Again, I do not know that poverty is the issue, and we can't compare a continent with individual nations.

Using the World Bank definition of $1.90/day, as of 2016, roughly 734 million people remained in extreme poverty (or roughly 1 in 10 people worldwide). Nearly half of them live in India and China, with more than 85% living in just 20 countries

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_poverty#Definition


Yet, China is considered a 'superpower'.

Tribalism is another western concept applied only to AFrica, but many nations have their form of 'tribalizsm' They just call it 'social status' or 'financial status'.

Corruption(Russia) and incompetence(USA) are also found in so called 'superpower' countries.

At the root of the African countries being risen above 'third world' status is the need to become economically stable, and the will to utilize their own resources to achieve it.

Firstly, Trump improved nothing but the sustainability of the uber rich. I am not one of them, nor are most on this board.

Secondly, his display of 'leadership' during crisis has been horrific.

And finally, I tire of the 'socialist' fear tactic.

If you look for a list of the happiest countries, you might find this:
https://www.cntraveller.com/gallery/the-10-happiest-countries-in-the-world

10. Austria
9. Canada
8. New Zealand
7. Sweden
6. Switzerland
5. Netherlands
4. Iceland
3. Norway
2. Denmark
1. Finland

If you look for the healthiest countries, you might find this:

https://www.cntraveler.com/gallery/healthiest-countries-in-the-world


10. Israel
9. Norway
8. Singapore
7. Australia
6. Sweden
5. Switzerland
4. Japan
3. Iceland
2. Italy
1. Spain


Most of these countries have some type of programs that are sold as 'socialist' in our country, yet they are either happier AND/OR healthier than we are.

So yeah, if that is what 'socialist' is, maybe it is better than what we are doing, not being on EITHER list.

Well, Africa is almost three times the size of Europe, with a longer history of invasion and oppression than Europe, so I think it is hard to compare the two in the terms of who 'should' be a superpower.

We are also at a disadvantage in the Western World of history being reported by the Western World, and having a bit of 'victor' bias because of it. I am not sure what housing materials has to do with power. I am not sure if caves are better than 'huts'. But that is talking about history and not all the things between which lead to today's status.

Also, when talking about what 'should' happen or be happening, it is hard to say.
When I look up 'superpower', I get this definition:

A superpower is a state with a dominant position characterized by its extensive ability to exert influence or project power on a global scale. This is done through the combined means of economic, military, technological and cultural strength as well as diplomatic and soft power influence.


For me, at least, cultural priorities play a huge impact on whether these things happen. The interest or will of a person or people to WANT to be an influence, or have 'power', let alone 'superpower' may not be something that can be known, or should be highly valued. If the African countries were interested enough to exert military force over other nations (or want to), or to conquer, oppress, or 'discover' them, or to control their own natural resources as a means of profit for their own, or play a part in 'western' politics and/or culture, they COULD have more nations with 'superpower' status. After all, Egypt could have once been considered a 'superpower', and it is an African country.

JMHO





, but what Africa Does have going for it that could contribute to what is commonly considered in 'superpower' status.

The continent IS rich in natural resources like gas, oil.platinum, and gold.

But as another posted, I am not sure I want to see Africa as a 'superpower', but an 'equal' power.

IF that is being an alleged conservative, with his head exploding, having daily meltdowns, and being entertainment, I agree.

Are we talking love and hate of a person, or love and hate in general?

IN other words, I can love someone and therefore HATE that they are in pain, or HATE a choice they have made that I feel is unhealthy, harmful, or criminal.

But I cannot LOVE someone and HATE that someone at the same time.

I don't know about anyone else really. I feel both things kind of mesh for me. I read to see if we would be compatible, I move on if/when I discover things that would make us NOT compatible (or at least not as likely) as it helps narrow it down when there are so many profiles or messages.

Ed Sheeran Perfect

Love is not hard, as someone else noted. Mutual love, or making love last is hard. We can only control how we feel, not how others feel. It is disappointing when what we feel does not match how another does.

I think it is hard also because of the different definitions two might have on what love is also.

If you are a person who thinks of love from the perspective of what the other person does for you (and how it makes you feel), it is harder because, as I said, we cannot control others actions or feelings. If you have two people with this definition of love, it is harder to make it last.

If you are a person who thinks of love from the perspective of what you want to do for the other (and how it MIGHT make them feel), it is a little simpler because it is only dependent on the things you do which are things you have control over. If you have two people with this definition of love, I think it makes it a bit easier to make it last.

If you have two people each with different definition of love, it is probably hardest to make it last.


I think most people think of love from the first perspective, unfortunately. JMHO

I agree that it is not a conscious choice. I do happen to think of it as something that is conditioned though. I think of Pavlov's dogs changing their physiological reaction to salivate to a bell, not by what we would think of as 'choice', but through the programming of action-reaction conditioning that embedded in the mind a stimulus replacing or adding to their 'natural' stimulus of food.

I think our subconscious makes those kind of correlations and connections on any number of things that we are not consciously making a choice about.

I stand corrected. Feelings are not conscious choices (there is some conditioning and subconscious association there). Actions are choices, like who we date or what we eat or what we wear , et cetera...,.

I am mostly bored and wanting to point out the diff between something being a true 'preference' (implying a rank in a list) or a mandate (implying inclusion or exclusion from the list).

I recently updated the text on my profile. However, when I view it, it all runs together like one paragraph instead of several. How do I fix this? Can I not put spaces to separate paragraphs?

Preference: a greater liking for one alternative over another or others. When we say we 'don't' do something. That is not a preference.


A preference ranks options by order. If I don't eat spinach, that is NOT a preference. It is a choice, and It is an exclusion altogether, not even in the options. If I prefer strawberry ice cream, I will still eat other types. But amongst those options, my first choice is strawberry.

If I do not date girls, that is my choice. Because they are not an option, I can't really say it is a preference. They are not even on the list. IT is an exclusion and it is my choice though.

well, humans are terrible for nature. It is a good thing for nature that so many are staying out of it and in their buildings. It is just a huge inconvenience for US. The good and the bad of everything.

Why would 'my' mister Trump want to change the system that has amassed him billions? Why would the KING of America feel anyone could harm or touch him?

Amen. When we can no longer learn anything, we are no longer really 'living'. Life is about a learning journey.

Though it is true that lack of OTHER medical resources poses serious threat, the drugs have not yet been properly tested and proven. Having worked in insurance, this is not any different than ANY other drug. That testing and proof is required. The drugs are also not banned, as previously mentioned, they are only restricted as a PRESCRIPTION to treat coronavirus, since, as said before, the drug has not had the testing and proof of it's effectiveness for it. This prevents hoarding from patients who need the drug prescribed for PROVEN treatment of other things, and it does allow the drugs to be given in medical facilities.

I honestly think it will 'get worse' before it gets better. I also do not know if we will have the accurate numbers until it is contained because I think we can not know how many are not being tested that may have it AND we can not know how many that are being seen and counted are being properly diagnosed.

I think the concern is death rate. We are now up to 21,912 deaths in the US in 10 weeks. That is 2200 deaths a WEEK. That is much higher than weekly road accident deaths or weekly gun deaths, or even weekly suicides. Given the infected numbers of 557 thousand, that is nearly a 4 % death rate. And these numbers include time being quarantined. It is logical to find concern in these numbers. And also, that these numbers are ON TOP of the resources we already are using and are rising so quickly is a reason for concern.

However, all the world can do is keep going. It may be a change in systems and perspectives, but the world will go on for sure.