>>102631636
>Vietnam had been colonized and raped by Europeans and their fellow Asians for centuries. Then when the modern era arrived they had a war against France, America (who blew up 90% of the infrastructure with bombs) and China losing millions of people in the process
>Now is one of the most successful countries in the region
Gee I wonder *what* historical event set the stage of their have to level of success
Let me break it down for you since you genuinely seem retarded
Vietnam, unlike *most* African countries, broke free from its colony ties via rebellion and (with some Soviet help) fought off ensuing outside actors that attempted to control them. This in-turn meant that Vietnam was run by Vietnamese people who had other Vietnamese's best interest in mind, and that Vietnamese people owned and controlled Vietnam's resources, which in-turn means they can use that fact as a bargaining chip when trying to deal business on a global stage
In contrast many African countries did not break away from their colony ties via rebellion but judicially thanks to many European powers being weakened in a post-WW2 society to actually hold power outside of their own countries, this is good right? Wrong because this their former colonial overlords were the ones writing the terms of agreements and this left many fledgling nations in compromised positions where foreign capital had influence over their resources and many African "leaders" were puppets who were more interested in selling out their own countrymen for personal gain than their developing their nation and how we wind up with situations where a coal mine in Botswana for example is owned by a French company and the Botswanan government is making $0 off anything sold in that mine.
So, nominally speaking many African are poor because they barred access to using natural resources local to their countries for economy gain, and there exist many militarily power structures both domestic and foreign that exist to crush any up start politicians who would attempt to nationalize said resources (See: what the Belgians did to Patrice Lumumba)
So to summarize I can't stress enough how idiotic, anti-intellectual and outright RETARDED you have to be to look situation in Vietnam how developed vs how whatever African country of your choosing developed in thinking the differences lay in one group being smarter is such a baffling conclusion that you'd have to willing to ignore roughly NINETY both world history and Vietnamese/[X] African country history for it to make sense, in a just society you would've been held back in High School
