posted
Recently I was researching the Gbagbo thing. For those unaware,Paris basically destroyed CdI to shoehorn their man Ouattara in and get rid of Gbagbo. Burkinabe,Chadian and Burkinabe mercs along with French specops were used in what the media called a 'civil war' but was anything but. However,this standard French operating procedure in Africa. Even now they're active in Mali stealing gold under the anti AQ war and the CAR putting resources under lock in the guise pf peackeeping. Anyway,I discovered Gbagbo was pulling his country out of the most egregious agreement bilateral economic agreement written I've seen since.....IDK when I saw the French treaty with their ex colonies. This is what got him overthrown.
quote:
Just before France conceded to African demands for independence in the 1960s, it carefully organised its former colonies (CFA countries) in a system of "compulsory solidarity" which consisted of obliging the 14 African states to put 65% of their foreign currency reserves into the French Treasury, plus another 20% for financial liabilities. This means these 14 African countries only ever have access to 15% of their own money! If they need more they have to borrow their own money from the French at commercial rates! And this has been the case since the 1960s. web page france Since 'independence' this money has accumulated to at least 400 billion ,maybe half a trillion euros! 1.Why do the leaders of France Afrique allow this to happen. Blackmail/mindcontrol/occult? Seriously!? 2.In this day and age a critical mass of the citizens should know-what are they doing? Kings,prime ministers and prez's have been killed for less!
Posts: 433 | From: nairobi | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is a great post Kikuyu. People that criticize Africa don't realize many African countries are not fully free. What kind a stupid agreement is that for 14 ex French African colonies to put 85% of their currency reserve in France a racist, colonialist and imperialist European country. The French government is also printing those 14 African country currency call the franc CFA. That's neocolonialism at its best. Those 14 franc CFA African countries president are required to become member of French freemason in order to become president. The requirement of Euro freemason is for African leaders to put the interest of their white freemasons so call brothers first before the interest of their countries and their population. That's why many African countries are poor and European country rich. East Asian countries are developed and rich because they practice their own religion and have their own dragon elite society.
The Ivory Coast was a rich country under President Felix Houphouet Boigny. After the death of Pres Boigny the French spy agency created a civil war in the country in order to weaken and control the country. Ivory Coast President Laurent Gbagbo was a patriot who was trying to free is country from French exploitation because of that the French and the USA used a foreign mercenary army from Burkina and Chad to deposed Pres Gbagbo. President Gbagbo won Ivory Coast last election organized by the UN. the neocolonialist powers France, USA and the UN stole the election and gave it to their IMF(International monetary fund) employee puppet Alasane Ouattara who is going to defend the interest of these neocolonialists and imperialists power in the Ivory Coast. France and The USA used a mercenary army to deposed President Gbagbo and installed their Puppett Ouatara in power. In one Ivory Coast village the mercenary army massacred two thousands unarmed civilians.
All the wars, civil wars and invading groups in Africa are supported by imperialist countries spy agency using proxy countries. The goal of the vampire imperialist countries is to destabilize and weaken African countries in order to exploit them forever. We need African international banking and business families to conspire to free African countries from Western exploitation. We need them to create regional states in africa, an African economic union and an international African currency.
posted
Meena, Re Gbagbo, the information you have about him is just inaccurate. He actually lost the election but the fool disgraced himself by hanging on--causing deaths and destruction in Abidjan. He was also a notorious ethnic chauvinist with his narrow nonsense about Ivoirite.
Ouattara is from the North of CI and as usual stupid nonsense was raised as to whether he was an actual Ivoirean. The fools who raised this question seemed to forget that all the nations of Africa are confounded colonial carve-outs.
When the French things directly they set things so that they had only 2 areas to control: French Soudan and French Equatorial Africa. Come independence and the greedy colonial upstarts agreed to divide up the areas among themselves into small, ineffective states--with France's blessing of course. Fanon talked about this in his WOTA and specifically in his famous chapter "The Pitfalls of National Consciousness".
Ouattara is France's man for CI--plus he has married one of them--as in the case of Gabon. Total neocolonial cronies.
CI was not a rich country for the indigenes under Houphouet. For the French, yes, for the locals, no.
That 85% is now down to 65% minimum now. The reason for such a bad decision is due to cowardice and colonial brainwashing. The solution is for West Africa to have a single currency that would operate within the context of ECOWAS. This would make business transaction costs much cheaperand increase efficiency. But the CFA governments don't do it because they are are afraid. The idea that Gbagbo was about to do something about is just bogus. he was just another silly colonial like all the others.Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: Meena, Re Gbagbo, the information you have about him is just inaccurate. He actually lost the election but the fool disgraced himself by hanging on--causing deaths and destruction in Abidjan. He was also a notorious ethnic chauvinist with his narrow nonsense about Ivoirite.
Ouattara is from the North of CI and as usual stupid nonsense was raised as to whether he was an actual Ivoirean. The fools who raised this question seemed to forget that all the nations of Africa are confounded colonial carve-outs.
