians may be genetically superior to Europeans and Africans due to their higher percentage of Neanderthal DNA which may have increased the genetic fitness of East-Asians in particular.

 

What does ''genetically superiror'' mean? Less susceptible to disease? You quote research that you say proved that east Asians are the least susceptible to disease. Why are then people ''speculating'' about it if it has already been established?

 

 

 

 

2) does being East-Asian give one a pre-disposition to being intelligent?

 

 

If the IQ score charts are to be believed, then yes, to an extent. I wouldn't say ''pre-disposition to being intelligent''. I think it's more accurate to say ''there's a higher chance of them being intelligent'', which is not the same thing.

 

 

 

(if not, then why is hong kong, Singapore , south korea, japan, china and Taiwan ranked highest in terms of average IQ? Is this all cultural or could it be due to superior genes that Africans/Europeans do not possess?)

 

I don't know which data you're looking at, but the maps I've checked say that both east-Asians and European countries have higher IQ averages. So saying that these people are superior to Europeans is, as far as statistics go, wrong.

 

Also, take note that different IQ studies differ. I am looking at 3 IQ maps and they are all somewhat different from one another. That is to say that there's a higher margin of error than in some other statistics, because IQ tests aren't 100% correct in determining what they are supposed to.

 

 

 

3) is there such a thing as an inferior ethnic group?

 

 

That's a tricky one. It depends on how you define inferiority. If you mean IQ, then there's a great deal of evidence that some countries have significantly higher IQ averages than others. These are statisticis and they cannot be denied, whatever you would like to believe. If your inferiority had different connotations, point it out.

 

 

 

4) which ethnic groups are most closely related to each other genetically speaking?

 

 

This question doesn't really make sense to me. Each country has another country which is more closely related to them than other countries. For example, Slavic countries are mutually similar, so are some African countries, as well as East Asian countries etc.

 

It has been confirmed that Africans lack Neanderthal DNA that people from other continents have. It is estimated that non-Africans possess 2-4% Neanderthal DNA on average. Furthermore, East-Asians have 30% more Neanderthal DNA than Europeans.

 

 

Citation needed.

[Strange]

You can't really treat Africa as single entity in questions like this. It is a very diverse continent with some countries having reasonable standards of living, education and health, while others are still struggling.

 

One contributor to the problems that some African countries have had (and some still have) has been poor and/or corrupt governments.

 

I recommend watching all of Hans Rosling's videos to get a more balanced view of the world.

[Ten oz]

My questions are the following:

1) which ethnic group worldwide is least susceptible to genetic disease?

2) does being East-Asian give one a pre-disposition to being intelligent?

(if not, then why is hong kong, Singapore , south korea, japan, china and Taiwan ranked highest in terms of average IQ? Is this all cultural or could it be due to superior genes that Africans/Europeans do not possess?)

3) is there such a thing as an inferior ethnic group?

4) which ethnic groups are most closely related to each other genetically speaking?

5) I have heard that race does not exist but ethnic groups do. what does this mean exactly?

 

Hope some people here can help with my questions!

 

Thanks,

mad_scientist

 

1 - Any population which is more genetically diverse.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19633717

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-study-finds-genetic-diversity-may-be-key-taller-smarter/

 

2 - No and your examples excluded and/or ignored countries in Asia which aren't getting along as well like parts of Myanmar, India, Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand, rural China, North Korea, and etc.

 

3 - No

 

4 - We are all related

 

5 - Enthic group typically refers to culture while race refers to preceived differences in physical appearance.

[Strange]

4) which ethnic groups are most closely related to each other genetically speaking?

 

 

This is an interesting but complicated question. It requires information from history, archeology, historical linguistics, genetics, etc.

 

There is some info here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_genetic_variation#/media/File:Map-of-human-migrations.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_genetic_variation#/media/File:World_Map_of_Y-DNA_Haplogroups.png

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

[Ten oz]

 

 

This is an interesting but complicated question. It requires information from history, archeology, historical linguistics, genetics, etc.

 

There is some info here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_genetic_variation#/media/File:Map-of-human-migrations.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_genetic_variation#/media/File:World_Map_of_Y-DNA_Haplogroups.png

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

Different regions and cultures are more closely related. The OP seems to be using Ethnic group and race interchangably to a large extent. We are all the same at the end of the day. Some populations are less genetically diverse but that can change in a single generation. We live in a world where people are born and raised in India immigrate to England and end up having children with someone from Ireland. Or a person raise in Africa moves to Hawaii and has a children with someone from Nebraska and that child moves to Chicago and eventually becomes POTUS.

