The comments lately have been getting a little more opposing, so I wanna reiterate what I said at 10:33 that these borders obviously wouldn't improve Africa and that I don't actually condone a change like this. It's only a creative exercise and a way to put African civilizations in the spotlight.
I believe in self-determination as a principle, but personally I tend to oppose seperatism. There are exceptions, but I usually don't agree with it. I think Africa should at least discuss a reconsideration of some of the borders. Again, it's a complicated issue but it might be able to fix some issues if approached carefully.
Your mediocre attempt had some flaws let me correct them All north Africa is morroco except Egypt reasoning Egypt is the most square country and the rest is Zimbabwe exept for Chad just for the meme I decided north Africa be eTEAnecithy and let the square do square things and for the rest chads are chads and Zimbabwe sounds good This is how you make borders you Dingus
I think that dividing the countries like this back during decolonization could have alleviated a lot of tension, but doing it nowadays would probably cause more tension than it would solve.
Especially how people have moved around inside the current borders of the nations such division would only leave people stranded form their people in other lands.
Yes. It's much easier to do something like this when you're dealing with African politicians in an environment hosted and supervised by mostly disinterested constitutional monarchies and advanced republics than attempting to do the same with sovereign entities that can literally break any law they want because they are the law.
As a Kenyan I believe, especially for my country, these borders would cause more trouble than good. I believe African states should pursue national identity instead of dividing
That's true, at this point it's better for these countries to just continue as they are now, that has worked out for countries like Botswana, Ghana and Kenya as well. It's just fun to speculate on what the borders would look like if they were ever accurately drawn :)
different cultural values may get in the way of that. look at israel and palestine, jews and muslims were basically middle eastern brothers back then but look at it now constant battle by the israeli and the palestinians over the land. Its simply not possible to force everyone to live in harmony.
@@jmgonzales7701 I understand your point but as the above reply states it can succeed, if you ask a Kenyan who they are they'll first say "I'm a kenyan" before they say their tribe
As a Somali, I am impressed by your knowledge and presentation of the new map. I am glad you managed to get the Oromo in there, thpugh they would prefer their state to be called "Oromiya" not "Adal" since Adal was an ethnically Somali kingdom.
It's funny since Oromo's pushing the Adalites to Harar city 500 years ago. The Oromo invasion was disastrous for Ethiopia too they took Shewa, Wellega, Arsi, Bale, Harargae etc. It started 500 years ago. They aren't native to Ethiopia, they're from Kenya.
As a South African, dividing the country like this would cause a 'civil' war... But it is really interesting to think what Africa would have looked like if this was how the map was drawn when countries first gained their independence. Very interesting, keep going!
@@kosinusify a lot of people groups that have since apartheid ended moved back to their traditional home steads and now some minority's like eff are trying to get us to drop the ideas of borders and go back to pre colonial Africa state, so to suddenly try and force border changes on such groups would only lead to conflict and clashes of culture and traditions, some clashes are already happening and then spend decades in court to try and solve them peacefully like with what happened to PE and how it got a name that even locals where unsure how to pronounce it correctly and had to call their extended family I'm Gauteng to get a good pronunciation of the new name, while most just went on calling it PE.
Yeah South Africa is trying but we have literally nothing in common with each other the British just drew lines and said live together we have 11 official languages like bro 😭 but we trying
@@johngifts8688 It sounds bad. We Poles are sometimes mad about borders. They were artificially created after WW2, drawn by Stalin. It was basically moved west to give more lands to USSR and take land from Germany. Millions of Poles were relocated to the previously German lands from modern Ukraine and Belarus. But in the end 96% of Polish citizens are ethnically Polish and we have no border issues with neighbours. Africa got it much worse. I wish you good fortune.
@@MyPrideFlag thanks bro but we will learn to live with each other it's just we at a point where we say to one another you not South African because you white or you brown or you too black 😕 but it will soon pass
Because it's hard as hell to understand a word he's saying. Idk if it's a bad lisp, the sound is sped up if it's just his cadence or what but it will unfortunately stay underated if that doesn't get fixed. Good video besides that one issue I hope he gets it fixed
@@oooshafiqooo I salivate at the thought of the eac making me only have to remember 1 country instead of 8 now and who knows how many by the time they try to actually initiate it.
It’s impossible to make “perfect borders”. Just drawing new lines in the sand to create nations that are effectively monocultures (as in same religion, geography, ethnicity, and so forth). Making monoculture nations won’t fix African borders. It may solve some problems but it’ll cause more as well.
and that can all be solved organically by the Africans just like it took the Europeans a couple of world wars to settle on there borders. Africans never got that chance since they keep getting global interference and borders where made for them against there will. it will only lead to further suffering in the long term instead of solving it now and resetting the borders because eventually its going to happen anyways might aswell get it out of the way early.
