Why Africans Never Invaded The World

Patreon:

[Omaroy]

In my opinion, generally speaking, when a society’s basic need are met, they tend not be militaristic. Africa has an abundance of resources to provide food, shelter, etc. for all. Also it’s a comfortable place to live where there is sunshine and natural beauty all around. The same can said for the Americas. In contrast, many parts of Europe and Asia are inhospitable and lack most of the desirable resources found in warmer and more lush parts of the world. I believe the environment and natural resources play the biggest part in whether or not a society decides to become militaristic

[grapeshot]

The African continent had a lot of resources so there was no need to try to go conquer somebody else's lands.

[nbokomwana]

Because we were comfortable, no need to enslave or conquers other people countries.

[cowabungahgeoff]

Definitely interested in a further video. Thank you Hometeam!

[tavishlopez]

I think this is a good start. I wonder if it would help of thinking about specific kingdoms rather than large central regions. On the Asian continent, there have been many kingdoms but only one or two has tried to conquer the world. It’s also important to remember that most empires that did try to conquer the world did probably not start that way but it was an idea that slowly took form for whatever reason.

I would recommend playing around with the following:
1. Identify who did try to conquer the world
2. Try to understand their why
3. Identify which African empires has the ability to conquer the world eventually
4. Compare those African empires to the world conquering empires

[LyaPouleyy]

Because they didn't need to! There was nothing outside Africa that they wished they could have!

[misterpalmer]

Yo! This topic has been on my mind real tough lately! I'm always trying to analyze history to understand how TF we got to where we are now.
I appreciate all of your scholarship Hometeam! I watch a ton of YouTube, and this is one of my absolute favorite channels. I'ma put my money where my mouth is real soon! Thank you! 🙏🏿

[RiVer-Parish]

We mind our own business, took care of our own didnt need other resources that are still currently being stolen throughout Africa until this very day.

[jacksonmowell]

Do more videos on why Africa never developed a conquer the world mentality.

[orodriguez]

Technically, the Egyptians, the Carthaginians and the Moors all went beyond the confines of Africa. And then there are Zanzibar and Zimbabwe.

[ballroomdru]

Please do a video about the diversity of ethnicities within our home continent.

[psyco]

i hate when people speak about Africans as if they were all the same, as if the African CONTINENT has only one tribe, one culture, one history, one way of looking at things...

[lizlocke]

Power conceived of as residing in the eldest, therefore most sagacious, is, of course, shared by many indigenous north American groups, also across large portions of a continent (and perhaps two). The concept of power there, though, and not uniquely, is that the creator's power, expressed mainly through culture-hero ancestors and the natural world, distributes power among all entities because turtle power and butterfly power and eagle power and river power and human power are all required for working together in harmony, which pleases the ancestors and keeps the world going. Such a model of distributed power is also inherently inimical to the ambition for world domination. Thanks for your insights and great writing, and for giving me a chance to revisit these hugely relevant ideas in an out-of-Africa context!

[darius]

Why invade anywhere when you got it all. Anyone who invaded other lands used up all there resources like morons. Really shows to intellect

[cjones]

Africa was and is still the main attraction of the universe. We have everything that everyone wants. ❤️🖤💚✊🏾👑

[JauPim]

I would argue that there were a lot of other factors, such as size, geography and technological development which all played a large part as well.

To start, Africa is three times the size of Europe. Even if you exclude the territory covered by the Sahara it is still much larger than Europe. An Empire controlling all of Africa below the Sahara would end up being about twice the size of the Roman Empire.

Next you have the Sahara itself. While not impassible it severely hampers travel between the North and South of Africa. This isolates Southern Africa from Northern Africa and Europe and makes the logistics of a medieval ground invasion going either way uneconomical when compared to just expanding into neighbours on the same side as you.
(Edit. Thinking about it, this isolation is likely also the reason for the development of a different mindset since there would have been less outside influence)

Eygpt and the Arabian peninsular have better access, as we can see with the Arabic slave trade having started much earlier compared to European enslavement of Africans. You even covered this yourself as several of the African nations that you mentioned as exceptions come from this region.

As for the West Coast, if you look at the ocean currents and winds, they form cycles. These cycles are not favourable to sail powered ships looking to traverse from South to North Africa, or vice versa. You also have to consider the logistics of transporting a medieval army via boats. Given the distance you would need to travel on the open sea it is not viable for launching invasions in this manner unless you have already exhausted the potential for expansion over land.
This is also the reason that the Trans-Atlantic slave trade relied on African rulers selling captured enemies rather than the slavers capturing slaves themselves. They couldn't bring enough people to actually threaten local African nations without it becoming unprofitable.

And lastly technological disparity. It was only when the technological disparity between Europe and other areas of the world allowed small forces of Europeans to take on larger local forces that colonisation became viable. Prior to this Europeans were largely limited to the areas around the Mediterranean. Since Africans never achieved a similar level of technological disparity they were never able to realistically project power beyond the continent even if a nation had desired to.
(Please note that America is an exception to this due diseases that European explorers unknowingly transported with them wiping out large portions of the native populations in both North and South America. Without this it is possible that American powers would have been able to resist colonisation)

[suntemple]

Thank you, you made some very good points in this video. Another thing I've noticed even when I was younger studying European history in school, they spent a lot of time having Wars with one another.

It appeared to me that the continent of Africa gave them a chance to focus not on one another, but on a different group of people, with a different color, a different faith a different language and on a different continent.

Thank you again keep up the good work, your studies are very will put together in details and is very inspirational.

[dianadyer]

All I know is we Afrikans from Alkebulan will have to fight to become truly liberated and free. Ase

[YakobiIsrael]

This is why:

“The significant difference between ourselves and other men, our ‘racially’ higher level of aggression, must be explained if we are to deal with it. We differ from other men in one other respect: of all major groups, only Caucasoids crossed the sapiens threshold in a glacial environment.” (Michael Bradley, The Iceman Inheritance, pg. 59)

[salahuddinmuhammad]

A land with all the resources that they need, without the thirst for conquering outside of their sphere, and being family-centric has no need for world domination