Why do Berbers/Maghrebis think they are better than Sub-Saharan Africans?
Many people wonder why Black Africa hasn't accomplished much in history when so called "White Africa" up North didn't do a whole lot either.
Egyptians are not Berbers. They are different Afro-Asiatic speakers. Berbers traded and interacted with Egyptians but they are different people.
Carthaginians weren't Berbers either. Carthaginians were Semitic Phonecians from the Middle East.
The only notable Berber kingdom from the past was Numidia. For most of history, all the Berbers have accomplished is getting conquered by outsiders. First the Egyptians invaded them. Then the Carthaginians did it. Then the Romans did it. Then the Arabs did it. Then the Turks did it. And finally European empires did it.
The Maghreb is like Poland, except at least Poland allied with Lithuania and had an impressive conference. The only notable thing Berbers did was start the Barbary Slave Trade where they enslaved, killed, and ravaged millions of White Europeans and Americans.
Even when it comes to modern day geopolitics, there are several Sub-Saharan African countries richer than your average North African state like Botswana, Seychelles, Equatorial Guinea, Mauritius,, etc.
When it comes to history, both the Malians and Ethiopians have accomplished far more than any North African civilization (excluding Egypt of course) has ever done.
So why do Amazighs think they are some part of Caucasoid master race when the only thing they have over other Africans is a higher chance of a sunburn?
- Anonymous6 months agoFavourite answer
Everyone, tribe, city, state, country, should believe that "they" are the best.
Otherwise should be considered sedition.