I think African Monoculture borders, or a combination of a few monocultures to make a true state, would work much better than the current systems. Remember, Africa in the past had it's own nations, kingdoms, and empires before colonization, meaning the European style of governance(or lack of understanding of the land they're governing) doesn't apply all that well at all to the geography and history of African nations. Let's take Ethiopia as an example of a successful African state(pre 20-21st century), with at least 30 different ethnicities and nationalities, and around 5 or 6 majorly populated ones out of the 30, it has existed for centuries without totally collapsing. Because of it's geography, being mainly mountainous, it is extremely hard to invade externally. However, as per it's civil war you can see it is susceptible to internal conflict(Note that the nation never seemed like it was going to cease to exist, much like the American Civil War). Being a nation that has been able to naturally form over the centuries and take on many forms has molded it's identity, much like European countries, and formed a loose cohesion between the peoples who have lived there making it a place where the tensions between the peoples aren't as extreme as most other African states. A great example of a modern(20-21st century) African state is Botswana. Not only have they banded together to petition the U.K in the past to be an independently governed territory(to avoid being apart of Rhodesia), which did succeed, after they gained their independence(When the U.K released most of their colonies and territories) they once again banded together to vote for what would be best for the people there. Botswana itself is a very desolate place, which is primarily why Britain allowed it to be independently governed, however because of their geography there wasn't much to fight over so a democracy was naturally the most stable choice to have. Of course precious gems being discovered in the territory did a lot to boost the nations economy, but because of it's history of banding together, they were able to keep the few mines they had safe from corruption(partially because they invited a private company to invest, harvest, and protect said resource too). The main troubles these African nations are facing are implementing modern forms of governance with their given borders, which don't conform to any of their historically defined cultures. This is why corruption and wars are so prevalent, these people are fighting to secure a healthy life for themselves and their followers rather than for the whole nation, because in simple terms, the nation they are apart of is not at all their people, it's an amalgamation of cultures mashed together for convenience. Breaking up many of these states to form smaller culture-based nations would help stabilize the region and also provide a want to form mutual pacts of aid, like the East African Federation is attempting to do. As you said, this wouldn't fix all of Africa's problems, new problems would for sure arise from this, but the severity of said problems would be a much lighter burden on the people governing and living in these regions. It would go a long way to being able to actually develop the region naturally rather than the self destructive exploitation(material or otherwise) it currently has.
As a student in Geography and Territory Management (which include geopolitics, infraestructure, social and physical geography...) most of the countries would be a pain in the ass to manage, basically Songhai and all those plastidoo shapes. Either too large to properly connect the peoples in them, or too large countries without many natural resources that can prop up nation development and improvement of their conditions. Based on the ideas of nuclear zones in Europe and Asia, modern socioeconomic structures (and then nation-states) appear from resource rich zones where industry and trade can develop from (Ile de France, Francfurt, London, Piamonte...) therefore, countries in Africa should have a decent territory and population, as well as either a lot of raw materials or access to navegable rivers or the sea. In this process, which seems that Africa never reached, small communities banded together, began to speak the same tongue and ended up integrating into bigger groups (the process repeating itself). You can see that in how medieval Europe, full of small, disconnected duchies, princely states... turned into kingdoms. More resources available, freedom of commerce (since you don't need to pay/negotiate to get goods from point A to point Z and through all the alphabet) and more manpower to generate revenue, defend said resources... In this way, many of the proposed states would fall short on either one of multiple of the points. This is why the current push in African states is not for separatism but inter-state political structures which share some common traits. Namely, the East African Federation. Mostly christian; same language group, even with all the differences; same administrative language, same (now) coin, geographical proximity and together they all have access to the sea, ending regional disputes between countries for water resources. This EU of Africa should be the way to work towards and to fix the problems caused by european colonial powers and african idiosyncrasy. In this way, we could see unions of south african states, the french speaking west, a bantu christian confederation and a saharan muslim one, fixing the problems with the former Spanish Sahara, french exploitation of their former colonies, the muslim part of Nigeria... with many raw resources like basic materials for electronics, oil and gas... allowing them to grow on the short term and to develop and create a common culture on the long run. Sorry for the wall of text but thought it would be a very informative and discussion-provoking mental exercise
It is possible to manage a navigable river across multiple sovereign jurisdictions. The Rhine and Danube rivers in Europe are great examples of this, as is the Mekong in Asia.