When the French things directly they set things so that they had only 2 areas to control: French Soudan and French Equatorial Africa. Come independence and the greedy colonial upstarts agreed to divide up the areas among themselves into small, ineffective states--with France's blessing of course. Fanon talked about this in his WOTA and specifically in his famous chapter "The Pitfalls of National Consciousness".
Ouattara is France's man for CI--plus he has married one of them--as in the case of Gabon. Total neocolonial cronies.
CI was not a rich country for the indigenes under Houphouet. For the French, yes, for the locals, no.
That 85% is now down to 65% minimum now. The reason for such a bad decision is due to cowardice and colonial brainwashing. The solution is for West Africa to have a single currency that would operate within the context of ECOWAS. This would make business transaction costs much cheaperand increase efficiency. But the CFA governments don't do it because they are are afraid. The idea that Gbagbo was about to do something about is just bogus. he was just another silly colonial like all the others.
My info is that Outtara's count from the North was hugely inflated by Burkinabe mercs who settled and til now haven't left creating a massive future problem with the original landowners. Luckily,for him the electoral officials were mainly in his camp. Gbagbo didn't lose! In other words this state of affairs of a decrease in the extortion from 85% to 65% of all forex reserves is acceptable to the Afro French elite?
Posts: 433 | From: nairobi | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:My info is that Outtara's count from the North was hugely inflated by Burkinabe mercs who settled and til now haven't left creating a massive future problem with the original landowners.
You got it wrong. Outtara won the election because the dumb ethnocentric South vote was split between Bedie and Gbagbo. The Electoral Commission confirmed the numbers--54% to 46%. Gbagbo then got his own planted man in the Constitutional Council to nullify the vote. It didn't work and the selfish and greedy man plunged the whole country into a crisis because he didn't want to step down. The fool was eventually cornered like a rat in hole. Just shameful.
And this silly talk about nationality in those piddling colonially created nonsense states should just stop. Burkina Faso/Upper Volta or Ivory Coast[ Houphuet in all his ignorance kept the colonial name "Ivory Coast" once one in a trio of "Grain Coast", "Slave Coast", and "Ivory Coast"] who cares?
When the French ran West Africa directly it was just one "Equatorial West Africa". That's what the fools who run those French sponsored Bantustans should do now. Will they? Hell no, they are too busy stealing and playing the fool.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
When the French ran West Africa directly it was just one "Equatorial West Africa". That's what the fools who run those French sponsored Bantustans should do now. Will they? Hell no, they are too busy stealing and playing the fool.
Do you think Tuareg separatists could have successfully set up an independant nation in the territory of Northern Mali if it wasn't for French or other Western intervention?
Posts: 42934 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Do not blame the Euros. Natural order: strong prey on weak. Blame the people who will not rise up.
The people tolerate misrule.
Everywhere else on earth when people get fed up they rise up and throw down.
Is African man upside down?
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Do you think Tuareg separatists could have successfully set up an independant nation in the territory of Northern Mali if it wasn't for French or other Western intervention?
Now that's a dumb question. What does it have to do with the topic? Just shows that you know little about African history or sociology.
I will humour you and answer your dim-minded question. Touaregs are traditionally nomads with no fixed abode as they trek back and forth in the sand wastes of the Sahel and Sahara.
The main reason why these trekkers are pushing for some phoney independence derives from their ignorant and shallow-minded racism--fueled by French colonialism that they are not generic African. As a result they foolishly believe that being governed from Bamako by Bambara speakers is not acceptable. The fools allowed in a bunch and illiterate Islamists to help establish some new state they called "Azawad". The failed and are now licking their wounds as they engage in silly suicide bombings.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Do you think Tuareg separatists could have successfully set up an independant nation in the territory of Northern Mali if it wasn't for French or other Western intervention?
Now that's a dumb question. What does it have to do with the topic? Just shows that you know little about African history or sociology.
I will humour you and answer your dim-minded question. Touaregs are traditionally nomads with no fixed abode as they trek back and forth in the sand wastes of the Sahel and Sahara.
The main reason why these trekkers are pushing for some phoney independence derives from their ignorant and shallow-minded racism--fueled by French colonialism that they are not generic African. As a result they foolishly believe that being governed from Bamako by Bambara speakers is not acceptable. The fools allowed in a bunch and illiterate Islamists to help establish some new state they called "Azawad". The failed and are now licking their wounds as they engage in silly suicide bombings.
This is why I stopped engaging her. She deliberately introduces irrelevancy in the guise of questions to professionally derail the thread-she does this every time! The question remains-have the Afro French accepted the situation?
Posts: 433 | From: nairobi | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:The question remains-have the Afro French accepted the situation?
Yes, "Afro-French" is appropriate. They all genuflect before "Papa Hollande" and don't hesitate to call on "Cher Papa" for any problem.
