Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

254

Africa…

  • Doesn’t grow their own food
  • Is filled with people who are massively “self focused”
  • Is filled with people who are very, very lazy.
  • Is filled with people who are unintelligent
  • Is filled with people who only exist because the western world has been feeding them for almost a hundred years.

What would happen to the continent of Africa if the grain ships just stopped sending them food?

I think western society is about to fundamentally reorganize itself. When it does the grain ships to Africa might stop for a decade or more simply out of necessity.

When this happens we will likely see starvation in Africa far, far beyond anything we have EVER heard about in all the history of the known world.

Sub Saharan Africa has over 1 billion people. It’s a population bubble, fed by the interests of western society. In the natural world sub Saharan Africa has a population of maybe a few tens of millions at most.

If the worldwide shipping network breaks down (not entirely unlikely at this point) that population is RIPE for almost total destruction.

We might see a 95-99 percent population reduction in Africa over the next thirty years.

Why is no one talking about this?

Am I just misinterpreting some issues?

Africa… - Doesn’t grow their own food - Is filled with people who are massively “self focused” - Is filled with people who are very, very lazy. - Is filled with people who are unintelligent - Is filled with people who only exist because the western world has been feeding them for almost a hundred years. What would happen to the continent of Africa if the grain ships just stopped sending them food? I think western society is about to fundamentally reorganize itself. When it does the grain ships to Africa might stop for a decade or more simply out of necessity. When this happens we will likely see starvation in Africa far, far beyond anything we have EVER heard about in all the history of the known world. Sub Saharan Africa has over 1 billion people. It’s a population bubble, fed by the interests of western society. In the natural world sub Saharan Africa has a population of maybe a few tens of millions at most. If the worldwide shipping network breaks down (not entirely unlikely at this point) that population is RIPE for almost total destruction. We might see a 95-99 percent population reduction in Africa over the next thirty years. Why is no one talking about this? Am I just misinterpreting some issues?

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (24).
[–] • 0 pt

I think those numbers would be accurate for a white population.

But the black population in Africa is different. They don’t know how to work together. They don’t know how to sacrifice from self for the benefit of others.

They will cut down the orchards just to spite the other blacks that aren’t sharing the produce.

I think the grain ships are going to stop. And I think when they do it’s only a period of time until 90% off Africa died.

If your garden requires a special type of fertilizer to survive, and that fertilizer is cut off (wheat boats from overseas) then that garden will die and in its place only a garden grown from available fertilizer will grow in its place. Because of the behaviors of blacks and for their obsession on self and their propensity for anger and violence the only local fertilizer available to them to grow “dey culcha’” is the fertilizer of Hunting and gathering.

[–] • 0 pt

Well, I was just thinking that the current population of Africa is 1.3 billion. So if you're saying 95-99% decline like in the OP (not trying to split hairs, just that's what I was replying to), you're saying it'll go down to 13-65 million. Wikipedia says that even in 0 AD they had 16.5 million, and in 1700 they had 61 million. So you're saying they'd go back 300-3000 years (in population I mean, not tech). I feel like at this point at worst they'd go back to where they were just before colonization, maybe a bit further because technology has advanced since then (even in Africa).

A 90% decline would be 130 million, which is close to the 1913 number. That's I believe right at the tail end of the colonization period.

Now I'm sure if Western aid were to disappear, the carrying capacity would go back in time quite a bit. But nowadays some countries in Africa have accumulated some GDP, so I think modern Africa with no aid would still have a little bit more purchasing power than 1913 Africa with colonialism. Also, the technology that modern Africa could import is greatly superior to what 1913 Africa had access too.

So I think they would be able to import some agri stuff for example. It would be very little because they are poor, and it wouldn't be utilized effectively, because, well it's Africa lol. But it should still put them in a slightly better position than 100 years ago.

If you look at South Africa for example, they're doing much worse than under Apartheid, but also they are still better now than pre-Apartheid. Of course SA probably still receives aid, so you have to look at the quality of administration and infrastructure rather than population. That's declined a lot, but not to pre-colonial level.

My estimate of 30% would send them to 800 million which is 1998 numbers. Thinking about it, if aid suddenly stopped I think it's more realistic that they would go back to 1960-1980 levels, so 300-500 million, so 60-75% decline. Also holy shit this continent went from 400 million to 1.3 billion in 50 years wtf, not even India grew that fast

But I think this is all academic anyway because even if the West suddenly cut them off, others like China would immediately swoop in and provide support on a level somewhere between the colonial age and current times.

That all said though, it would be great if they stopped aid (food, money, medicine) because it's basically wasting a huge amount of money to create many problems, like demographics and environmental. It's worse than throwing money in the pit, it's like telling filling a pit with money, and then telling the excavator guy he can have it all, and if he digs the pit bigger he'll get even more next time.

[–] • 0 pt

I don’t think China would lift a finger to feed a starving Africa. They would more likely eagerly await the depopulation so they could claim the land for themselves.

The Africans will call it an Afrocaust for 100 years to come.

Their problem is fundamentally in their mental development. They have still never learned to sacrifice the present desire for a bigger future benefit. That mental state, on the scale of a Continental famine, will be like throwing water balloons filled with gas at a campfire. Very very very few Africans will be thinking “how can we work together to survive this?” Because that thought has not yet populated in their cultural subconscious. Instead there will be a land of over a billion people with almost everyone looking to take from another to feed themselves.