@@decuno1663 Idk, many universities in your country should give have a learning career similar to mine. Its always geography(mother branch)+something else, be it environmental studies, urban development... you name it
I think the religion part is good - but language families, once you leave the close related family it just gets odd. So grouping Songhai languages together works out, but spreading further doesn't make any sense as those languages are far apart. Similar to Indo-European languages in Europe: to group Latin, Germanic and Slavic together somehow makes sense but for a non-linguist the difference between English and say Albanian or Greek is as far as between English and Hungarian. Also Watersheds have been used IN Europe quite often to mark borders, in quite a few places in Africa that would make sense too, as people usually dwell arround Rivers and spread out from there.
Ethiopia's a bit of a different critter too. The modern country is essentially equivalent to the fabled precolonial Kingdom. This is also true of Swaziland, I would add, and I believe Lesotho is too.
Just a small correction. If Nigeria split up, it would probably be on Arewa (Hausa-Fulani)/Oduduwa (Yoruba)/Biafra (Igbo) lines. Those three regions have heavy beef with each other, to the point where ethnic separatist groups are already fighting for independence.
True but the Yoruba and Igbo could still somehow coexist the tension mostly happens with the Islamic north and the mostly Christian south but I could be wrong
As a half Ghanian, I endorse this map bc it means my people the Gurunsi people can live in the Volta nation united together with other Gurunsi in Burkina Faso instead of being forced to live amongst Akan people who dominate our government. People forget but these ethnic differences within countries lead to corruption and genocide and low trust and favoritism and nepotism.
Note that the African Union wanted to keep the borders this way because having borders based on ethnicity would result in never ending conflicts, and it would be better for national unity to create the nations of the country through their history of colonialism and the values they wrote in the constitution of independence
National unity? There’s no unity in Africa since the start, uniting a country based on meaningless values like colonialism is BS. You need actual unity between cultures and ethnicity, the African union is just full of westernized Africans who want to keep their country with old borders to continue being exploited.
It's half true, the issue is that they replaced one boogie man with another, the reason there's tons of corruption now isn't because of "muh ethnicity" now it's because of "muh colonialism". Many Africans who speak up on the Internet all admit that corruption is main issue and it's mostly domestic issue, can they solve it? Who knows. Sadly EU has it's own batch of corrupt nations that need reform so we can't exactly go out and help Africa, better we focus on our neighbours and let Africa decide their future for themselves 😅
Yep that south african map would actually be a disastrous, like Balkans 2.0 disastrous. The country's current situation is actually more workable than having smaller tribal states.
That was very interesting video and your style is awsome! It’s really good and respectabel that one of your first videos is about african geography which is a very difficult subject. Well done!
Africa's borders are not actually much of a problem. Canada, Switzerland, Belgium, Indonesia, the Philippines and others prove that a country can be multi-ethnic and diverse with relatively little civil strife and conflict. Ethnic tensions is *not* the main cause of Africa's problems. Exploitation by corrupt governments and Western businesses on the other hand - changing the lines on the map won't help that. It should be Africans who decide what the borders of Africa should look like.
Well Africans want it to change. The only reason those countries are that way is because of western influence. In Europe it’s the peace after WW2 that America has held up, in Indonesia and Philippines it’s colonialism making them have to unite together to be their own country.
Yeah good point now that I think about it given recent events haha. I mean, they've been able to keep it together for longer than Yugoslavia ever did so I guess they do still count. @@andriusgimbutas3723
Some of these countries have untennable borders. Adal, for example, has long potrusions snaking into the territories of larger neighbors. Or just, the entirety of Chaussa. I can't imagine they would survive very long with their current borders intact simply due to how vulnerable such regions would be and how easily neighbors could just take them by force for their land, resources, or people.
They would have allies though, the somalis in particular identify with the oromo as close neighbors and fellow muslims. It would not be alone in a war.
@@Zeyede_Seyum It should have been oromia for sure, the actual adalites were somalis. That being said the native point is irrelevant, after 500 years they are a part of the area.
Great Video, I should add that the Adal Empire was largely Somali with some Afar and Harari people but you've labelled the Oromo inhabited regions Adal. The Oromos themselves would probably prefer the name Oromio. Aside from that, Solid Video.
Ignoring the historical borders of pre colonial states was a total fail. Ethiopians out there must be blowing a gasket you completely disappeared one of the single most ancient civilizations on earth.