Obviously, they have accepted this open thievery. Apparently, they still believe in "Nos ancestres les Gaulois"
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Great point Lamin: When the French things directly they set things so that they had only 2 areas to control: French Soudan and French Equatorial Africa. Come independence and the greedy colonial upstarts agreed to divide up the areas among themselves into small, ineffective states--with France's blessing of course. Fanon talked about this in his WOTA and specifically in his famous chapter "The Pitfalls of National Consciousness.
Mena: The Europeans(mulato, white) transformed their white and mulato colonies into giant, huge, colossal states exemple the USA, Brazil, Canada, Great Colombia, Argentina, Australia, Russia-siberia.
USA map Federal states of America
Brazil map. Federal states of Brazil map
Canada map. Federal states of Canada map
Gran Colombia map. 12 states of Gran Colombia.
Australia map. Federal states of Australia
Russia map. Federal states of Russia
European colonial Africa with federal colonial states like French West Africa, French equatorial Africa, British East Africa, British Southern Africa, British Egypt-Sudan
Balkanised African states. Look at how Eurpeans divided and sabotaged Africa into small and medium weak states. Many African countries are landlock and condemn to poverty. The Euro colonial powers could have free African countries into a federal states like Brazil, Canada, Australia. The Euro colonial power wanted to make sure by balcanising Africa no black African country will emerge as a world superpower like the USA, Russia, China, Brazil etc. The African intellectual, business and banking elite should secretly conspire to create African regional economic union that will become African regional federal states in the future.
Posts: 5374 | From: sepedat/sirius | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Do you think Tuareg separatists could have successfully set up an independant nation in the territory of Northern Mali if it wasn't for French or other Western intervention?
Now that's a dumb question. What does it have to do with the topic? Just shows that you know little about African history or sociology.
I will humour you and answer your dim-minded question. Touaregs are traditionally nomads with no fixed abode as they trek back and forth in the sand wastes of the Sahel and Sahara.
The main reason why these trekkers are pushing for some phoney independence derives from their ignorant and shallow-minded racism--fueled by French colonialism that they are not generic African. As a result they foolishly believe that being governed from Bamako by Bambara speakers is not acceptable. The fools allowed in a bunch and illiterate Islamists to help establish some new state they called "Azawad". The failed and are now licking their wounds as they engage in silly suicide bombings.
As you know the borders of many African nations today were determined by Europeans not by African heritage and tradition. -Now apply this to mali and the situation with the Turaegs who far pre date the French in Africa
My question was legitimate and an intelligent related offshoot on the topic of recent 2013 French intervention in Africa, in Mali at request of the malian governement. You seem ignorant of the topic. You say that Tuareg separatists were fuled by French colonialism is stupid in light of the fact that the French just came in and bombed them with airstrikes.
In the late 19th century, the Tuareg resisted the French colonial invasion of their Central Saharan homelands. After numerous massacres on both sides,[9] the Tuareg were subdued and required to sign treaties in Mali 1905 and Niger 1917. In southern Morocco and Algeria, the French met some of the strongest resistance from the Ahaggar Tuareg. Their Amenokal, traditional chief Moussa ag Amastan, fought numerous battles in defence of the region. Finally, Tuareg territories were taken under French governance, and their confederations were largely dismantled and reorganised. 1974
The first Tuareg rebellion came right after the French released their control of Mali and the "nation" became independant because they couldn't do it with the French there
______________________________________________
The Tuareg rebellion of 1962–1964, sometimes called the First Tuareg Rebellion or the Alfellaga, was a short lived insurgency by populations of what is now northern Mali begun shortly after the nation achieved independence from France in 1960. Many in the sparsely populated and ethnically distinct north of Mali (along with some in southern Algeria and northern Niger expected an independent Tuareg, Berber, and Arab nation to be formed by the Sahara desert regions when French Colonialism ended. This combined with dissatisfaction over the new government led some Tuareg in Northern Mali to rebel in 1963. This rebellion was short-lived as the military response of the new Malian government was swift and harsh. No more than 1,500 anti-government fighters were ever active following the larger rising on 1963 but the response of the Malian Armed Forces, occupying much of what is now Kidal region, Gao Region, and Tomboctou Region resulted in a refugee crisis, as thousands fled to what is now Algeria (the southern reaches of which were still under French control). The military occupation, deaths, torture and imprisonment of suspected rebels has left deep resentment in much of the northern population. The area has seen three successive major rebellions in the decades since, and remains a source of conflict
___________________________________
2012-13
The Tuaregs and Arabs who lived in Bamako and elsewhere in southern Mali were subjects of a rash of ethnic attacks by black Malians (as opposed to Mediterranean Arabs and racially mixed Tuaregs), despite many of them being hostile to Azawad separatism as well as the Islamists. In fact, a large part of them actually had only recently arrived to the government-held south, fleeing the violence in the north.
An incident arose on 8 September 2012 when a group of Malian soldiers detained 17 unarmed Tablighi preachers from Mauritania in Dogofry, north-east of Diabaly, while en route to a religious conference in Bamako and executed all but one of them without reporting to their own command. The Malian government expressed its condolences for the event, which Associated Press considered a symptom of the disintegration reached by the Malian Army as a result of the 21 March Coup.