Edited May 5, 2017 by Ten oz

[frankglennjacobs@gmail.com]

So? If we find ourselves in the same elevator with a person who is of a different intelligence potential, what are we supposed to do?

 

(ANSWER: Say Howdy -- and carry the conversation as far as it will go in the limited time you have together.)

[nec209]

Hi Scienceforumers,

 

The international community have spent trillions and trillions of dollars in aid to Africa in programs designed to alleviate poverty however Africa still lags behind most countries in a variety of measures. Corruption, disease, social injustice, poverty and many other issues are at the forefront for many African communities today.

 

Researchers have spent some time studying the DNA of Africans and have concluded that many Africans have a predisposition to a variety of genetic diseases such as sickle-cell anaemia on top of many others. Studies of African-Americans in the USA have also shown that having an African background can increase the likelihood for someone obtaining a disease. Many in the international community are deeply worried and frightened that Africa will never catch up with the rest of the world and that things may actually be getting worse in some countries!

 

It has been confirmed that Africans lack Neanderthal DNA that people from other continents have. It is estimated that non-Africans possess 2-4% Neanderthal DNA on average. Furthermore, East-Asians have 30% more Neanderthal DNA than Europeans. With the rise of East-Asian economies, many have speculated that East-Asians may be genetically superior to Europeans and Africans due to their higher percentage of Neanderthal DNA which may have increased the genetic fitness of East-Asians in particular. Many have also speculated that East-Asians are genetically superior due to their higher genetic variability which is known to increase genetic fitness over time.

 

My questions are the following:

1) which ethnic group worldwide is least susceptible to genetic disease?

2) does being East-Asian give one a pre-disposition to being intelligent?

(if not, then why is hong kong, Singapore , south korea, japan, china and Taiwan ranked highest in terms of average IQ? Is this all cultural or could it be due to superior genes that Africans/Europeans do not possess?)

3) is there such a thing as an inferior ethnic group?

4) which ethnic groups are most closely related to each other genetically speaking?

5) I have heard that race does not exist but ethnic groups do. what does this mean exactly?

 

Hope some people here can help with my questions!

 

Thanks,

mad_scientist

 

 

I think the big reason is corruption the government and warlords live like king an people are poor. Always fighting over land and resources so on.

 

Other part is Africa is made up of way too many countries decentralize wealth and resources.

 

It will be like if the US all 50 states where countries and fighting for land, money, wealth and resources. The US would be lot worse of and poor.

 

In Africa not having less than 5 countries and way too many countries fighting for land, money, wealth and resources. The decentralize wealth and resources.

Different regions and cultures are more closely related. The OP seems to be using Ethnic group and race interchangably to a large extent. We are all the same at the end of the day. Some populations are less genetically diverse but that can change in a single generation. We live in a world where people are born and raised in India immigrate to England and end up having children with someone from Ireland. Or a person raise in Africa moves to Hawaii and has a children with someone from Nebraska and that child moves to Chicago and eventually becomes POTUS.

 

I'm sure OP not aware of Ethnic group. Even in India and Mexico there different groups.

 

Some people from India and Mexico are light skin and some people from India and Mexico dark skin than you have other groups, mixed and natives.

 

Like country Brazil it has large diversity of so many different Ethnic group.

 

I'm sure there probably different different Ethnic group in Africa.

 

Just like native indigenous people and white people there many Ethnic group.

[Manticore]

Churches - we have a really bad infestation - particularly fundamentalist ones. They all send missionaries to Africa & their only aim seems to be to extract the maximum amount of cash from the maximum number of suckers.

(And, of course, multinational companies.)

[Handy andy]

Churches - we have a really bad infestation - particularly fundamentalist ones. They all send missionaries to Africa & their only aim seems to be to extract the maximum amount of cash from the maximum number of suckers.

(And, of course, multinational companies.)

Religion does not help people to get of their knees and help them selves, and can lead to extremism and wars, if not moderated.

 

Religions have been messing with humanity for a few thousand years and are the main cause of most unrest over the last few thousand years, and religious conflict is a problem in parts of Africa.

