3 ms·
Sudan was under British rule and Cyprus was under British rule at the same time. Outcome is vastly different. The Brits brought civilisation and made Cyprus wha
by anovikov 6mo ago
Sudan was under British rule and Cyprus was under British rule at the same time. Outcome is vastly different. The Brits brought civilisation and made Cyprus what it is, enabling its current prosperity (only difference between Cyprus and Greece is that Cyprus was a British colony and Greece wasn't). Somehow it didn't happen in Sudan.
And no it's not because they handled locals differently. They didn't care about locals. Colonialism is about exploiting territory, not population - locals, for colonialists, just "happen to be there" and are usually an obstacle or annoyance rather than a resource to exploit.
Maybe it's because locals were different.
- nslsm 6mo agohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORBBap-m0tY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORBBap-m0tY
- tovej 6mo agoCyprus is an island. That changes a lot of the dynamics. Also Cyprus has the support of its big brother Greece, which the Greek majority Cypriots wanted to unite with. Sudan had no such partner, because the Egyptian rulers aligned themselves with the British. I hope you can see that Greece is the key differentiating factor here. Any other argument is disingenuous. Not to mention the racist attitudes of the British empire, that saw Greek Cypriots as a "civilized" nation compared to Sudan.
- anovikov 6mo ago"Support" of Greece - that was withdrawn when it was critically needed - resulted in the biggest disaster of our history, 1974 invasion. Greece only brought instability here and it was a much poorer and much more chaotic place to begin with, it couldn't do better even if it wished.
- tovej 6mo agoI'm not saying the Greece-Cyprus relationship is totally good in every way, but compare it to Egypt-Sudan. I hope you can see how the differences in geopolitics advantage Cyprus when compared to Sudan.