Why didnt european powers just exterminate the population entirely and replace it?
>>18651299because they wanted the cheap labor, dumbass
Colonialism shiftes towards extractivism in the XIX century, so the european powers were more interested in using native workforce to extract resources to use for their industry.Also, a main excuse for colonialism of the XIX century was that it was humanistic mission, since it would bring civilization and prosperity to the "savages".
>>18651299Religion, allegedly
>>18651302Let's be honest here, that cheap labor was not worth that much
>>186512991. Intentionally exterminating large populations (as in, a million people or more) is a costly, expensive, and outside of totalitarian regimes highly politically fraught. Incidental replacement via social darwinism was seen as one thing, but proposals to outright exterminate Native Americans drew strong pushback even during the Indian Wars, and even the Nazis felt the need to hide the Holocaust. 2. It only makes sense to kill a large population if you have a way of replacing it. For that, you need a large body of would-be colonists that you can convince or coerce to move to the victims' land.3. Diplomatic and legal repercussions can be heavy. If there is ever a change in power, you can expect inquiries or in some cases even tribunals. And considering how much effort you are spending on genocide vs properly governing...
>>18651299Who's gonna grow all the cotton and tea and opium?
>>18651323Indians and chinese
>European imperialism:(>European imperialism, Rome:D
>>18651329Its just ethnic chuds seething the tribe they identify with got buckbroken by a tribe they dont identify with.
At its core, the story of White people is that they are the only race who were cursed with empathyArabs castrated their slavesAfricans ATE their slavesWhite people felt bad for their slaves, and freed them, then they freed all the other slaves across the worldNow White people are dying, because they're too nice
>>18651299European colonialism was tested like a business first and foremost. Starting wars to kill off an entire tribe or occupy an area costs money. Every investment had to have an immediate payoff or prospect of paying off within an expected number of years. Nobody was funding a military expedition because "someday centuries from now this barren shit hole will become relevant to global markets and geopolitics that haven't materialized yet".
>>18651360>the only race who were cursed with empathyThe funniest part is not that my people are cursed with empathy, the funniest part is we liked someone else's religion so much (the christian jewish sect) that at some point their moral framework started evolve with us to the point of extreme feelings of guilt.
>>18651335Everyone does this>not us leftshitsLeftshits do this with their particular flavor of leftoidism>>18651360White people aren’t the only race with empathy, but they have too much empathy. No one else would let millions of shitholers into their country willingly.
>>18651329It's okay when the Europeans do it to each other
>>18651302>cheap laborYou mean FREE labor
>>18651328We already got them doing all that, we need more
>>18651393They unironically conquered, enslaved and devouring resources of people in middle east and africa too.
>>18651393Ahn, romans completely exterminated the punic population and replaced them with Italian settlers
>>186512991: Running an empire is already pretty expensive, for all the modern talk of 'StOlEn WeAlTh' that wasn't what was happening2: Genocides are even more expensive3: As Christian nations, even if the rulers were sociopathic assholes, the general population would not have reacted well to the genocides4: Given the above, and other factors, any European politicians suggesting a full depopulation of the conquered areas would have been laughed out of politics and society
>>18651320what are you talking about niggergpt? None of that makes sense
>>18651314It was lol. Your profit margins were massive because the wage floor was borderline zero. Either they work for you or they starve because you took their lands and cockblocked their ability ro participate in the economy on a level footing. Southern Afrucan agriculture was super outdated in the 1900s explicitly because they had Africans who did it for literal pennies with no way out in terms of finding other jobs or trying to farm with the massiev amount of disadvantages they faced.
>>18651492>for all the modern talk of 'StOlEn WeAlTh' that wasn't what was happeningIt was. Most people can't grasp how wealth is generated and the masaive amount of utilities many colonies had. Also busted as fuck margins since you basically had modern Southern US agricultural industry on crack with even worse rights than what Central American illegals.>the general population would not have reacted well to the genocidesLmao they are extremely easy to convince and many pro genicide movements alongside population removal or capture were backed by "good Christians" and the church. Many Christian bodies and roga directly backed imperialism.>any European politicians suggesting a full depopulation of the conquered areas would have been laughed out of politics and societyWW2. Also ethnic cleansing rhetoric was constantly dogwhistled and pushed for ages
>>18651433>>18651437Oh yeah I forgot about that....... Let's call them honorary Europeans
>>18651674>itsallsotiresome.jpgThat narrative has been debunked my guy. Africans can't prosper because they're Africans, not because of muh colonialism
>>18651395technically by the time of the scramble for Africa it was cheap since they larped as totally not having slavery so you technically had to pay them something, but said pay was so low with so many conditions that it might as well be free
>>18651299Because whites were woke back then too.
>>18651414More indians in africa.Ever heard of uganda?
>>18651299They literally relied on local African colonial troops to help complete their conquests.Africans had immunity to yellow fever and malaria with sickle cell disease.White soldiers dropped dead en masse in the malaria and yellow river infested jungles They would die even faster sending huge armies of whites with no viable logistics and food or medicine against the entire African population.It has nothing to do with being nice or humane, whites did it to Native Americans and Australian Aboriginals who died of smallpox and had no iron weapons.They just couldn't do it to malaria amd yellow fever ridden African against Africans armed with iron weapons and dense populations and immunity to European diseases.