On 19 January, Human Rights Watch report killings and other human rights abuses committed by the Malian army in the central Malian town of Niono. Tuaregs and Arabs were especially targeted.
On 23 January 2013, BBC reported claims by the International Federation of Human Rights that Malian Army soldiers had carried out summary executions against people suspected of being militant, and with bodies subsequently being hastily buried in makeshift graves and wells. Some victims were reportedly killed for not having identity documents or for their ethnicity. Reportedly, dozens of ethnic Tuaregs living in Bamako had their homes raided by government troops
Posts: 42934 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
After creating colossal, giant states from their American and Oceanian colonies Rome and the western European countries are economicaly, financially and politicaly uniting Europe under the European Union or EU. It is like rebuilding the European part of the Roman Empire.
European Union
European Union
China was created by the union of many kingdoms
The 13 kingdoms that became China
Nice fantasy United States of Africa map.
Alternate Africa Africa. The world centre for commerce, wealth and defense. The most powerful continent in the world. Power is centred around the gargantuan Kanem Kingdom, the profitable Kongo Republic, the resurgent Axum empire in the east and the powerful Somali Federation. Several smaller republics exist in and around the continent. The nations have changed history worldwide. The first changes in modern history start around 0, however there was a drastic change before this in the formation of the Sahara desert not happening and several other deserts in Africa not forming
The Kanem Empire is presented here in Purple, the Kongolese Republic is in Red, the Somali Federation in Green, the Axum Empire in Orange, the Tswana United States in Yellow, Libya in Aqua. The countries in white are small republics, and the other nations are foreign colonial possesions given as gifts to the European empires
Posts: 5374 | From: sepedat/sirius | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mena7: After creating colossal, giant states from their American and Oceanian colonies Rome and the western European countries are economicaly, financially and politicaly uniting Europe under the European Union or EU. It is like rebuilding the European part of the Roman Empire.
The Eurozone crisis
is an ongoing crisis that has been affecting the countries of the Eurozone since early 2009, when a group of 10 central and eastern European banks asked for a bailout. At the time, the European Commission released a forecast of a 1.8 per cent decline in EU economic output for 2009. The ECB extended liquidity support to Hungary and Poland, while the EU contributed to Latvia's bail-out.One researcher has held that this was a combined government debt crisis, a banking crisis and a growth and competitiveness crisis
Posts: 42934 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:My question was legitimate and an intelligent related offshoot on the topic of recent 2013 French intervention in Africa, in Mali at request of the Malian government. You seem ignorant of the topic. You say that Tuareg separatists were fueled by French colonialism is stupid in light of the fact that the French just came in and bombed them with airstrikes.
The thread had to do with the French diktat that the ex-colonial governments deposit 80%[now 65%]of their reserves in the French Central Bank.
I argued that during the colonial era the French ran the West African area as one unit. That's how the post-colonial states should do it now. Such leads to efficient running of affairs and economies of scale.
When the Europeans colonised Africa they came with their theories of race to distinguish between African peoples. A good example of that is the way how the Germans and Belgians formulated their racial theories in Rwanda and Burundi. All this had at its base the so-called Hamitic Theory.
It was the European colonisers that came up with the idea of "true negroes" and coined classifications such as "negroid but not negro", "caucasoid"[terms which they applied to the people of the Horn, the Foulah, the Tutsis, the Baganda, Masai, and others such as the Touareg, classified as caucasoid], "Bushmen", "Capoid", etc.
These racial classifications led to differential colonial treatment as was the case in Rwanda-Burundi. People such as the Touareg were inculcated with the ideas that they were not generic African and that they were racially superior to the latter. Plus the nomadic Touareg--like all the major Sahel groups kept "captifs"[ slaves] that were captured during raids.
In Mali, there are many ethnic groups such as the Bambara, Foulah, Malinke, Sarahole, Songhai, Moor, etc. All accepted to be part of the post-independence Mali government ran from Bamako. All except the Touaregs. No one has ever stopped them from engaging in their Gypsy lifestyle--so what is the basis for their fussing?
You mention Malian reprisals against the Arabs and Touaregs resident in Mali. But this was after their linking up with the Islamist invaders to put Mali under a harsh Islamic lockdown for many months with punishments such as Sharia limb amputations being carried out. You did not mention the cause of the reprisals, just the effects. In Mali today, the Touareg are mostly despised.
Again, your question--which was answered--had nothing to do with the thread. Ask the thread-starter.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:You say that Tuareg separatists were fueled by French colonialism is stupid in light of the fact that the French just came in and bombed them with airstrikes.
Where did ever write such? And besides your made-up comment is just non-contexted nonsense.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Historically we can see "Twareg pre-cursors" who also balked against "Gnawa" rule. Check what went on between Ghana and the Sanhadja.
Independent Azawad is what there was after the Songhai empire and before the French. But all of Mali north of the Niger was never solely inhabited by Kel Tamasheq.