 

Maybe banning religion would be a good thing, but then those in power use religion to control people and claim it is a good thing, so we may be stuck in a loop for eternity unless the leaders change their methods of controlling people.

 

The over whelming number of people like to believe what they are told and don't think for themselves. Also in colonial countries if people have been told what to think for a few generations maybe they will need a generation or two to work out politicians and religious leaders are generally lying thieving selfish manipulative pieces of human excrement, who would like to think people believe they are a benefit to society.

 

Racism or Classimo is common place globally not just in Africa, if you do not come from the correct social group or have the correct skin colour or ethnic origins, your chances of progressing are reduced, by those controlling the education , money flow etc.

 

Its a sad old world, where people just behave the same way towards each other again and again throughout history, because they are all just people doing what people do. Education could break them out the ground hog day mentality by teaching them to think for them selves.

Edited May 9, 2017 by Handy andy

[Knowledge Enthusiast]

Hi Scienceforumers,

 

The international community have spent trillions and trillions of dollars in aid to Africa in programs designed to alleviate poverty however Africa still lags behind most countries in a variety of measures. Corruption, disease, social injustice, poverty and many other issues are at the forefront for many African communities today.

 

Researchers have spent some time studying the DNA of Africans and have concluded that many Africans have a predisposition to a variety of genetic diseases such as sickle-cell anaemia on top of many others. Studies of African-Americans in the USA have also shown that having an African background can increase the likelihood for someone obtaining a disease. Many in the international community are deeply worried and frightened that Africa will never catch up with the rest of the world and that things may actually be getting worse in some countries!

 

It has been confirmed that Africans lack Neanderthal DNA that people from other continents have. It is estimated that non-Africans possess 2-4% Neanderthal DNA on average. Furthermore, East-Asians have 30% more Neanderthal DNA than Europeans. With the rise of East-Asian economies, many have speculated that East-Asians may be genetically superior to Europeans and Africans due to their higher percentage of Neanderthal DNA which may have increased the genetic fitness of East-Asians in particular. Many have also speculated that East-Asians are genetically superior due to their higher genetic variability which is known to increase genetic fitness over time.

 

My questions are the following:

1) which ethnic group worldwide is least susceptible to genetic disease?

2) does being East-Asian give one a pre-disposition to being intelligent?

(if not, then why is hong kong, Singapore , south korea, japan, china and Taiwan ranked highest in terms of average IQ? Is this all cultural or could it be due to superior genes that Africans/Europeans do not possess?)

3) is there such a thing as an inferior ethnic group?

4) which ethnic groups are most closely related to each other genetically speaking?

5) I have heard that race does not exist but ethnic groups do. what does this mean exactly?

 

Hope some people here can help with my questions!

 

Thanks,

mad_scientist

 

Ridiculous questions to ask and bordering on being racist. The differences between races are so minuscule. How many smart kids a race might conceive is random and tests for intelligence do not determine if an individual will end up successful.

[Handy andy]

Ridiculous questions to ask and bordering on being racist. The differences between races are so minuscule. How many smart kids a race might conceive is random and tests for intelligence do not determine if an individual will end up successful.

 

I forgot to mention elitist on my post above. The opportunity of getting an education and getting ahead does not always fall to the naturally gifted, an education can be bought and exposure to good educational environments improves dumber peoples chances to get ahead. Look at the some of the royal families of the world, genetic inbreeding does not produce genius, but they are amongst the elite.

 

What direction is this thread going to take. Is it smart folks or the elite should tell perceived inferior peoples what to do, based on an IQ, physique, colour, birth right etc. Should smart folks be able to control the worlds resources and act the part of god in a benign dictatorship, and world government. Should children be given aptitude tests at kindergarden to decide what they will be in future life. Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Epsilon etc could be stamped on their foreheads, or they could be electronically tagged in some Orwellian nightmare like Animal Farm.

 

What is the ultimate aim or point of this thread? Is it to argue a point for elitism, racism or selective breeding to improve the human bloodline etc.

 

All races off the world have differences, as do people in the same family. Most normal folks don't need leaders telling them what to do, or a race who perceives it is their right to order people about(The master race). This is what happens in police states and military dictatorships.

[Handy andy]

Something not mentioned above, but was alluded to on another thread on this forum, which I have been unable to find the link to. But research shows that hormones particularly testosterone affect descission making. Someone with high testerone is likely to make a bad decissions. Teenage boys going into puberty get hit with a large dose of hormones and can make bad decissions, more likely to crash cars etc. Education is waisted on teenagers as they know everything already:). I have heard Women going into menopause can appear irrational for a year or two as they get used to the new hormone balance.

