******Official politics thread ******

[Swish]

Originally Posted by Patriam1066 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I thought it was liberal values and their education system. Speaking of constant warfare, why isn't Somalia successful?

I can't believe you're actually arguing that modern swedes aren't superior to female genital mutilating Somalis

Brain drain partly, and not just in Somalia. The ones with the education or sense do the right thing and leave as refugees or through whatever other means.

Sweden has taken in a shit ton of them over the last 10-20 years and its showing culturally. Last time I was in Stockholm in one of the big train stations there was a noticeable black population (comparable with an English city). I used to watch a late teens League player who was based in Sweden (from Somalia)...he was shit hot as Leblanc.

[Patriam1066]

Originally Posted by Swish [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Brain drain partly, and not just in Somalia. The ones with the education or sense do the right thing and leave as refugees or through whatever other means.

Sweden has taken in a shit ton of them over the last 10-20 years and its showing culturally. Last time I was in Stockholm in one of the big train stations there was a noticeable black population (comparable with an English city). I used to watch a late teens League player who was based in Sweden (from Somalia)...he was shit hot as Leblanc.

Yeah brain drain has fucked Iran too. That doesn't explain female genital mutilation though

I just want a liberal to admit that there are indeed bad people who have melanin in their skin. I think Juris would acquit OJ Simpson and his rationale would be "Nicole had it coming"

[JurisDictum]

Originally Posted by Xaanka [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Somalis actually used to dominate trade in the indian ocean and were pretty wealthy until the 19th century when the aligned ottoman empire collapsed. hell somalia was most likely the mythical land of Punt, a wealthy trade hub of the ancient world. seems like Jurus doesn't really know much about their history or the context as to why they are the way they are in the 19th century and beyond. somalia's civil war and and subsequent decentralization of power played a much larger role than British (and Italian, you seemed to miss that part) conquest my dude.

oh no that doesn't fit into my agenda of "all the problems with Africa are the white man's fault" what will i ever do???

I grant you I didn't spend a good amount of time on Somalia. But my understanding is they were just a province of the Ottoman Empire. The Ottomans were indeed more powerful in world economy than any other civilization during the medieval period. A subset of ethnic "Harbi" Arabs had an extensive clan trade network going. We're talking vast wealth in the spice trade in this era.

Then the Ottoman Empire decayed over time due to an inability to truly consolidate and rule their people. They had many different people's under their rule, and cultural differences made it difficult to rule with anything but a very lose hold. The rich got lazy and conservative and they sat their on rusting institutions rather than the military/bureaucratic innovation going on in Europe.

By World War I, regimented armies with fire arms and suppy-lines showed up and tore the Ottomans apart. Which had no national education system or modern bureaucracies like the Europe.

Why did Europe pull ahead? Mostly we believe its because constant war made the state more necessary, powerful, and efficient. The Ottoman Empire did not need to fight as many wars as the Empires of Europe. Therefore, they did not "evolve" as fast.

[Xaanka]

Originally Posted by Swish [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Brain drain partly, and not just in Somalia. The ones with the education or sense do the right thing and leave as refugees or through whatever other means.

I was going to say, the Somalis I worked with were all VERY smart and ambitious young men. They would constantly go on about how their kinsmen back home were so focused on fucking each other over they have no concept of creating something for themselves.

[Patriam1066]

Originally Posted by JurisDictum [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I grant you I didn't spend a good amount of time on Somalia. But my understanding is they were just a province of the Ottoman Empire. The Ottomans were indeed more powerful in world economy than any other civilization during the medieval period. A subset of ethnic "Harbi" Arabs had an extensive clan trade network going.

Then the Ottoman Empire decayed over time due to an inability to truly consolidate and rule their people. The rich got lazy and conservative and they sat their on rusting institutions rather than the military/bureaucratic innovation going on in Europe. Soon regimented armies with fire arms and suppy-lines showed up and tore the ottomans apart. Which had no national education system or modern bureaucracies like the Europe.

Why did Europe pull ahead? Mostly we believe its because constant war made the state more necessary powerful and efficient. The Ottoman Empire did not need to fight as many wars as the Empires of Europe. Therefore, they did not "evolve" as fast.

