I don't understand how things could have possibly gone this wrong when the colonial powers looked at a map of Africa, took out a ruler, and divided up the continent among themselves with the same amount of finesse as when you pin the tail on the donkey.
I mean it's such a good idea on paper! Makes the whole continent look so nice and neat, don't you think? Who were they to know that people actually lived there? And that those nice borders they drew up cut entire civilizations in half, and forced long-time enemies to suddenly share a country?
Nobody knew colonialism could be so complicated
Hello. This is another W&A comic, drawn by yours truly and written by /u/christopherkj. Round of applause for the Director!
And for the Producer himself! This is my first collaboration and it turned out better than I could have ever expected! Seeing your idea brought to life by another's pen (or rather mouse) is really interesting.
Oh and just in case, context: South Sudan, the world’s youngest country, is constantly in civil war. Before their independence, the Sudanese and South Sudanese fought each other over their differences. Ironically enough, after South Sudan got their independence they’re still in civil war, this time between themselves.
No worries, European emperors are descendants of chosen by God, they clearly know what they’re doing.
I thought the common understanding is that was a feature not a bug. The coolies can't rise up against their rightful lords and masters if they're too busy fighting each other.
You’re thinking of Japan mate. European monarchs are chosen by god, and that’s why you should shut up and do what they say.
They grow up so fast, wipes tear.
Sudan actually is the one area where Europeans didn't cause the issue. The Ottomans and Egyptians did actually. The British Empire had almost no control over Sudan, Especially lower Sudan for almost all of its time in control. Sudan actually successfully revolted from the Egyptians and British for about 20 years and then again during WW1. The whole area of Southern Sudan has been almost completely uncontrolled and in some form of revolt for 200 years. The British definitely made the issue worse by more heavily investing and controlling the Islamic North and industrializing it, furthering the division, but the division was always there and this was actually a continuation of the Egyptian policy. So yea they continued to make it worse, but they didn't cause the issue.
Simplified version? Two people of different ethnic groups are fighting because their leaders had an dispuited election. After the looser claimed the election was fraudulent, he made it an ethnic thing and the two largest groups started attacking each other. Then after that, the other groups and local leaders who were fighting as regional warlords got bribed and pardoned by both sides in exchange for joining their side, thus both sides are actually incentivizomg furthermor revolt in order for the revolters to get more bribes. Neither side can afford not to keep doing this as the other side won't stop and they will loose then and because of the attrocities they committed neither side particularly wants to face the others judgement. Meanwhile both sodes are fighting Sudan still over dispuited oil producing regions and both harbor rebels from the others nation so they periodically raid each other too. The Sudanese-South Sudanese conflict is mostly ethnic and religious (black Christian south vs Islamic Arab north) and economic exploitation of the south. Meanwhile Eritrea, Uganda, Sudan and Etheopian are pumping funds in to various rebel groups to gain influence over each other in a proxy war. Meanwhile on the periphery, China wanted South Sudan as it's African Jewel and pumped billions in in development aid and infrastructure... Right before the current civil war as they rushed in immediately.... And saw their entire investment destroyed in a day and their strategy explode.
Just, you know, genocides and concentration camps and good stuff like that.
colonialism was fine
They blow up so fast, too.
Thanks for the context!
This isn't a good guy bad guy thing though. It might've started that way when the Egyptians first invaded 200 years ago, but since then it devolved into an endless cycle of violence. Yea most of the attrocities during the civil war we're by the North Sudanese, but the South Sudanese-South rebels we're equally brutal, they simply lacked the equipment and manpower to sustain a genocidal campaign. This is the longest running conflict in history.
If you are really interested it's because origionally imperialism was justified as spreading Christianity and then it was discovered that holy shit not white people could be Christians so we can't enslave them. The Spanish particularly ran into this problem (so did the Muslim nations actually). Then the justification turned to skin color then after WW1 to those non western (meaning white, Christian and your particular brand of Christian depending on where you are, in reference to the rise of Russia and eastern Europe or Italian Unification) especially after the rise of Japan (seriously if you look under most nation's immigration laws exemptions were made for the Japanese). Stereotypes grew to justify policies, not the other way around.
For example while aftica is about 50/50 Christian muslim, most black people are Christian. The Muslims were largly stopped by the Sahara except at the coasts, but Christianity is both older and had the support of most of the imperial powers (except the Omanis, Ottomans and Egyptians). Most Muslims are actually south east Asian or Indian. The West coast of Africa, Islam penetrated due to Mali and the Massana Jihads, and on the east it spread to Zanzibar and Mozanbique die to Omani colonization of East Africa.
Israel ran into a similar racism problem after they found out that there were 150,000 black Jews in Etheopia called the Beta Israelis that equalli didn't know about the existence of other Jews.
South Sudan is Best Sudan
Republic of Congo stole D.R. Congo's M.D., huh?
The cycle of Africa-life.
White Arabs murdering Black Christians
There are no words.
Exactly. While Sudan was part of Egypt it was always a distinct region with a distinct identity and culture with significant divides within its borders. Colonisation is the key reason for a lot of African/Middle-Eastern stuff but this is one of those few examples where it was more the background rather than the key player.
systematic genocide of entire islands for a nutmeg monopoly was fine
but it didn't really damage the current continent
I can only speak to the parts of the continent that I'm familiar with, but the genocide committed by Germany in Namibia has had huge lasting effects on the political and social climate of the country, because the relative populations of the major ethnic groups are totally different now.
Reason #372 why Turkey should’ve stayed the regional hegemony of North Africa and the Middle East
Maybe I should’ve just said “Huh” in my post instead of “No words.” I was just pointing out how contrarian the color-coding was to stereotypical images of both religions.
EDIT: NOT IN AN OFFENSIVE WAY. I swear, it’s getting easier and easier for me to end up acting unintentionally racist...
What are their differences exactly?
Wait, we can draw eyelashes now?
Goddamn. Fucking. Brilliant.
True, thanks for the correction.
Wow BB drew a comic
It's so great to see the little brother all grown up and civil warring.