 

Do Hormones and poor education affect peoples behaviour in Africa?

 

A common idea that Black Men like to portray is they have bigger genitalia than all other races. Does this give them more testosterone?.

 

Do those likely to get into power have higher testosterone levels than those they are trampling over, Do Alpha (leader) type people have higher testosterone and make bad descissions based on their level of education. Are leaders from the "developed world" better educated than those from undeveloped countries, but given the same opportunities would make the same bad decisions?

 

Should world leaders undergo hormone treatment to make sure they are thinking and analysing everything with their heads and nothing else, when making decisions that affect other peoples lives.

Edited May 11, 2017 by Handy andy

[Ten oz]

Something not mentioned above, but was alluded to on another thread on this forum, which I have been unable to find the link to. But research shows that hormones particularly testosterone affect descission making. Someone with high testerone is likely to make a bad decissions. Teenage boys going into puberty get hit with a large dose of hormones and can make bad decissions, more likely to crash cars etc. Education is waisted on teenagers as they know everything already:). I have heard Women going into menopause can appear irrational for a year or two as they get used to the new hormone balance.

 

Do Hormones and poor education affect peoples behaviour in Africa?

 

A common idea that Black Men like to portray is they have bigger genitalia than all other races. Does this give them more testosterone?.

 

Do those likely to get into power have higher testosterone levels than those they are trampling over, Do Alpha (leader) type people have higher testosterone and make bad descissions based on their level of education. Are leaders from the "developed world" better educated than those from undeveloped countries, but given the same opportunities would make the same bad decisions?

 

Should world leaders undergo hormone treatment to make sure they are thinking and analysing everything with their heads and nothing else, when making decisions that affect other peoples lives.

In my opinion this post is a bit ridiculous. While there is a case to be made that testosterone effects behavior this post does little to set that up.Testoterone obviously impacts male behavior. Roping genitalia sterotypes into the discussion is silly. Shall we research the size of Hilter's genitalia or perhaps see if we can find a historical account of Genghis Khan's? Or did the world domination and war horrors of men like Stalin and Mussolini not count as "bad decisions"? In the U.S. do you imagine that the average size of a Southern Plantation slaver owner's genetalia was larger than those of men in non slave states?

 

The world is not static. At different times in history different parts of the world have experience good and bad times. Every region on earth has been the site of abuses and the site of discovery. No continent has been all good or all bad. No continent today exists in a world which has not been shaped by the past. The individual intelligence, endowments, and efforts of each individual person alive on earth today is not soley responsible for the circumstances of that individuals life unfortunately. I was born and raised in a California suburb. Life has honestly been easy. Not getting a date with some specific girl in High School or not having the view out a dorm window I wanted has been the primary hardships of my existence. Too easy, too self indulgent, too naive for me to sit and ponder the frailties of those born into a world so different. Genetalia size notwithstanding.

[Handy andy]

In my opinion this post is a bit ridiculous. While there is a case to be made that testosterone effects behavior this post does little to set that up.Testoterone obviously impacts male behavior. Roping genitalia sterotypes into the discussion is silly. Shall we research the size of Hilter's genitalia or perhaps see if we can find a historical account of Genghis Khan's? Or did the world domination and war horrors of men like Stalin and Mussolini not count as "bad decisions"? In the U.S. do you imagine that the average size of a Southern Plantation slaver owner's genetalia was larger than those of men in non slave states?

 

The world is not static. At different times in history different parts of the world have experience good and bad times. Every region on earth has been the site of abuses and the site of discovery. No continent has been all good or all bad. No continent today exists in a world which has not been shaped by the past. The individual intelligence, endowments, and efforts of each individual person alive on earth today is not soley responsible for the circumstances of that individuals life unfortunately. I was born and raised in a California suburb. Life has honestly been easy. Not getting a date with some specific girl in High School or not having the view out a dorm window I wanted has been the primary hardships of my existence. Too easy, too self indulgent, too naive for me to sit and ponder the frailties of those born into a world so different. Genetalia size notwithstanding.