The countries I’m most skeptical of are the atlantic and red saharas. Countries with a huge amount of land but small populations make targets for neighbouring countries who want resources and/or trade routes, and these two are positively surrounded. In particular, the part where red sahara cuts across the nile wouldn’t last long at all.
it is not a very good idea to further divide countries in africa. the kingdom of egypt and the sudan was divided into the republic of egypt and the republic of sudan; and they both never saw a day as good as their unified golden age in the 1800's afterwards. Then sudan was further divided into north and south and they are suffering now even more than before. it is also redundant to want sexy curvy lines for borders when the area we speak of is a vast featureless desert. the non-linear borders of europe are that way because they are based on rivers and mountains. What do you do in an area with no distinctif natural borders? The borders of egypt for example were not drawn by colonial powers but are the results of multiple treaties; the northern eastern border with the levant was drawn ater the peace treaty between the egyptian and the ottoman empires in the 1800's following the first and second egyptian-ottoman wars. The western border was drawn via a treaty with the italians, and the southern border was an internal administrative line separating the two nations of the united kingdom, and was used when the two split the kingdom into two republics. politically, socially and economically; division or "sexy curvy lines" do absolutely no good. taking the example of egypt and sudan again; to this day they immigrate to the north for work opportunities (egypt houses 4-5 million sudanese refugees), and the egyptians are still lamenting the loss of the arable land in the south. if these two republics were still unified; the northern nation would face absolutely no food, water or oil shortage and the southern nation would face no shortage of funding, work or industrialization. What makes the united states basically play on ultra-easy mode since day one is that it is a union of states with co-benefits (with straight lines for days btw), not that every single race and micro culture has its own national borders. your model of countless micro-nations doesn't make anyone happy. There is a reason why african borders largely stayed the same since their conception; if it was beneficial for them to change, they would have been changed.
Interesting. I hadn't actually seen alternative maps of Africa (which are desperately needed after they were fucked by colonialism/ de-colonialism) before. Earned a sub.
So easy to talk - the Europeans did a pretty good job! This is very simply validated: There have been lots of wars in Africa in post-colonial times - how many of those have been over National Borders?
@@ludai602 Just Africans themselves - there are 50+ countries in Africa and they like their borders and all the benefits they accrue from being independent countries.
I'm against ethno states or theonationalism or whatever, and they do not prevent war, humans always find a reason to be devided and united, so that's not the problem of Africa. In addition, African people groups as different and diverse as they seem are mostly united by common problems that were solved in most of the rest of the world, that's why we see all those unification movements now a days, the east african initiative and the west african initiative are things we should support.
The West African initiative will never work it'll just be a Nigeria Square. Muslim-Christian conflicts, ethnic conflict, terrorism ,banditry etc will be be the norm if it happens.
I think we should let them figure it out rather than meddle any more than we already have. Regarding unification of African nations together, I personally think the East African Federation might have been a good idea before South Sudan and the DRC got involved, two extremely unstable and poor states that would tear the rest of the union apart.
Dividing people along ethnic lines isn’t a solution for a problem, since it assumes that racism/ethno-nationalism is the cause of issues, and the way to solve it is to give people ethno-states. We need to be advancing towards a more integrated unified world, not a more separated Balkanized one.
@@sergicb1533 That's true, but as societies advance, and wealth is gained, and less stratified, generally peoples insecurities lessen, and their need to hate and blame everything on another group tends to recede. We know how to fight the problem generally.
Love your comment. We are so concentrated on the nation-state idea as the one form that can allow culrural self determination that we forget that there are other reasonable models. Ethno-cultural identity can be set and served on an individual model in which I opt for my national/cultural identity and receive cultural and educational services (schooling, media, museums, organised high art, etc) not from the regional/national state but from an ethno-cultural body. You can have an Hungarian ministry of culture and Education able to offer and support schools and universities, tv, radio, museums, national ballet/Opera/theatre, folk dance groups, literary prizes, the printing of books and magazines in Hungarian etc wherever Hungarians exist. From Brazil to Romania. From the UK to Hungary itself. Funding can come from each state still, strictly following percentages of ethnic adherence in each territory (Brazil has 0.003% of population from an immigrant population? Then it gives 0.003% of the total culture budget to that country) and election of officials can be done directly by the adherents. For those who want to be a klingon or a unicorn? You can either have a limited number of choices (dangerous but perhaps necessary) or just go for it. But you cannot put your kids in an American or Hungarian school without paying as a non-adherent. But you can open a school teaching in Klingon or the Klingon national folk dances group...which does sound fun
Drawing borders based on Ethnic divisions is probably even more problematic since ethnic identities tend to mix and mingle through a population and blur with interracial marriages. Dividing countries by ethnicity leads to ethno-nationalism and perpetuates attitudes of racism because a given tribe can claim a territory as "our land" and insulate itself from outsiders, resulting in an echo chamber of tribal homogenization. A better way to draw borders is by city-states. An large urban center where people centrally gather and it's surrounding suburban tentacles where it's natural resources are harvested from should be the foundational building block of a state. Many of these city-states can then unite together for their common defense and form a common free trade zone and that basically amounts to a Federal system of government.