If you can admit they pulled ahead then ask yourself what values and cultural traits allowed that. Then be a chauvinist for those values being promoted across the world. Do you want America to become Iran or Iran to become America? I use that example because seriously buddy George Washington and Hamilton would be an improvement over the dip shits running my country 250 years later

That's all I'm saying bud!!!! Stop apologizing for dog shit behavior

[Xaanka]

Originally Posted by JurisDictum [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I grant you I didn't spend a good amount of time on Somalia. But my understanding is they were just a province of the Ottoman Empire. The Ottomans were indeed more powerful in world economy than any other civilization during the medieval period. A subset of ethnic "Harbi" Arabs had an extensive clan trade network going.

Then the Ottoman Empire decayed over time due to an inability to truly consolidate and rule their people. The rich got lazy and conservative and they sat their on rusting institutions rather than the military/bureaucratic innovation going on in Europe. Soon regimented armies with fire arms and suppy-lines showed up and tore the ottomans apart. Which had no national education system or modern bureaucracies like the Europe.

Why did Europe pull ahead? Mostly we believe its because constant war made the state more necessary powerful and efficient. The Ottoman Empire did not need to fight as many wars as the Empires of Europe. Therefore, they did not "evolve" as fast.

Somalia was always independent of the Ottoman empire, run by their own sultanates, though allied with the Turks and using their own version of Ottoman currency. Arab muslims, once imported into Somalia, became the elite ruling class of the country.

Somalia was also one of the first countries to have firearms, imported by the Ottomans to aid in the somali-portugese, and the ajural-portugese conflict over control of the Indian ocean. This was prioritized by the Ottomans due to their close ties, as a way of contesting Portugese domination of trade in the Indian ocean.

So they weren't just marched on by guys with rifles while they were carrying swords and sharpened sticks; they've had many firearms imported since their first sultanate. Most of the conquest they've faced in their history was not at the hands of the white man, but actually primarily other African nations.

[mickmoranis]

Originally Posted by Ahldagor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Azzar, can you clue these folks into that what it takes to be the top is to be born into a specific familial circumstance and have the connections to maintain an information flow that contains financial data used for personal gains? Is that Boolean, black and white, dichotomy based enough?

The difference between knowing this to be true, working hard so that you can have your children start in a better place in an economy that allows you to do so VS. thinking its unfair and demanding that those that have had smart and successful people that came before them need give up their earned position in society...

...is the difference between being a pragmatist and being a libtard.

[Xaanka]

Originally Posted by mickmoranis [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The difference between knowing this to be true, working hard so that you can have your children start in a better place in an economy that allows you to do so VS. thinking its unfair and demanding that those that have had smart and successful people that came before them need give up their earned position in society...

...is the difference between being a pragmatist and being a libtard.

tl;dr he has a fair point about old wealth however he's failing to recognize the entire existence of new wealth because he incorrectly treats it as out of reach for the average person and believes anyone creating new wealth only did so because of societal advantages given to them.

so basically he's never read a biography on almost any billionaire.

[Xaanka]

Hell I didn't include him in past posts because we've fallen out of touch and I don't particularly like him very much these days, but the one billionaire I used to be personal friends with was 100% self made as well. At one point he was the wealthiest man on earth. I'd say who it is but I'd get a bunch of "uncle at nintendo shit that didn't happen" replies and I don't feel like digging up proof because I'm lazy, so you can make the incredibly easy guess.

[mickmoranis]

I mean seriously who thinks being in the top 1% is something america promises every citizen? it takes generations to get there, hence being born in special familial circumstances.

Its absurd to be upset that there are ultra rich people, its absurd to be upset about that.

You want to get there, raise your family in a way that makes them want to get there, using the advantages that you provide them.

It's ridiculous that people of shitty families are upset and think they have a right to change the greatest economy on earth to benefit them and their lazy families.

Side note, all that said, it it even actually possible to go from the absolute bottom and make it into the 1% in one life time thanks to america's economic system. Its absurd to think that isnt extremely rare.