What can you do with cobalt, phosphate and uranium in the middle ages? No one could extract any of that back then let alone use any of it.
South Africa is also quite rich in coal, which is one of the main reasons as to why the Industrial Revolution was able to be kickstarted in the UK.
Africa also has some of the most arable land in the world:
It holds 65 per cent of the world’s arable land and ten percent of the planet’s internal renewable fresh water source.
Africa is rich in natural resources ranging from arable land, water, oil, natural gas, minerals, forests and wildlife. The continent holds a huge proportion of the world’s natural resources, both renewables and non-renewables. Africa is home to some 30 percent of the world’s mineral reserves...
www.unep.org
Tons of arable land which is yet to be cultivated.
Quite a lot of Gold, which has been used since Ancient times for many purposes:
Africa is the third-largest gold producing continent in the world, and has gold mining activities in more than 21 of its countries. Ghana, one of the
world's leading countries in gold production, and the second-largest producer in Africa, produced approximately 90 metric tons of gold in 2023.
It is the sedimentary Precambrian rocks, particularly in
western Africa, that have proved the basis of Africa’s role as a major world producer of iron ore. The most significant deposits are in
Liberia in the Bomi Hills, Bong and Nimba ranges, and Mano valley; in the
extension into Guinea of the Nimba–Simandou ranges, where hematites have been located; in
Nigeria and
Mauritania, which have large deposits of low-grade ore; and in
Gabon, where extensive reserves are present in the northeast. In Southern Africa most iron ore reserves lie in
South Africa itself.
Africa - Metallic deposits: In North Africa reserves of iron ore are concentrated in the Atlas Mountains and in the western Sahara. Egypt, however, has medium-grade reserves, of which the most important are at Al-Baḥriyyah Oasis. The ore deposits in Morocco and Tunisia, which were once of...
www.britannica.com
In fact, Rhodesia was quite agriculturally rich:
Rhodesia was the world’s second largest exporter of flue-cured tobacco. This together with exports of maize, soya beans, cotton, sugar, coffee, tea, fruit, vegetables, flowers and beef made agriculture the major source of foreign currency. Agriculture contributed more to the gross domestic product than any other industry. It was the largest employer of labor, providing employment for about a third of the total labor force.”
Dr. Mick Gammon wrote the following in the magazine The Rhosarian (October 2009): “The first white hunters, traders and missionaries who in the 19th century
www.victoriafalls-guide.net
Another passage from that article:
Dr. Mick Gammon wrote the following in the magazine The Rhosarian (October 2009): “The first white hunters, traders and missionaries who in the 19th century came to the region which was to become Rhodesia and subsequently Zimbabwe, found a land devoid of infrastructure. The wheel was not yet in use. Early travellers recorded travelling often for days without seeing any human habitation. Commercial farming started in the 1890’s on what was for the most part virgin land. There were no roads or railways, there was no electricity or telephone, there were no fences, boreholes, pumps, windmills, dams, or irrigation schemes; there were no cattle dips, barns or other farm buildings.
Africa is quite resource rich, not just in what you mentioned but these various other resources that allowed Eurasia to develop.
Also, the Indians were able to domesticate the Elephant, yet Africa never was able.
Well it's always implied in everything you say with you being an SFcel and stuff.
So even on topics not related to anything along these lines it's implied? kek.
On a tangent here, I just dislike how this forum is so absolutist in it's methods of thinking: Many on here will accuse me of wanting to "defend muh normies & foids" completely disregarding the fact that things are much more nuanced than that, and I will now share some reasons as to why I come across as a "SFcel"
To discern my thoughts, as well as that of many others on this topic, the reason as to why some of us here come across like this is for a few reasons:
-Ethnics are much more NT-centric, and obviously, Whites by default are more "autistic" in terms of behavior, and we happen to be even bigger autists due to being diagnosed.
-It lowers the overall QOL: You may say, "well why do you care if you just rot?" Well firstly, many of us just can't LDAR/NEET & still have to work. Not to mention, it means that taxes, cost of living, etc will be altered, crime may increase, etc.
-Humans just naturally prefer seeing faces of their own race, and feel more trust around them: This is just biological nature, and in accordance with the blackpill, can't really be changed and/or altered.
-It has been shown that heterogeneity tends to breed lower-levels of trust, even within races internally
-It makes logical sense to want to be surrounded by those whom share the same values, history, genetics, ideals, etc. as you, which is why I support Authoritarianism & some form of Nationalism, since it will ingrain these more & lead to possibly better treatment from normshits.
On another tangent, and this isn't directed towards you ofc, but frankly I feel that Whitecels here are probably some of -if not- the most gaslight in the community: I also feel the general attitude towards "SFcels" are based upon platitudes, and the assumption we "think we're superior" when it's often due to the reasons I discerned above. Not to mention, I've seen way more bait by ethnics towards whites as opposed to the other way around: JBW has truth to it, myself & basically every other White on here agrees, but that doesn't mean it needs to be a major topic for discussion, especially when there's tons of other important factors to consider, such as the NTpill which I wish to discern upon.
I'm autistic, I'm below average height, and ofc sub-5, that is true: However, I at least what to find some kind of identity & have some kind of unity amongst others. I recognize racial realism, which I personally see as a correlation of the blackpill, and I notice race determines a lot in behavior. I also just generally believe, after observing the r-selective society in the Shitnited States, that Authoritarianism & some form of identity amongst a populace will lead to better social cohesion & thus, possibly better treatment.
I was treated poorly by the normies of my race: However, to them I am just ugly & autistic, but to most ethnics I am those & White, which as per my previous communications is understandable why I may find that as problematic. I also would assign part(not all ofc) of the blame on my treatment by normies, due to some reasons discerned in the academic findings I read below.
Plenty of other explanations could be posited for that. It's just as valid as an ITtard saying blackpill deboonked because he sees ugly people in relationships, it's reductive and strips it of context.
As I shared earlier in this thread/elsewhere, heterogeneity tends to breed distrust both amongst groups externally & internally:
In a recent study, Glaeser and colleague Alberto Alesina demonstrated that roughly half the difference in social welfare spending between the US and Europe—Europe spends far more—can be attributed to the greater ethnic diversity of the US population. Glaeser says lower national social welfare spending in the US is a “macro” version of the decreased civic engagement Putnam found in more diverse communities within the country.
Economists Matthew Kahn of UCLA and Dora Costa of MIT reviewed 15 recent studies in a 2003 paper, all of which linked diversity with lower levels of social capital. Greater ethnic diversity was linked, for example, to lower school funding, census response rates, and trust in others. Kahn and Costa's own research documented higher desertion rates in the Civil War among Union Army soldiers serving in companies whose soldiers varied more by age, occupation, and birthplace.
“People living in ethnically diverse settings appear to ‘hunker down’—that is, to pull in like a turtle,” Putnam writes.
In documenting that hunkering down, Putnam challenged the two dominant schools of thought on ethnic and racial diversity, the “contact” theory and the “conflict” theory. Under the contact theory, more time spent with those of other backgrounds leads to greater understanding and harmony between groups. Under the conflict theory, that proximity produces tension and discord.
Putnam's findings reject both theories. In more diverse communities, he says, there were neither great bonds formed across group lines nor heightened ethnic tensions, but a general civic malaise. And in perhaps the most surprising result of all, levels of trust were not only lower between groups in more diverse settings, but even among members of the same group.
Jonas, Michael. 2007. “The Downside of Diversity”.
wcfia.harvard.edu
Here's some crime stats from NY btw:
If you are making a claim here as for possible external factors, what do you suggest they are?
www.annualreviews.org