Yes, the nation state is ONE theory of how countries should be organized, and it only "worked" in Europe thanks to an enormous amount of ethnic cleansing through the world wars.
This was perfect. I don’t know why but after decolonisation us Somalis were denied our ethnic lands. You did a good job on East Africa but for west Africa some slight improvement could be needed
As a somalian, I can confirm we should be better than a civil war destroying us, and become a better, stronger and better so we can become one of the best
Abyssinia was an empire that conquered and assimilated multiple other ethnicities. It’s an indigenous form of imperialism that created the modern Ethiopian state of today.
My most serious concern about this plan is the number of geographically untenable countries. Real life countries rarely have serpentine shapes (in the absence of very strong natural barriers), because it is far too difficult to administer and trade along a single, snaking route, not to mention that they are completely indefensible in a conflict. No actual country could support or defend borders that Adal, Nyama, or Chaussa has on your map, and Songhai, Furarilluk, Mutapa, Malawi and Nilotica would likely panhandles quite quickly, either to local separatist movements or to their neighbours.
As a South African, I would say it is more appropriate to have Xhosas and Zulus (in _Ngunizwe_ ) have their own separate countries. Or perhaps, a federation with the two other Nguni speakers.
As a mandinka, i feel like some of the coast of Guinea would be part of manding too but Fulanis would have a bigger country too, they’re pretty much everywhere inland in west africa, great video tho
very underrated, I really like kraut and basically any channel that is a countryball explaining things. hope your channel progresses further, goodluck!
African borders suck right? Yet many African nations have declined changing their borders because 1: they want to work through diversity and help people groups coexist 2: they want to work with what they got and they fear that radically changing borders would spark even more wars and instability Which is fair enough the borders will work themselves out in time we just gotta be patient African nations want to prioritize a group identity, rather than encouraging even even more tribalism
"Kenya and almost every African country was birthed by the ending of empire. Our borders were not of our own drawing. They were drawn in the distant colonial metropoles of London, Paris and Lisbon, with no regard for the ancient nations that they cleaved apart. Today, across the border of every single African country, live our countrymen with whom we share deep historical, cultural and linguistic bonds. At independence, had we chosen to pursue states on the basis of ethnic, racial or religious homogeneity, we would still be waging bloody wars these many decades later. Instead, we agreed that we would settle for the borders that we inherited, but we would still pursue continental political, economic and legal integration. Rather than form nations that looked ever backward into history with a dangerous nostalgia, we chose to look forward to a greatness none of our many nations and peoples had ever known. We chose to follow the rules of the Organisation of African Unity and the United Nations charter, not because our borders satisfied us, but because we wanted something greater, forged in peace." - Martin Kimani, Kenyan UN Ambassador.
This is still one of my favorite videos to go back to. While dividing now wouldn't make much sense, it's fun to speculate what would've happened if colonization didn't screw over the entire continent. Honestly makes me curious about what it would be like in the case of other continents (South America, Oceania, North America...)...
Colonisation ended slavery in Africa, created widespread urbanisation and education, added about 30-40 years of life to the average sub-saharan African and brought much of Africa the span of 6,000 years of development. What was bad about that?
@@frankyyaggabot6222 Even if the borders were completely messed up for fun.. How did India manage and they can't with their measly population compared to India.
@@frankyyaggabot6222colonialism was literally slavery, Africa was already rich , you lied most Africa was at the same level of development as the rest of the world , colonialism brought death, exploitation, f@mine and created new conflict every where.
@@IgnasV India managed - Pakistan, Bangladesh? India took a long time to get to half-way normal because it went down the socialist route. Some African countries are into double figures for coups since Independence which probably speaks volumes about why they cannot manage stable democracies (not that they manage dictatorships either). There have however been very few border wars in Africa - that either speaks to a well thought out border regime or, that the countries have been too unstable internally to worry about external actors.
The Horn of Africa countries actually would work - I also really liked that you created a country in the eastern Sudan region for the Beja & Atlantic Sahara ( just makes so much sense) - Triple thumbs up to you good sir
No they wouldn't. First off the names don't even make sense, "Djibouti" for an Afar state and "Adal" (the name of a Somali sultanate) for an Oromo state is nonsensical. The Afar state would fail because of a lack of resources. The Oromo state includes so many different groups of Oromos that would fall into infighting and Greater Somalia historically failed because Somalis are divided over regionalism and clans. And the Ethiopian state is just a rump state that would collapse.
