Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Western Sahara

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 103 posts

Re: Western Sahara

#91

Post by owebmaster »

skrebbel wrote: post #22
eej71 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never quite understood the nature of this criticism. At best I'd describe it as deeply intellectualized tribalism. But I think I'm being a little too kind.

I (in good faith) don’t understand what you don’t understand. Western Sahara is basically a colony so if you’re opposed to colonialism it isn’t super weird to be opposed to making a movie in that colony, paying taxes etc to the colonizers and so on, no?

Why is western Sahara a colony and not California, Puerto Rico, North Ireland, French Guyana, the Falklands?

Re: Western Sahara

#93

Post by owebmaster »

mohamedkoubaa wrote: post #57
alephnerd wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I'm not Algerian and though I am of North African descent I am a US citizen that spent my whole life in the United States and I don't feel anything but embarrassment and contempt for the authoritarian country that my parents immigrated from. I don't know why you are bringing Europe into this.

So you don't have the legitimacy to call yourself north African in a discussion.

Re: Western Sahara

#94

Post by pvaldes »

Klonoar wrote: post #37
coshi_dz wrote: post #9

who submited this to hacker news doesnt seem like a fiting spot

This site has like 5 articles about Japan that hit the front page a day. If that shit is allowed then I don’t see why this wouldn’t be.

Yep. Is the sign of modern times. Some places are over-represented and other dismissed.

With five of the seven unicorns in Africa and almost one of each three African startups, Nigeria should be a fascinating country to discuss here, but almost never reaches the front page unless the word 'prince' is in the title.

Re: Western Sahara

#95

Post by tiagod »

TFNA wrote: post #26
tiagod wrote: post #6

A series of enormous sand walls separate the morocco-occupied region from the sahrawi controlled region. These are one of the largest minefields in the world. It's impressive to look at satellite images of this. Just a huge sand wall, with hundreds and hundreds of military outposts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moroccan_Western_Sahara_wall https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Western_sahara_walls_moro...

In spite of the craziness of the Berm, the funny thing is that the vast majority of foreign travelers passing through have never heard of it. It is out of sight of the Moroccan highway, and obviously something locals won't be talking about.

Yeah, I did a road trip through Morocco a few years ago (but not Western Sahara), and I only recently found out about this. It's incredible how many insane mega-projects exist around the world that are pretty much unknown to most people.

Re: Western Sahara

#96

Post by skrebbel »

owebmaster wrote: post #91
skrebbel wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I (in good faith) don’t understand what you don’t understand. Western Sahara is basically a colony so if you’re opposed to colonialism it isn’t super weird to be opposed to making a movie in that colony, paying taxes etc to the colonizers and so on, no?

Why is western Sahara a colony and not California, Puerto Rico, North Ireland, French Guyana, the Falklands?

Because resources are extracted for the profit of the colonizers and not the locals, who are being suppressed and purposefully supplanted. Seriously man, this is not really very controversial, Morocco isn’t really behaving all that nicely down there.

Tell me again how the locals are suppressed and resources stolen from on the Falklands? What are we even talking about, grass and sheep?

Re: Western Sahara

#97

Post by brazukadev »

skrebbel wrote: post #96
owebmaster wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is western Sahara a colony and not California, Puerto Rico, North Ireland, French Guyana, the Falklands?

Because resources are extracted for the profit of the colonizers and not the locals, who are being suppressed and purposefully supplanted. Seriously man, this is not really very controversial, Morocco isn’t really behaving all that nicely down there. Tell me again how the locals are suppressed and resources stolen from on the Falklands? What are we even talking about, grass and sheep?

what you described is that rich countries can have colonies because the colonized likes it but poor ones can't. I also forgot to mention Greenland.

Re: Western Sahara

#98

Post by brazukadev »

skrebbel wrote: post #96
owebmaster wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is western Sahara a colony and not California, Puerto Rico, North Ireland, French Guyana, the Falklands?

Because resources are extracted for the profit of the colonizers and not the locals, who are being suppressed and purposefully supplanted. Seriously man, this is not really very controversial, Morocco isn’t really behaving all that nicely down there. Tell me again how the locals are suppressed and resources stolen from on the Falklands? What are we even talking about, grass and sheep?

what you described is that rich countries can have colonies because the colonized likes it but poor ones can't. I also forgot to mention Greenland in Europe (sic).

Re: Western Sahara

#99

Post by twister2920 »

owebmaster wrote: post #91
skrebbel wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I (in good faith) don’t understand what you don’t understand. Western Sahara is basically a colony so if you’re opposed to colonialism it isn’t super weird to be opposed to making a movie in that colony, paying taxes etc to the colonizers and so on, no?

Why is western Sahara a colony and not California, Puerto Rico, North Ireland, French Guyana, the Falklands?

All of those regions are colonies or former colonies. The main difference is that Western Sahara is being actively colonized right now whereas all of those regions were colonized 100+ years ago. Falklands were uninhabited before European settlement btw

Re: Western Sahara

#100

Post by twister2920 »

timinou wrote: post #77
mohamedkoubaa wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a North African, your inability to respect the right to self determination of a an aggreived minority population has nothing to do with the "economic integration of North Africa".

If you can find the empathy to do so, please reread my post realising that the people under a government are not the government itself. Morocco ≠ Moroccans. The reality is we're all subjugated. Moroccans, Sahrawis, or Americans. And we're all minorities in Morocco: Sahrawis, Riffis, Chlouh, Doukkali, Chamá-lo, Fassi, Meknessi, Soussi, and I can keep going. The issues people are saying about the Moroccan government's…

nice motte and bailey defense
Post reply on HN