Sonrhai, Soninke, Fulani and others lived or roamed in that desert area. I think they ruled themselves even before the Mali and the Songhai empires though the history before the 11th cent is not very well known.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: the Touareg were inculcated with the ideas that they were not generic African and that they were racially superior to the latter. Plus the nomadic Touareg--like all the major Sahel groups kept "captifs"[ slaves] that were captured during raids.
You think prior to Europeans in Africa that the Touareg had had a strong sense of being "African" ?
quote:Originally posted by lamin:
In Mali, there are many ethnic groups such as the Bambara, Foulah, Malinke, Sarahole, Songhai, Moor, etc. All accepted to be part of the post-independence Mali government ran from Bamako. All except the Touaregs. No one has ever stopped them from engaging in their Gypsy lifestyle--so what is the basis for their fussing?
You mention Malian reprisals against the Arabs and Touaregs resident in Mali. But this was after their linking up with the Islamist invaders to put Mali under a harsh Islamic lockdown for many months with punishments such as Sharia limb amputations being carried out. You did not mention the cause of the reprisals, just the effects. In Mali today, the Touareg are mostly despised.
Tuareg minorities in Mali and Niger have fought for self-determination for more than 100 years.
The separatist movement MNLA is differenent from recent fundamantalist Islamacists-Ansar Dine who are more interested in Sharia law than an independant state.
Look to the first rebellion after the independandace of Mali. It happened in 1962-64
Tuareg society is composed of a multitude of individual tribes with different languages and varying customs depending on location. Traditionally, there was a well-defined social structure composed of three classes: nobles, vassals, and slaves.3 This last group was historically made up of black Africans.
The Tuareg are a people that have lived in northern Mali “as early as the fifth century BCE” according to Herodotus. After establishing the city of Timbuktu in the 11th century, the Tuareg “traded, traveled, and conquered throughout Saharan”
This independence was swept away when the French colonized Mali when they “defeated the Tuareg at Timbuktu and established borders and administrative districts to rule the area until Mali declared independence in 1960.” The Tuareg people have consistently wanted self-independence and in pursuit of such goals have engaged in a number of rebellions.
The first was in 1916 when, in response to the French not giving the Tuareg their own autonomous zone (called Azawad) as was promised, they revolted. The French violently quelled the revolt and “subsequently confiscated important grazing lands while using Tuaregs as forced conscripts and labor – and fragmented Tuareg societies through the drawing of arbitrary boundaries between Soudan [Mali] and its neighbors.”
Yet, this did not end the Tuareg goal of an independent, sovereign state. Once the French had ceded Mali independence, the Tuareg began to push toward their dream of establishing Azawad once again with “several prominent Tuareg leaders [lobbying] for a separate Tuareg homeland consisting of northern Mali and parts of modern day Algeria, Niger, Mauritania. […] [However,] black politicians like Modibo Keita, Mali’s first President, made it clear that independent Mali would not cede its northern territories.”
The First Tuareg Rebellion
In the 1960s, while the independence movements in Africa were ongoing, the Tuareg once again vied for their own autonomy, known as the Afellaga rebellion. The Tuareg were greatly oppressed by the government of Modibo Keita, which came into power after the French had left, as they “were singled out for particular discrimination, and were more neglected than others in the distribution of state benefits,” which may have been due to the fact that “most of the senior leadership of post-colonial Mali were drawn from the southern ethnic groups who were not sympathetic to the pastoral culture of the northern desert nomads.” [6]
In addition to this, the Tuareg felt that the government’s policy of ‘modernization’ was in reality an attack on the Tuareg themselves as the Keita government enacted policies such as “land reform that threatened [the Tuareg’s] privileged access to agricultural products.” Specifically, Keita “had moved increasingly in the direction of [establishing a version of] the Soviet collective farm and had created state corporations to monopolize the purchase of basic crops.”
In addition to this, Keita left customary land rights unchanged “except when the state needed land for industry or transport. Then the Minister of Rural Economy issued a decree of acquisition and registration in the name of the state, but only after publication of notice and a hearing to determine customary claims.” [9] Unfortunately for the Tuareg, this unchanging of customary land rights did not apply to the subsoil that was on their land. Instead, this subsoil was turned into a state monopoly due to Keita’s desire to ensure that no one became a capitalist based on the discovery of subsoil resources.
This had a major negative impact on the Tuareg as they had a pastoral culture and the subsoil helps to “determine what kind of crops can be grown in any area and, therefore, what livestock can be raised.” [10] Thus, by creating a state monopoly on subsoil, the Keita government was effectively in control of what the Tuareg would be able to grow and therefore in control of their very lives.
This oppression eventually boiled over and became the first Tuareg rebellion, which began with small hit-and-run attacks on government forces. However, it was quickly crushed due to the Tuareg lacking “a unified leadership, a well-coordinated strategy or clear evidence of a coherent strategic vision.” [11] In addition to this, the rebels were unable to mobilize the entire Tuareg community.