4:28 You forgot to include Afrikaans (derived from Dutch but use the orange, white, and blue colour scheme) as another official language in South Africa, which has 11 official languages instead of 10.
Obviously a radical change in africas borders would be very damaging now, but imagining an alternative history where these were the borders formed by Europe in a cleanup attempt before allowing national independence, as a strategy to minimise serious conflict that could and keep the majority of the continent broken into weak enough nations that Europe could maintain unbalanced trade and relationships with the nations in the lands they each once ruled. At the same time a HRE type situation could form to counter foreign abuse, a number of nations may turn their weaker neighbours into puppets or annex them entirely, who knows what the continent would look like if it had the last century to go from this alternative map into a fairly unimaginable adaptation
It seems like your channel is criminally underrated... I don't really agree with some of the borders, but the video itself was very well made and honestly I couldn't have done a better job
It's kind of impressive how he managed to make it worse lmao. There are a ton of geography experts and African explaining why it would be disastrous. I don't know how someone could look at Africa's borders and think the problem is that it wasn't split up enough or as if instead of having civil wars this wouldn't just cause more wars against other countries while still likely having civil wars.
Before watching this I feel like the last thing the continent needs is others from outside saying what is best for the continent. The problems with the borders and states as they are now are exactly caused by this.
So much for The Left's borderless world also You just argued against diversity. If such a small amount of cultural enrichment fails in Africa why would it work in places like Germany or the United States?
I'm big Supporter of Ethno-States for A-f-r-i-c-a Because I strongly believe there are Strong Fundamental Value Systems between Ethnic Nationalities in Africa, which is a necessary Component for Building a Successful country.
Great video! I found you through my recommended page, so hopefully you'll start seeing more traction soon. Best wishes for your channel, and your uni studies.
I love this video, you are clearly an underrated RU-vidr But considering that you have 3 videos and more than 400 subscribers you are not in bad shape, if for each video you get more than 100 subscribers you will become famous and you deserve it
This would reinforce the tribalism that is still a problem in Africa. Unity should remain. The europeans scrambled africa, and it's too late to make changes now. Europe also had many tribes that united and formed the individual countries that are there now, and every country has a sense of national identity, which still is not real in many countries of Africa. This excess of tribal identity over a national identity is what caused the genocide in Rwanda. Tribalism has to end
*As a Zimbabwean I'm surprised he ACTUALLY got the map showing our ethnic groups right.* *1) Ndebele, people often forget they are the second largest group, 20% of Zimbabwe is Ndebele* *2) There are Shona people in Mozambique especially around Beira and in Botswana. So many maps of the great Zimbabwe empire exclude it's most important territory which was the ocean region around Beira, the port of Sofala*
As an egyptian this map fucking sucks because for some dumb reason you decided to give alexandria half of the delta giza and a part of cairo to the libyans
Hey great job ! that was very fun to watch and I'm from the Sara tribe in the 4d area lol. There is already existing tensions between Muslims in the north and Christians in the south in Chad ( at a point where northerners call southerners ''kirdi'' which means slave in their language ) so cutting us from Chad just to put us in a country with a bigger Muslim majority after all that is just not gonna work lol. Ubangia or even Nigeria would be a far better choice in my opinion
Damn if you actually are that ethnicity then that's insane, didn't think I'd see that ever happening. On the map I made last year I had the christian Sara's as an independent country, but I didn't accept it here because it was double landlocked. I prioritized language families over religions when merging them with another country, but you've probably got better insight than me on this. I'll definitely make a change there, thank you!
I'd love to see border fixes or all other continents. It'd be so interesting to see how borders would look. (I just pray for an independent Northern England)
Europe really wouldn’t change that much, due to the world wars and ethnic cleansing a lot of Europe is pretty much accurate to the modern borders. Asia and Africa would really be a shit show, America wouldn’t change that much but just unite into a few countries.