>>18651874Britain also failed in its expedition to Haiti since yellow fever and malaria would kill them en masse while it didn't kill the Blacks.Haiti remained independent not out of charity or kindness but its population density and disease and climate.Germany trier to genocide Herero and Namaqua and Dutch genocided stone age Khoisan pastoralists and hunter gatherers.They just couldn't do it to iron weapons using Bantu farmers.
>>18651360Arabs didn't castrate Black slaves used in the field work or used as slave soldiers retard.Only slaves (both white and black) working in harems were castrated.Blacks in Iraq are descendants of Zanj Black slave rebels who did heavy manual field labour.Morocco and Fatimid Egypt both had Black slave soldiers who were not castrated. They had families and children.
>>18651299Believe it or not, it's actually very hard to just kill everyone. Especially if they're tribal nomads who also live off the land.
>>18651360That's Christianism's fault. Romans had their people controlling North Africa but when they became Christian most of these Romans were killed and now N.Africa is Brown.
>>18651874>>18651876>>18651881shut up brownoid
>>18651312You blame everything on that. Including why you're so ugly.
>>18652070>shut up brownoidKek. NTA but I have to ask:Why are you so mad?
>>18651874>Africans had immunity to yellow fever and malaria with sickle cell disease.We don't dumbass
>>18652782>We don't dumbassWe do dumbass. Only malnourished and dysgenic africans don't have immunity to yellow fever.
>>18651302If they wanted cheap labor why didn’t they employ or enslave their own underclass?Why bother keeping Africans around who don’t even work lol?>>18651307What was being extracted?The Africans didn’t build those diamonds or place the gold in the mountains. That stuff is finders keepers and Europeans found it. Belongs to us.
>>18651299Anon, what you're talking about is a truly staggering effort. It would take hundreds of years of building a nation back up from scratch before it ever became a profit center. Look at how long it has taken for diaspora nations (Australia, Canada) to become profitable, and how profitable they are (Not that much), and also look at the failure rate. Many nations take the prosperity they're given by driving natives out of a place and use it to become sovereign, separate nations. (USA, Modern India, South Africa, Indonesia)You have to be able to expend trillions of dollars exterminating them, trillions more building new infrastructure and settling new people, and then 250+ years holding onto the country even though its far from home and carefully policing it for any sort of separatist movements. Even then, its still another country, just one that has the Queen on its money. As an endeavor, the payout rate is below average when compared to just having a wealth extraction colony taking advantage of the cheap labor.
>>18651299Because they were there to "civilize" them.
>>18651679Take your meds, schizo
>>18652896>why didn’t they employ or enslave their own underclassIt’s difficult and expensive to kill move and replace millions and Europeans of the lower classes still could demand better pay and treatment and have means to do so unlike natives really> What was being extracted? That stuff is finders keepers and Europeans found itThe Africans did find these things along with other rare metals and rare crops like rubber before the Europeans and Arabs took it even if the Africans didn’t extract and trade to the same extent
>>18651876>trier to genocideWdym "tried"? They did do that
>>18651679>Most people can't grasp how wealth is generated and the masaive amount of utilities many colonies hadAlso I might add that whatever development occurred in some colonies it was despite colonial rule not because of it. A.G. Hopkins perfectly demonstrated how Lagos became a trading hub because of local African investment not British
>>18652896>just use your own euro underclasscongrats, you just speedran your own communist revolution, have fun getting your former ruling class butcher, with the two outcomes being>commies take over and agitate the other powersor>other power bumrush in and are able to supress it but your make county their bitch so you are just ottomans 2.0
>>18651299The objective of colonising Africa was not to settle it on a large scale. The African population was to be utilised for labour and there was also the “civilising mission” where it was deemed important to Christianise and modernise the populace. Also foreign diseases is what wiped out most of the indigenous peoples of the Americas and Australia. Africa was already exposed to the old world diseases.
Why do you retards always think mass rape and genocide is some easy and commonplace thing in history? It isn’t
>>18653736its usually becaue they salivate at the idea of said mass rape and genoicde
>>18653736it was. Maybe not in todays form. Usually they would kill all men and enslave the women
>>18651299Without the help of disease doing the bulk of the work for them that would have been difficult. Plus what's the point in doing that? Just seems like it would be a lot of work for nothing.
>>18651299>they do it for free>hey lets spend 5% of gdp, drive up domestic labor costs by reducing supply, lose 2-5% of 18-24 aged men to malaria, to kill them in the hope of France II in 300 years while England and Spain just turn and burn colonies to produce what can be produced profitably and use those profits to found 20 more colonies while we get boxed inNot how the /biz/ works lil chuddy.
>>18651299That's mean
>>18651299What would they gain from that? Africa was virtually empty anyway.
>>18653736banned for holocaust denial
>>18651299>and replace itBecause nobody want to live in Africa.
>>18651299>just exterminate the population entirely and replace it?early on they just lived seperately but in the same areas, then as Euros expanded and grew a modern civilization they began to buy/barter then push out into more areas. In some areas the locals were used for labor. Euros brought modern technology and techniques to build and improve but the locals just want tribal warfare and primitive living.Its all so tiresome. Watch the documentary Empire of Dust, see the obsticles to working with locals to improve the road.
>>18655396The road and railways are used by foreign corporations like Barrick gold to loot their resources and guards hired by those companies frequently kill and rape locals.With the roads also come feminism, female education and reduced fertility rates.