The Malian military, well-motivated and [well-equipped] with new Soviet weapons, conducted vigorous counterinsurgency operations. By the end of 1964, the government’s strong arm methods had crushed the rebellion. It then placed the Tuareg-populated northern regions under a repressive military administration.
Yet while the Malian military may have won the battle, they failed to win the war as their heavy-handed tactics only alienated Tuareg who didn’t support the insurgency and not only did the government fail to follow through on promises to improve the local infrastructure and increase economic opportunity. To avoid the military occupation of their communities and also due to massive drought in the 1980s, many Tuareg fled to nearby countries such as Algeria, Mauritania, and Libya. Thus, the grievances of the Tuareg went unaddressed, only creating a situation in which a rebellion would once again occur.
Posts: 42934 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tukuler say: Do not blame the Euros. Natural order: strong prey on weak. Blame the people who will not rise up
Mena say: Tukuler is right stong countries prey on weak countries. International politics or geopolitic is base on rapport de force or balance of power. A country have to have a good spy agency to spy on other country government, industries, businesses, armies and weapons. A country have to have a strong armed forces, modern weapons and a good weapon industry to defend itself against imperialist country. A country have to have a good diplomacy to make political, diplomatic, economic, technologic and defense alliance with other countries.
The pre Colombian Mesoamerican Kingdoms and pre slave trade African kingdoms were very civilized and riched but were stupid politicians. They didn't not have spies and diplomats in Western Europe to warn them of the Euros plan of colonization of America and slave trade in Africa. They didn't upgrade their ancient world weapon tech into gunpownder weapon tech in order for their armies to have equal power with Europeans and Asian armies. They didn't have spies, diplomats and merchants to warned them of the invention of the guns, gunboats and new war strategy.
There is a maxim that say governing is predicting. It was the duty of the Mesoamerican Kings and African Kings to predicted the colonization of America and the African Kings to predicted the African slave trade aka extortion. After making those predictions they should have upgrade their weapons and retrained their armies. They should have make diplomatical alliance with neighborhood kingdoms like the Greek city states to protect themselves against the Europeans invaders.
I disagree with Tukuler when he say do not blame the Europeans. The Europeans stole our African Christian and Jewish religions and claims to be Christians and Jewishs. Europeans should have follow the Bible laws. Some of the Ten commandments and 42 commandments of our religions is I should not kill, I should not steal, and I should not lie. The European Christian colonial powers under the guidance of the Catholic Papal state genocided Mesoamericans and Africans, they stole the Mesoamerican lands and stole African people and they lie to the Mesoamerican and African kings.
kikuyu states: Just before France conceded to African demands for independence in the 1960s, it carefully organised its former colonies (CFA countries) in a system of "compulsory solidarity" which consisted of obliging the 14 African states to put 65% of their foreign currency reserves into the French Treasury, plus another 20% for financial liabilities. This means these 14 African countries only ever have access to 15% of their own money! If they need more they have to borrow their own money from the French at commercial rates! And this has been the case since the 1960s. web page france Since 'independence' this money has accumulated to at least 400 billion ,maybe half a trillion euros! 1.Why do the leaders of France Afrique allow this to happen. Blackmail/mindcontrol/occult? Seriously!? 2.In this day and age a critical mass of the citizens should know-what are they doing? Kings,prime ministers and prez's have been killed for less!
Mena say: The 14 Africans ex French colonies Franc CFA financial contract with France is one of the most stupid financial deal in the history of the world. Instead of those African countries depositing their reserve currency in their central banks to earn interest and be loan to businessman they gave 85% of their reserve currency to France central bank who is earning interest on the African deposits and the French have the audacity to loan the African back their own money if they want it back. The 14 African Franc CFA governements should revoke the CFA contract as soon as possible and ask France to give them their $400 billion reserve currency. The French are earning interest in $400 billion African dollars. Those African countries should create and print their own currencies not the French. The franc CFA is neocolonialism.
The Europeans created a giant state in Mexico. The USA either stole part of Mexico territory or the Euro elite decided to transferred the French Mississipi and Mexico Texas, California and West states to the USA.
West Asia use to be united under the Ottoman the British destroyed it using divide and conquer tactic between turks and Arabs and balkanized West Asia.
British united India, Pakistan, Bangladesh under their British India colony. The British created a divide and conquer tactic between Hindu and Moslem Indians and divided India.
Five Europeans colonial powers united Africa under their rule but they balkanized Africa into medium, small and landlock states before the so call independence of African countries. They could have created five federal states in Africa like the federal states of USA, Canada, Brazil, Australia, Russia.
regions of Africa. How Africa can be united in a economic union or federal state
European balkanization of Africa.
Most of Africans speak the same language
Posts: 5374 | From: sepedat/sirius | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:[b]You think prior to Europeans in Africa that the Touareg had had a strong sense of being "African" ?[/]
This is an amusing question. Prior to the European presence those were mainly illiterate desert roamers and raiders with no sense of anything except Koranic chanting and dancing. What did they know about the concept of "Africa"? Zero.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:[b]You think prior to Europeans in Africa that the Touareg had had a strong sense of being "African" ?[/]
This is an amusing question. Prior to the European presence those were mainly illiterate desert roamers and raiders with no sense of anything except Koranic chanting and dancing. What did they know about the concept of "Africa"? Zero.