In my opinion it would be good if Africa would countain 5 countries... A united Southern Africa Western Africa East African federation Cental Africa and at North The United Arabian league... with each country being an independent state inside the united "Empires"
Nation: Atlantic Sahara Flag: 15 Yellow and blue stripes symbolising the sea, and a red camel to symbolise the heat. Capital: Tombocotu History: Once created by some tribes in the zones of Hassaniya and the Tuareg peoples, then was colonized by the French at 1897 and then gained independance at 1899. Alliance: The Saharan Union The countries there are: Eygpt Libya Tunisia Algeria Morroco Atlantic Sahara Red Sahara Kush and Sudan. Religion: 68% Islam 14% Christian 12% Folk Religion 6% Others Ideology: Islamism Language: Arab, French, Spanish Anthem: "Itri n yijdi" "The star of sand" Motto: "Tafukt ed yiɣfawen n yimuras" "Sun and the lunar lands" Relations: Love: All of the other members at TSU Red Sahara Axum Senegal Manding Hate: Furailluk Somalia Southern Countries (sometimes) President: Mande Tobia Longest serving: Mande Heri (68 Years) Shortest serving: Mande Hizha (1 year 2 months) First President: Mande Heri (1899) Family: Mande
To me, the only straight lines that kind of make sense to keep would be in the Sahara. I mean like 5 people live there, so it really only needs the lines to be in better places.
This is a good take besides Egypt which could still be mostly united due to Sa’idic Arabic which is basically a Arabic Egyptian Dialect and also Western Egyptian Dialect within the West which Libya now owns in this map which I don’t know why they would own it?
It was because the Libyan dialect of Arabic is spoken there, so I put it in Libya, of course. Also just to make sure that Egypt looks less like a damn square ya know B)
As a Portuguese I feel pan Africanism is what should fix africa and I hope our brothers from Guiné Bissau, Angola, Mozambique, São Tomé and Cabo Verde try to pursuit this idea, stay determined africa
@@easytiger6570 Well portugal did claim the entire continent of africa at one point. The big wtf however comes when king leopold of belgium wanted to claim west virginia and portugal as his own property.
Lol I once got called racist by saying that africa has too many straight borders. Just look at Equatorial Guinea, or even the most square country in the world Egypt!
I personally think you made some of the land-locked countries to strong. Ethiopia is a good example of what happens when you give a powerful country no ports. They're getting aggressive with Eritrea and are staging troops along the border because they want access to the sea despite Eritrea and Ethiopia not having the same religion. Countries like Furarilluk, Chokluzi and Chaussa might want to invade their weaker neighbours like Djibouti, Kongo or Togo to gain access to the sea. It might look kinda bad but giving them corridors to get to the sea like the DRC currently has would be important to keep peace in the region.
Great video! I'll give you some feedback, not sure how much of it will be useful but here it goes: Things that are already good and need no improving: - The music choice and the music volume, it isn't distracting whatsoever while also not being too quiet. Good job! - The visuals are outstanding, kind of like B4B like many others have pointed out; great word, it well and truly paid off - The passion is pretty clear just looking at it, and even if it can't be pointed out directly it does truly make it nicer to watch - Thumbnail/Title work is really good Things that could be better: - Your English technically speaking is good, the grammar and sentence structure is completely natural, and throughout *most* of thr video it sounds like free speach rather than a script reading. This is very good. The sole issue is the pronunciation and at some parts slight mumbling caused by fast speach, this isn't a big issue since its mostly understandable and due to the subtitles being in place. I recommend you practice doing hard R's rather than rolled R's, this would make sentences with a lot R's easier to hear. I also recommend doing an exercise before recording where you say the script louder than intended and with emphasis on saying each individual word clearly, this is a good strategy for preventing any sorts of mumbling, and despite it not being that big of an issue it would simply make the quality better - I recommend finding a way to have fewer transition still-frames, the ones you do use are well done but the raw amount of them at times disturbs the flow of the video, replacing every other one here with a verbal transition of some sorts "And speaking of *insert word here*..." would make it flow naturally - Not a complaint, but look more into sharing your videos around. Maybe there are platforms like reddit or such where you can publish your videos, or maybe some other creators will be willing to let you advertise on their community with permission. Look into it! It won't make the videos better but it'll help make the growth happen faster That's all, overall the video is very well done and only has some minor mistakes, I believe it is important with feedback early on especially as this will after a while become the core content of your channel, the thing people will be watching after seeing the popular videos Keep the good work up and looking forward to seeing more from you, always pleasant to see new Polandball related content on the scene :)
Damn that's really really helpful, thank you! Honestly I've thought of sharing some of these on Reddit, but to them it might seem like an outsider is shamelessly self-promoting, so I've stayed away from it so far.
That was some comprehensive feedback! Very well written. I wanted to address the issue with the reading speed as well, which caused a little bit of confusion in an otherwise excellent video. Glad that you put it so vividly and detail-oriented.
