Congo rail track built by the french in 1920 using FORCED LABOUR These lines proved very profitable while exporting rubber and ivory straight out of Africa. All profits went to the French and Belgian governments. This was before independence.
You need to explain what you mean by "brutal" The Aztec colonizers ate a lot of their subjects, or used for ceremonial sacrifices. The Zulus had a scorched earth policy against the tribes of Southern Africa. The great colonizers were the Mongols - they killed about 12% of all humans on earth.
Colonies are Empires and Europeans were a darn sight more civilized than all the others you've listed.
The Aztecs were also cannibals, and it is speculated that human consumption was a needed protein supplement for people who had very few domesticated meat animals I don't know much about the Zulu, other than that they had a highly developed sense of military strategy. The Mongols engaged in what is still probably the greatest genocide in world history, killing some 50 million southern Chinese in their conquest of that area. OTOH they were otherwise near exemplars for an occupying force in the 13th century. They tolerated all religions and enforced the safety of travelers in a way that opened up China to European travelers that had not existed for nearly a thousand years, quite possibly triggering the Renaissance and our modern world itself in doing so.
it appears both of you, pooh and rob are unaware of what a colony actually is. A colony is a territory controlled by a foreign culture with zero ties to the host it intends to parasite off, often from lands far away as would be expected since its a foreign culture. The zulu didnt colonize since they were part of the Nguni culture and subsequently were an amalgamation of the surrounding nations/people. A colony is what americans created, what ozzies created, what french created etc etc, all white nations.
europeans were also cannibals. Medicinal Cannibalism. Europe boasts the oldest fossil evidence of cannibalism. In a 1999 Science article, French paleontologists reported that 100,000-year-old bones from six Neanderthal victims found in a French cave called Moula-Guercy had been broken by other Neanderthals in such a way as to extract marrow and brains: smithsonian
But this is not Europe as we know it. 100k years ago the people of what is known as Europe today were black,or Neanderthal. And these people became the modern people of all the world. And this image is just satyre.
Seems that you don't know? You're kidding yourself; a country or area under the full or partial political control of another country and occupied by settlers from that country. All colonisers claim that the territory they conquer is part of a larger empire that benefits all. Your definition rather reminds me of all those black African countries which looted the Congo in the past few decades. But you seem to think "It's not wrong if black people do it". Every culture in the world practiced it at some time or another. Shouting 'blame whitey' doesn't work any more. We were just better at it than everyone else.
And we stopped it before anyone else and then stopped it worldwide through our empires. You're welcome.
youre confusing Territorial Expansion (China, Zulu, K.mt, Ethiopia) with Colonialism (whites). hence why it was stated that colonialism is the practice of invading foreign nations that have ZERO relationship with the parasitical colonist because the metropole is on the other side of the globe.
is that why white nations still have cannibals? jeffrey dhamer ring a bell? want me to go on lol. in fact cannibalism is legal in parts of europe
The Zulus invaded southern Africa, reaching there about the same time as Europeans reached Africa. The Dutch and the English never treated the native South Africans the way Zulus did with their total extermination. Call it territorial expansion, colonialism or whatever - the Zulus just did what many other races did. Singling one race out is just racism. As an aside - much is made of the impact of the Spanish in Mexico. Most native Mexicans welcomed them as they were able to deal with the genocidal Aztecs. Same in the USA with the white taking on the confederacy of those Indian nations bent on exterminating other Indian peoples.
the zulus didnt invade southern africa, thats where they originated LMAO! shocking lack of historical knowledge. so again, only the white nations had colonies and in this case it was the english/dutch colonies at war with the native Nguni ppl. please read up on african history before proceeding further, thanks.
Interesting. So which aboriginal North Americans welcomed the white incoming Europeans with their black slaves who gave, for example, smallpox infested blankets to other aboriginal North Americans and created reservations for all North American aboriginal peoples? I am interested in the detail of this. Was it the Sioux, or the Lakota? Who? And please direct me to the evidence. The key word you used being 'most'.
So if white people do it it's colonialism but when black people do it it's 'territorial expansion'? Don't we all have a relationship? Aren't we all from Tanzania originally?
Yeah a serial killer? One of about 2 examples I can think off? Not like Idi Amin or Samual Doe etc? Cannibalism is legal in the sense it is so unknown we don't need a law against it.
This whole article is worth reading - just one snippet here http://plainshumanities.unl.edu/encyclopedia/doc/egp.war.023 (no reservations here --- it was kill or be killed, men, women and children.) Intertribal warfare was intense throughout the Great Plains during the 1700s and 1800s, and archeological data indicate that warfare was present prior to this time. Human skeletons from as early as the Woodland Period (250 B.C. to A.D. 900) show occasional marks of violence, but conflict intensified during and after the thirteenth century, by which time farmers were well established in the Plains. After 1250, villages were often destroyed by fire, and human skeletons regularly show marks of violence, scalping, and other mutilations. Warfare was most intense along he Missouri River in the present-day Dakotas, where ancestors of the Mandans, Hidatsas, and Arikaras were at war with each other, and towns inhabited by as many as 1,000 people were often fortified with ditch and palisade defenses. Excavations at the Crow Creek site, an ancestral Arikara town dated to 1325, revealed the bodies of 486 people–men, women, and children, essentially the town's entire population–in a mass grave. These individuals had been scalped and dismembered, and their bones showed clear evidence of severe malnutrition, suggesting that violence resulted from competition for food, probably due to local overpopulation and climatic deterioration. Violence among farmers continued from the 1500s through the late 1800s.
This business of the small-pox blankets has a racist smell to it. I know of only one case of deliberate biological genocide and that was the Mongols hurling their dead warriors into European walled cities. This caused the death of about one third of all Europeans. If you were to condemn the Mongols for killing nearly 12% of all humans on earth you could be called a "racist." Making such a claim about white people and you are a sensitive woke, cultural warrior who is telling the "truth" (though it's not the truth.) The small pox blanket allegation was used against the settlers in Australia. It was debunked. No-one even knew what caused small pox in the 1700's.
Thank you for that. I missed the bit that added most North American aboriginal people welcomed the white European incomers as peace bringers.
So did I and I have read it a few times! I also missed where you said it was deliberate to bring in small pox?!