You forgot tea making to the list of Toureg accomplishments.
No but seriously, Tourag are not one monolithic group, as can be seen between half caste and black members of that group.
Now I do agree with you that Toureg were put up to do what they have done. How did a bunch of tent living, Ngoni playing, tea drinking, desert living people get sophisticated weaponry by which to attack Mali the way it did?
As for people who are asking about whether or not Touregs consider themselves to be African, stop Googling stupidity on the internet. Unless you have known these people personally (i have/do) you don't know what they think. They fact of the matter is, these people are by in large African, black. Then you have some who are mixed with European slaves and such.
But this isn't the issue. The issue is Europeans meddling in Africa's affairs. Then you have western blacks who know very little about Africa speaking as if they know tons, because they have Google at their finger tips. Africa is still colonized. Those who have truly broken free are labeled mad men, dictators or other wise ostracized by the west. Côte d’Ivoire wants to stop using European backed paper, the government is deposed. If Africa was truly free, there wouldn't be this issue.
Now lamin I disagree with you in terms of going back to some system, some filthy European had in place at one point. Screw them, their systems and their mothers. We had empires in place that functioned just well before any of those savages touched the continent. Were their wars? Well yeah, what continent didn't have war? Even know Europeans fight among themselves such as in Bosnia for example. We need to go back to the classical African model. The same way the Europeans turned to Greece and Roman to design a coherent model of governance for themselves, we need to turn to Kush, Kemet, Wagadu, Kukiya etc and study how they did things. Then come up with a unified means by which to move the continent forward. Those blacks in the west smart enough and well intentioned enough to help should. Those who want to stay in the west, so they can keep begging their former masters for recognitions and approval should do so and remove Africa from their minds. Those half caste on the continent need to either get on board or they need to be sent packing.
Posts: 1296 | From: the planet | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:You think prior to Europeans in Africa that the Touareg had had a strong sense of being "African" ?
This is an amusing question. Prior to the European presence those were mainly illiterate desert roamers and raiders with no sense of anything except Koranic chanting and dancing. What did they know about the concept of "Africa"? Zero.
But you just said:
quote:Originally posted by lamin: the Touareg were inculcated with the ideas that they were not generic African
posted
Typezeist :We need to go back to the classical African model. The same way the Europeans turned to Greece and Roman to design a coherent model of governance for themselves, we need to turn to Kush, Kemet, Wagadu, Kukiya etc and study how they did things. Then come up with a unified means by which to move the continent forward. Those blacks in the west smart enough and well intentioned enough to help should. Those who want to stay in the west, so they can keep begging their former masters for recognitions and approval should do so and remove Africa from their minds. Those half caste on the continent need to either get on board or they need to be sent packing.
Mena: I agree with Typezeist we need to go back to the Ancient African Empires and Kingdoms form of government. The Papacy still use the African system were a council of cardinals elect the Pope. In Africa it was a council of elders or nobles who elected the King. China is probably govern by a council of bureaucrats that is similar to the bureaucrats of the ancient Emperors. The Chinese bureaucrats eliminated the monarch position and replaced it by an elected or appointed bureaucrat President and Prime minister. Western Democratic system are more like a front for a plutocracy and corporatocracy system. LOL some black people in the West are so brainwash by TV propaganda that they are wasting their time and energy looking for white people recognitions and approval.
Posts: 5374 | From: sepedat/sirius | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: the Touareg were inculcated with the ideas that they were not generic African
I don't think you were able to parse what I wrote. It all has to with desert and Sahel raiders like the Touareg attacking villages and kidnapping individuals whom they then use as lower caste/servant/slave workers. It is on this basis that the idea of dominant group and subordinate group arises. The people who were usually kidnapped lived in villages and practiced agriculture of some sorts. The Touareg are nomadic people living in movable tents which carry with them as they trek from place. Many of the original Touareg groups are of lighter complexion while those kidnapped were usually darker. Hence in the simple-minded brains of the Touareg dark pigmentation, as is the case with the vast majority of Malians is associated with subordination.
Generic Africans, regardless of ethnic sentiments, do not think along those lines--i.e. of caste distinctions based of colour. Such caste distinctions were reinforced by the biological racial theories brought in with the French colonials. The Touareg indentify more with the resident Arabs and Moors of Mali than with the other groups. It is well known, of course, that North Africans--on account of Arab colonialism--do not, in general, view themselves as "generic African".
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Now lamin I disagree with you in terms of going back to some system, some filthy European had in place at one point.