I spotted a few mistakes. The Adal sultanate was a Somali empire and not Oromo. Djibouti is named after the capital Jabuuti which is the Somali side of Djibouti 🇩🇯 which wouldn’t make sense since the actual city would then be in Somalia (in this map). I think the Afar side should be named Tadjoura as that’s the afar capital in Djibouti Nation.
As an Algerian I really think you messed up the borders of North africa I don’t expect you to know every detail of north african history however creating these random borders is extremely inaccurate and borderline disrespectful For starters the current north african coast is almost accurate to its historic pre-colonial counterpart except for Algeria which lost a bit of coast in 1845 due to french colonialism and giving more coast to Morroco The west coast of algeria used to stretch to the Malwiya river (a natural border) which is very accurate to actual realistic borders As of to the south again creating a new “atlantic sahara” isn’t really the best idea as historically speaking north african countries always had borders that stretched to the sahara such as morocco and algeria I think a more realistic approach is to use the current borders of north africa since it’s the most stable it has been in centuries Yes i do acknowledge the current tensions and conflicts in north africa but its miniscule compared to historical and current conflicts around the word Either way I appreciate your efforts and wish you would check more sources when dealing with such a diverse continent ❤
I was thinking about the same, the case in North Africa is just so different compared to other nations, like how tf is a country made only of the Sahara desert supposed to work? And why breaking up countries like South Africa and Ethiopia that are quickly growing will solve anything?
Algeria as a "country" was created by France and founded in 1962. Morocco has it's border with Ottoman empire at "Tafna river" for centuries, Morocco lost the "battle of Isly" against France troops which resulted in losing Maghnia city and a big part of its eastern territories, in Lalla Maghnia Treaty after the battle.
Where did the story that adal is oromo start from? Am trying my best to calm down but that’s literally erasing our Dir history? First capital of Adal was located in modern day somaliland near Djibouti border. The empire fell due to British and french colonisations establishing British and french Somalilands (somaliland and Djibouti). This would fit the theme with countries like Ghana that has a name of an old empire that wasn’t in Ghana but Oromia is already in use in Ethiopia so why not use that in here as well. Also Afar country could be called Danakil (named after the desert) or Afar republic as calling it Djibouti wouldn’t make sense when Djibouti City is apart of the somali side of Djibouti
The complexity of the ethnic map of Africa cannot be solved with a redesign of borders unless you want to end up with a map more complex than the map of the Holy Roman Empire with its hundreds of princely states. Ethnic groups are too intermixed with often non adjacent territories and with many territories with no clear majority for a group or another. Note that some ethnic groups specialise in an economic activity and in the same region you are going to have an ethnic group that is agriculturalist living in the valley, pastoralists in the plain and forest dwellers in the forested area (with the cities with all these groups plus others from other parts of the country as administrators, trades people etc) The ethnic groups themselves are often not as "solid" as you would desire. Look at Somalians. They have all to be a nation on paper but then the clan affiliation works against it. Or there are "core" groups with affiliated dependent groups. Then some of the groups are really really small. To abandon them to a bigger ethnic group is to have them eliminated/assimilated to that bigger group often in a situation of inferiority and risk of destruction worst than the post colonial states with its new forging identities are offering. An Angolan can be a Kabinda, kongo, ovimbundo etc but a kabindan cannot be a Kongo or ovimbundu or anything else without having to abandon its Kabindan identity. If we are dreaming why not federate/confederate Africa instead (can even be in the current post colonial states) with basic rights for its different ethnic groups to mantain their cultures and languages.
The distance to the sun is not the reason why temperatures are higher near the equator. It's because of the spherical shape of the Earth and the resulting different angles at which sunlight falls on the Earth at different latitudes.
At 3:27 this became so bad that I didn't see any point in watching the rest of the video. NO, the Equator is NOT the hottest because it is closest to the Sun. It is hot because the Sun's rays are perpendicular. And NO, the hot air from the Equator is NOT brought to the Tropics. It's the other way around. The hot air at the Equator RISES UP. And when it rises up, it cools down, creating rainfall. This cool air THEN goes north and south, and it SINKS DOWN at the Tropics. As it sinks down, it heats up, and thus dries up. THAT is why there are deserts there. Because the sinking DRY air sucks all of the moisture out of everything. This air then flows back to the Equator, sucking more moisture out of the air as it goes. And when it gets to the Equator, the cycle repeats itself. If you don't even know THIS, then I doubt you have anything useful to say.
Hey man, I just thinking if you can share your map of your newly drawn borders of africa, it would be really cool. Also you're doing a great job on your videos and the research. You're also a great artist and super underrated. PS: get a better mic lol, i had to use subtitles for this one.
