3 ms·

Not really a hypothesis that the British lumped unrelated and rival ethnicities in Africa together for a magnitude of reasons. Most of these were geopolitical

Not really a hypothesis that the British lumped unrelated and rival ethnicities in Africa together for a magnitude of reasons. Most of these were geopolitical to the interests of the metropole and almost none of these border decisions were (initially at least) designed to accurately represent cultural and ethnic identities the way America was colonized for example or the way Europe was shaped by feudalism and war. That’s the “they weren’t being actively malicious end” with the nation this thread is discussing having been the go to example of this being done. Pakistan only exists to be a thorn in Indias side

jcranmer 4y ago
> none of these border decisions were (initially at least) designed to accurately represent cultural and ethnic identities the way America was colonized for example I'm not sure what you're referring to here. American borders were laid out without any consideration for indigenous peoples (the general policy of colonial and post-colonial states towards such peoples being "exterminate them"), and colonial and post-colonial states fought lots of wars over transferring land between them for reasons that boil down to simply "I want more land."