 

The whole thread is a bit bizarre and seems border line racist or elitist, with no or little basis in reality. In addition to this I noted a thread a couple of days ago based on scientific research which discussed the levels of testosterone in decision making. Testosterone leads to bad decisions. Alpha type people generally believe they are correct even when they are wrong. It is simple question I raised do Africans have more Alpha orientated thought processes due to testosterone levels and does this lead to bad decision making. Incidentally they don't all have big genitalia its a myth .

[Ten oz]

The whole thread is a bit bizarre and seems border line racist or elitist, with no or little basis in reality. In addition to this I noted a thread a couple of days ago based on scientific research which discussed the levels of testosterone in decision making. Testosterone leads to bad decisions. Alpha type people generally believe they are correct even when they are wrong. It is simple question I raised do Africans have more Alpha orientated thought processes due to testosterone levels and does this lead to bad decision making. Incidentally they don't all have big genitalia its a myth .

What constitutes a bad decision? I provided examples of people in history who made the bad decision to kill an inordinate amount of people. Has Africa seen a disproportionate number of killers, rapists, and cannibals throughout history?

 

Ultimately you are right that the thread is borderline. All individual humans more or less have the same mental capacities. Many circumstances like environment, natural resources, population, disease, natural disasters, and etc, etc play a factor to the overall health of any collect group overtime.

[CharonY]

 

 

A common idea that Black Men like to portray is they have bigger genitalia than all other races. Does this give them more testosterone?.

 

 

A big problem with this is that has been long a talking point for people of the racist persuasion. The basic idea was to depict black men more animal-like, physically strong, but stupid and aggressive (and obviously a threat to white women).

 

One problem is that testosterone level fluctuate even in individuals during the day, but also in response to stressors and physical activity. In order to find biologically meaningful differences one would either adjust for all potential covariates (which is close to impossible) or have a huge unbiased population pool. Typically the studies that showed differences were limited in size, and in the age grouo 18-30. Which often means college students, as they are conveniently used in many studies (and are willing to be tested for donuts and ramen).

However, this pool, especially in older studies is incredibly biased as, among other things, there is a disproportionate amount of college athletes. Most studies I have read did not account for these sorts of biases.

 

A number of newer studies that provide testosterone level but did not set out to specifically look at racial differences often did not find such an effect (especially in studies from outside the US) or found a faster decline in testosterone in black men past 30 (which in your model would make them more reasonable than white .

 

There is also a glaring lack in studies among Africans, which is bit funny as many people extend that bit of information from African Americans to the whole of Africa. The reasoning behind it is somewhat disconcerting, especially as we know that there we will find the largest genetic diversity in humans. Even if there was a difference, it would actually more sense to argue that non-black have reduced testosterone. After all, if there is a biological basis (which is by no means clear), it is more likely that those occurred after a sub-population moved out of Africa. But rather tellingly, the reverse is often seen by some people as the deviation from the norm...

[Handy andy]

 

A big problem with this is that has been long a talking point for people of the racist persuasion. The basic idea was to depict black men more animal-like, physically strong, but stupid and aggressive (and obviously a threat to white women).

 

One problem is that testosterone level fluctuate even in individuals during the day, but also in response to stressors and physical activity. In order to find biologically meaningful differences one would either adjust for all potential covariates (which is close to impossible) or have a huge unbiased population pool. Typically the studies that showed differences were limited in size, and in the age grouo 18-30. Which often means college students, as they are conveniently used in many studies (and are willing to be tested for donuts and ramen).

However, this pool, especially in older studies is incredibly biased as, among other things, there is a disproportionate amount of college athletes. Most studies I have read did not account for these sorts of biases.

 

A number of newer studies that provide testosterone level but did not set out to specifically look at racial differences often did not find such an effect (especially in studies from outside the US) or found a faster decline in testosterone in black men past 30 (which in your model would make them more reasonable than white .

 

There is also a glaring lack in studies among Africans, which is bit funny as many people extend that bit of information from African Americans to the whole of Africa. The reasoning behind it is somewhat disconcerting, especially as we know that there we will find the largest genetic diversity in humans. Even if there was a difference, it would actually more sense to argue that non-black have reduced testosterone. After all, if there is a biological basis (which is by no means clear), it is more likely that those occurred after a sub-population moved out of Africa. But rather tellingly, the reverse is often seen by some people as the deviation from the norm...