Stop running your mouth stupidly. Did you understand what I wrote? Briefly put, my point is that larger political and economic territorial units--when run efficiently--are much more effective than tiny units such as those of a balkanised Africa. Compare the economic power and political influence of mega-states such as the U.S.[ with 50 individual federal units], China, Russia, Brazil India, Australia, Canada, etc.--with tiny, non-viable, and dysfunctional units such as Togo, Lesotho, Gambia, Sierra Leone, Swaziland, Djibouti, Rwanda, Burundi, etc.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Now lamin I disagree with you in terms of going back to some system, some filthy European had in place at one point.
Stop running your mouth stupidly. Did you understand what I wrote? Briefly put, my point is that larger political and economic territorial units--when run efficiently--are much more effective than tiny units such as those of a balkanised Africa. Compare the economic power and political influence of mega-states such as the U.S.[ with 50 individual federal units], China, Russia, Brazil India, Australia, Canada, etc.--with tiny, non-viable, and dysfunctional units such as Togo, Lesotho, Gambia, Sierra Leone, Swaziland, Djibouti, Rwanda, Burundi, etc.
How am I running my mouth "stupidly" when I am quoting YOUR WORDS! I understand your point and my point still stands, you SAID and I quote "I argued that during the colonial era the French ran the West African area as one unit. That's how the post-colonial states should do it now. Such leads to efficient running of affairs and economies of scale."
In your response to me you clarify your statement; that is fine. But don't try and belittle someone, who responds to a half thought out statement, out of frustration. This misunderstanding stems from your inability to clearly express yourself to begin with.
Also, running the entire area as one unit is fine and dandy, but you still have to have a viable system of governance to make that work. Just lumping everything together is a useless endeavor, which will do little more than perpetuate the current economic and political shortfalls of the current system in place, just on a larger scale.
A viable economic system must be sorted. A viable social and political system also must be sorted. Africans need to turn to a classical model and modify it to reflect current realities. Once that is done, then geographical integrity of the political system should be sorted.
Posts: 1296 | From: the planet | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mena7: Typezeist :We need to go back to the classical African model. The same way the Europeans turned to Greece and Roman to design a coherent model of governance for themselves, we need to turn to Kush, Kemet, Wagadu, Kukiya etc and study how they did things. Then come up with a unified means by which to move the continent forward. Those blacks in the west smart enough and well intentioned enough to help should. Those who want to stay in the west, so they can keep begging their former masters for recognitions and approval should do so and remove Africa from their minds. Those half caste on the continent need to either get on board or they need to be sent packing.
Mena: I agree with Typezeist we need to go back to the Ancient African Empires and Kingdoms form of government. The Papacy still use the African system were a council of cardinals elect the Pope. In Africa it was a council of elders or nobles who elected the King. China is probably govern by a council of bureaucrats that is similar to the bureaucrats of the ancient Emperors. The Chinese bureaucrats eliminated the monarch position and replaced it by an elected or appointed bureaucrat President and Prime minister. Western Democratic system are more like a front for a plutocracy and corporatocracy system. LOL some black people in the West are so brainwash by TV propaganda that they are wasting their time and energy looking for white people recognitions and approval.
I agree with you, with one modification. It isn't only Western Blacks who are brainwashed. There are tons of Ns (yeah, I mean it in that way) on the continent who are just as absolutely ignorant and self-loathing as the ones in the West. The Black in the west suffered slavery and mis-education, and the one on the continent suffered colonization and mis-education. This is why Africans on the continent and in the diaspora are so disunited. Because of this mis-education.
Give you an example. I met a Jewish man once, who was of Polish stock. He told me Jews hate each other and by this he was talking of the two branches ie Ashkenazim and Sephardic. He said the ONLY thing which united them was the Holocaust and the fact they never wanted that to happen again. Remember, not all Jews were rounded up and killed, it was only the European ones. The ones in Africa and the Middle East had no such issues. It was the fact that the Jews recognized the fact that it could easily happen to any of them, that made them stop and say hey, maybe we need to come together. Contrast that with dumb @ss Africans globally, who do not identify with each other. Ok, so Africans on the continent were not enslaved as such. However slavery resulted in a decrees in population, a decrease in brilliant minds who could have helped to keep Africa relevant and up to speed with technology. Minds that could have prevented colonization in the first place. For example, we know there were men who were trained as doctors, who ended up in the New World as slaves. One of them was a Muslim man in South Carolina, if I remember right. How many other such scholarly types found their way into this slave trade? This is called “brain drain” from an economics stand point. These same people could have easily been the first Einsteins or other such thinkers, had they been in an environment to nurture their abilities. So that slave trade hurt Africans at home and abroad. But because of mis-education, silly Africans on the continent think of the diaspora in terms of "that's their problem" haha, yeah right. There is a lot of education, healing, research and reconciliation that is needed. Africans (on the continent and globally) need to come together, if that means using slave trade as a rallying cry, a sorta (never again) thing, then so be it. But brilliant minds need to come together and help make the continent and our people strong again.
Posts: 1296 | From: the planet | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
To: TZ, You just run on and on and amazingly you say little of significance. That's how those Lebanese in Sierra Leone and other parts of West Africa are. Dumb as nails but somehow they seem to think they know things.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic