| Tango01 | 14 Feb 2015 10:36 p.m. PST |
Interesting article and map here… PDF link
Amicalement
Armand |
| Glengarry5 | 14 Feb 2015 11:34 p.m. PST |
|
| Green Tiger | 15 Feb 2015 3:08 a.m. PST |
Money! Vast mineral resources… |
 ochoin  | 15 Feb 2015 5:13 a.m. PST |
Nationalism: my empire's bigger than yours. |
 20thmaine | 15 Feb 2015 6:22 a.m. PST |
To recapture the primary developments that account for Europe's increased involvement in Africa, we review the role of Christianity, medicinal and technological advances, and the lure of capitalist gains. The first 3 are by-products and enablers, the last is the reason. No-one sent troops with modern technology to suppress the natives who happened to live on top of a gold or diamond mine in order to bring then christianity – that was a by-product. And the technology and medicinal advances were the enablers – when you have the Gatling and they have spears a land grab is feasible; when you have improved odds of not dying from unfamiliar diseases then the wealth was worth the gamble. International Prestige is another by-product – because really you're holding the land (and the workforce) around the gold, not because you want the land. |
| RavenscraftCybernetics | 15 Feb 2015 7:33 a.m. PST |
|
| olicana | 15 Feb 2015 11:11 a.m. PST |
Mussolini did it because it was the only place left
and the bits he got were rubbish! |
| GarrisonMiniatures | 15 Feb 2015 11:42 a.m. PST |
Because the US had the Wild West and didn't need Africa. |
| Glengarry5 | 15 Feb 2015 1:12 p.m. PST |
GM
After the US settled the Wild West they kept busy moving further West into colonies in Asia and South to control Central and South America. The East they left to Europeans and the North, Canada, was assumed to eventually, inevitably become part of the United States. |
| Jcfrog | 15 Feb 2015 1:31 p.m. PST |
It really came only when breech loaders and repeaters made it reasonably cheap.
in France for ex, it was not popular, costing way more than it ever brought back to the country as a whole. That said everywhere, astute individuals and companies did make a lot of money from colonisation and influenced states or dragged them into it. + missionaries
+fight against slavery
+coaling stations around Africa |
| cosmicbank | 15 Feb 2015 7:19 p.m. PST |
I think the "It never paid off" thing is hindsight also its about having something and some people to control. For the British it was very profitable for the upper class and a place to send the lower class. For the King of Belgium it was his own little slice of heaven. Work people to death for profit. |
| cosmicbank | 15 Feb 2015 7:20 p.m. PST |
Also fight against slavery is being very kind when your working the natives to death. |
Puster  | 15 Feb 2015 11:12 p.m. PST |
Imho the main reason was nationalistic pride and competition. The whole story is more complex, but "money" is imho overestimated, as economic exploitation could be made largely without direct control. The idea to stop piracy and slavery certainly played their part, especially to rouse up public support for the involved costs. Later on, competition between the various European states certainly plays the main part. |
makes models of models of models...