 

Excellent answer. However, are you saying conclusively that Testosterone is not the cause of stupid decisions made by many world leaders including African leaders like the renowned NOT Geniuses President Zuma and President Mugabe both with many wives. Are you also stating testosterone is not a strong element off Alpha type personalities.

 

In support of your post, president Obama (Black mostly) seemed more balanced than President Bush(white) or the current jokers, Trump etc currently running the US. As a possibly irrelevant aside, Mrs Obama always looked happier than Mrs Trump, is it 1, 2, 3 or 4. Does mr Trump view his ladies as disposable pleasures rather than meaning full pursuits.

 

Education

 

Is there any consensus on this thread towards Africa might be lagging behind the world due to lack of education and opportunities in some of the poorer parts of Africa.? Not all African states are poverty stricken, at war, AIDS ridden, or in famine, some are wealthy.

 

Politics

 

Some publicized parts of Africa suffer from famine due to localized climate problems and wars, how would a similar situation be handled in Europe or America, would the other states come to help.

 

Could a political change along the lines of a United States of Africa, be able to pool resources from all over the continent and mutually help each other move forward. Could Politicians in Africa come to a consensus to help their people move forward? Which way is forward for Africa?

 

Future

 

Does any one have an optimistic or pessimistic view point on the future of Africa.

 

South Africa I understand is now developing an educated black middle class, that are no longer voting ANC. But the dumber uneducated electorate still vote and protest in ZA throwing bricks at any one who is not ANC, and destroying universities, built to help them get an education.

 

Assistance

 

Would it be better for the so called developed world to send teachers to Africa rather than religious missionaries. Is the developed world responsible for holding Africa back, to steal its resources?

 

Most of Africa was living in the stone age 400 years ago, hunter gatherers and warriors, how many generations does it take for people to catch up and join the 21st century?

 

Not Helping

 

Much of Africa is viewed as having one hell of a lot of catching up to do politically and socially with the rest of the world. This may not be being helped by groups promoting differing religious and political systems from other countries, that may not be suited to Africa.

What constitutes a bad decision? I provided examples of people in history who made the bad decision to kill an inordinate amount of people. Has Africa seen a disproportionate number of killers, rapists, and cannibals throughout history?

 

Ultimately you are right that the thread is borderline. All individual humans more or less have the same mental capacities. Many circumstances like environment, natural resources, population, disease, natural disasters, and etc, etc play a factor to the overall health of any collect group overtime.

 

IdeAmin, Mugabe(remember the Matabele), Ghengis Khan, Hitler, all continents and countries have had their fair share of leaders who over see mass murder, to maintain control. I suspect on a whole Europe has produced more empire builders than the rest of the world.

Edited May 11, 2017 by Handy andy

[CharonY]

The history of many African states has been tumultuous, but there are two things to remember, first is that many suffered various degrees of colonization and had a much shorter time frame of modern reorganization. Second, because of their history many countries are lacking in social cohesion, as the nations were created externally rather by some internal mechanisms. That being said, as a whole catastrophic poverty has been decreasing on average, and there signs of increasing prosperity. However, a big challenge is a large gap between rural and urbanized areas, for example. There are many more aspects to consider, but one really need someone with scholarly knowledge of at least one of the African countries. After all, we are talking about the second largest continent as it was a somewhat homogenous region. As such almost certainly any speculation will be superficial and most likely completely wrong.

[Handy andy]

The history of many African states has been tumultuous, but there are two things to remember, first is that many suffered various degrees of colonization and had a much shorter time frame of modern reorganization. Second, because of their history many countries are lacking in social cohesion, as the nations were created externally rather by some internal mechanisms. That being said, as a whole catastrophic poverty has been decreasing on average, and there signs of increasing prosperity. However, a big challenge is a large gap between rural and urbanized areas, for example. There are many more aspects to consider, but one really need someone with scholarly knowledge of at least one of the African countries. After all, we are talking about the second largest continent as it was a somewhat homogenous region. As such almost certainly any speculation will be superficial and most likely completely wrong.

 

Exactly, what is not noted on the first post, is just how big and how diverse Africa is. The whole continent has massive potential and resources, as well as many problems. Many of the problems are a result of their history. However Colonialism may have actually brought them forward, without which they may still be hunter gatherers and warriors. The borders were imposed, and agreed by colonial powers, however colonialism has finished now. People who were born in those countries like everywhere else in the world have a right to live there. On the colonial lines can anything be learned from the American experience, how would the history of America had gone if the colonial powers had integrated with the indigenous people rather than pushing the indigenous people onto reservations or shooting them.

 

Would a US of Africa be beneficial. America has oil in Texas, The middle east has the biggest reserves, but Africa has untapped oil and gas reserves as well. America has huge areas of land, Africa has more. America has tropical and desert environments, Africa has more. America has untapped resources(geo thermal yellow stone park), Africa has vast un tapped resources(no super volcanoes). How could the people of Africa benefit from what they have, without it being stolen by multi nationals and corrupt politicians or the ruling elite. How can politicians be encouraged to work for their people rather than line their pockets with greed.

 

I am still for neutering all the worlds political leaders just to be on the safe side, to make them think with their heads

Edited May 12, 2017 by Handy andy

[CharonY]

One thing to remember, colonialism was not nation building. Investments weren't made to modernize or benefit the population. Rather they were for the benefit of the ruling class and to facilitate wealth transfer to the colonizing powers.

[Handy andy]

One thing to remember, colonialism was not nation building. Investments weren't made to modernize or benefit the population. Rather they were for the benefit of the ruling class and to facilitate wealth transfer to the colonizing powers.

 

This is the same the world over with multi nationals. Keeping an eye on the past, how can Africa move forward, gain control or at least benefit from their resources. Could African political leaders enforce new contracts on multi nationals exploiting the resources of Africa. Could the governments of the world enforce legislation to force multi nationals to invest some of their profits back into the areas they are exploiting. Do multinationals have too much power today. Could people power globally force a change.

 

Can Africa help it self out of the state it is in, without international aid. Is the international aid being used in the best way possible?

 

In Africa the phrase TIA (This Is Africa) is sometimes used to explain the state of Africa, should people just stop meddling and let them get on with being African.

[MigL]

The OP is accurate, the reasons are many, and a lot of them have been brought up by various members.

All of the reasons are due to circumstances, current and past.

None of them are biological.

 

So why do we always descend into accusations of racism or racially motivated arguments ?

 

And I also find it amusing to blame 'bad' decisions on the ratio of testosterone to estrogen.

It has served well for millions of years to ensure our survival.

Would you say that the bad decisions made by Neville Chamberlain to appease A Hitler were due to a higher ratio of estrogen to testosterone ?

Because that would be equally wrong !

[Handy andy]

The OP is accurate, the reasons are many, and a lot of them have been brought up by various members.

All of the reasons are due to circumstances, current and past.

None of them are biological.

 

So why do we always descend into accusations of racism or racially motivated arguments ?

 

And I also find it amusing to blame 'bad' decisions on the ratio of testosterone to estrogen.

It has served well for millions of years to ensure our survival.

Would you say that the bad decisions made by Neville Chamberlain to appease A Hitler were due to a higher ratio of estrogen to testosterone ?

Because that would be equally wrong !

 

The testosterone line was intended partially for amusement, partially to get the thread away from racism and elitism, and partially because there might be some truth in it. According to one of the other science threads on this forum, testosterone does not help decision making.

 

Would you say that Mike Tysons aggressive tendencies have nothing to do with Testosterone:) Would you like to argue with him.

 

Ref the racially motivated arguments, it gives people an opportunity to behave like animals in a pack and attack claimed inferior peoples or cultures, if cleverly controlled by leaders:) People can then acquire a "fist full of dollars" and sometimes "a few dollars more" from people they perceive to be "the good the bad and the ugly" who they then "hang em high" and then claim to be heros and live "where eagles dare" but in the end they are all "dirty harry's"

 

You mentioned hitler, was it not herman gering between the wars who stated "if you are not one of us you are against us" Is this the same trick being used by politicians today to justify military action in the world, a handful of terror attacks or perceived injustices, warrants attacking and destabilising whole countries. Politicians of course do not want anything todo with seizing the assets of the countries they destabilize and are completely humanitarian NOT! No one invades poor countries without resources to stop atrocities.

 

Africa has huge problems and huge potential, it may just need a little more time to get up to speed, with the rest of the world, with fair trading etc.

 

Also why should every country in the world want to have the same culture or things as we have in Europe. How would America look if after the civil war, the Indians were not mainly wiped out or driven onto reservations. Would Africa have been like America if the colonial powers in Africa had done the same.

 

The world needs to learn from its mistakes and move on, diversity is the spice of life.