The top ten countries every 50 years (m is for millions):
1900: world population: 1,700m
- British Empire: 420m
- China: 415m
- Russian Empire: 132m
- USA: 76m
- French Empire: 76m
- Germany: 56m
- Austro-Hungary: 51m
- Dutch Empire: 51m
- Japan: 42m
- Italy: 32m
The British and Chinese between them rule almost half of mankind.
It goes like this:
- 68% white rule
- 24% Chinese rule
- 8% Other (Japanese, Ottoman, etc)
Whites are a third of the world but rule two-thirds.
USA: 87.3% White, 11.6% Black, 0.7% Hispanic, 0.3% Native, 0.2% Asian/Pacific.
1950: world population: 2,526m
- China: 544m
- India: 376m
- Soviet Union: 182m (1951)
- USA: 158m
- British Empire: 148m (est.)
- French Empire: 131m (est.)
- Pakistan: 86m
- Japan: 82m
- Indonesia: 73m
- Brazil: 54m
Indonesia broke away from the Dutch Empire; India and Pakistan from the British Empire. The Russian Empire is now called the Soviet Union. Austro-Hungary is gone, Germany divided. Italy is out, Brazil is in.
The French and British empires still hold onto their African possessions (except Egypt) but have lost nearly all of their Asian possessions (the main exception: French Indochina – Vietnam and Cambodia).
In 1945 the permanent seats on the UN Security Council were held by governments that ruled 65% of mankind (Britain, China, Soviet Union, USA, France).
USA: 87.5% White, 10.0% Black, 2.1% Hispanic, 0.2% Native, 0.2% Asian/Pacific.
2000: world population: 6,063m
- China: 1,264m
- India: 1,006m
- USA: 282m
- Indonesia: 214m
- Brazil: 176m
- Pakistan: 152m
- Russia: 147m
- Bangladesh: 132m
- Japan: 127m
- Nigeria: 124m
The world as we know it.
Bangladesh broke away from Pakistan, Nigeria from the British Empire. The French, British and Russian empires are gone.
The top five countries have nearly half the people in the world. The five permanent members of the UN Security Council have only 30%.
USA: 69.1% White, 12.5% Hispanic, 12.3% Black, 3.8% Asian/Pacific, 0.9% Native.
2050: world population: 9,551m
- India: 1,620m
- China: 1,385m
- Nigeria: 440m
- USA: 401m
- Indonesia: 321m
- Pakistan: 271m
- Brazil: 231m
- Bangladesh: 202m
- Ethiopia: 188m
- Philippines: 157m
Russia and Japan, with shrinking populations, are out, Ethiopia and the Philippines are in. The top ten moves southward.
India passes China. Nigeria passes the USA.
This is based on UN projections. It assumes 2010 boundaries. If the past is any guide, some of these countries will probably break apart. So, for example, there might be a Northern Nigeria or a South China.
The USA is now less than half non-Hispanic white. White America has been shrinking since about 2020, but the rest of the country is still growing.
USA: 46.6% White, 27.9% Hispanic, 14.4% Black, 8.0% Asian/Pacific, 1.5% Native.
2100: world population: 10,854m
- India: 1,547m
- China: 1,086m
- Nigeria: 914m
- USA: 462m
- Indonesia: 315m
- Tanzania: 276m
- Pakistan: 263m
- D.R. Congo: 262m
- Ethiopia: 243m
- Uganda: 205m
Brazil and Bangladesh, with shrinking populations, are out. So is the Philippines. In: Tanzania, Uganda and D.R. Congo (assuming the 2010 borders). India and China are shrinking, the USA is still growing.
The world is now less than half Asian.
In 2010 Africa had a billion people. By 2100 East Africa alone, from Ethiopia to Mozambique, will have a billion. Nigeria will have nearly that. Even countries like Mali, Niger, Kenya and Zambia will each have 100 million or more.
USA: 38.8% White, 30.6% Hispanic, 15.6% Black, 14.9% Asian/Pacific, 1.0% Native.
– Abagond, 2013.
Sources: GeoHive, Wikipedia, The National Archive, RIA Novosti, ProQuest, Wikipedia.
See also:
- Awesome Japanese world map from 1914 (9,592 kb)
- world population
- Peters projection
- Muhammad Chen – the completely average person
- demographically weighted world history
- thebiggests
- The Scramble for Africa
- British Empire
- white paternalism
- white gaze
Nice, where did you get these maps from?
LikeLike
I don’t think China will ever break up(at least in this century), it is likely that Nigeria will split in half.
I don’t think all of the projections of future populations are going to happen, because borders & birth rates change all the time, so some countries that are projected to make the Top 10 will possibly not make it if their governments adopt the right policies to curb explosive birth rates.
In Pakistan the government is planning to impose a 2 child policy, not sure if it will become law or if it will be enforced but if it does then Pakistan may be out of the Top 10 in the future, which in my opinion is a good thing.
“In 2010 Africa had a billion people. By 2100 East Africa alone, from Ethiopia to Mozambique, will have a billion. Nigeria will have nearly that. Even countries like Mali, Niger, Kenya and Zambia will have 100 million or more apiece.”
It seems like the 22nd century belongs to Africa.
LikeLike
Plus, I think china still has the one child policy. I’m not all that familiar with it. Plus, as far as Africa is concerned it’s a lot bigger compared to other continents than what most maps portray.
LikeLike
I think China no longer has the one child policy. I read somewhere (the news?) that they are now allowing two children per couple.
Interesting that the Hispanic population will be twice that of African Americans. Does that mean it will be more like South America?
What will the culture be like, I wonder?
Some Hispanic cultures are known to be pretty racist towards the darker skinned, so what would that mean for Blacks who aren’t Hispanic?
Should we panic, like White people, and start “acting a fool” right now or wait another ten years or so?
LikeLike
well I guess we need to start learning Spanish rofl. It’s interesting how everyone’s rate went up and blacks dropped then picked up again and latinos started a small percent and now surpass us and will one day surpass whites. how is it our rates seem to stay the same and maybe just go up 2% we will be surpassed by everyone someday.
LikeLike
Well in addition to learning Spanish, why don’t we throw learning Mandarin in there as well.
LikeLike
@kiwi
Maybe white elitist will start another war and bomb some more brown people in the name of white supremacy.
As far as Hispanics it makes me wonder if the really will outnumber blacks. I mean aren’t a lot of Mexican people in particular being killed off at fast rates due to the drug wars down there? Or does the media make it look worse than what it actually is. I mean the media is no stranger to over dramatizing some things. But as a whole including middle and South America it’s not too far fetched.
LikeLike
But hopefully the amount of wars the U.s has been in within the last 150 years will stop.
LikeLike
Mstoogood:
No, no, no! Learning Spanish sounds like a one of those logical, practical activities that a person (and I’m referring here to people) engage in as a response to change. Much too sensible an activity for the American people.
The foolish thing we should probably be doing., apparently, is what white people are doing right now, short of running through the streets, waving our hands and screaming at the top of our lungs .
LikeLike
[…] The top ten countries every 50 years (m is for millions): 1900: world population: 1,700m British Empire: 420m China: 415m Russian Empire: 132m USA: 76m French Empire: 76m Germany: 56m Austro-Hungar… […]
LikeLike
[…] World population map, 2050. Countries scaled to their relative populations. Uses 2010 borders.India: 1,620mChina: 1,385mNigeria: 440mUSA: 401mIndonesia: 321mPakistan: 271mBrazil: 231mBangladesh: 202mEthiopia: 188mPhilippines: 157m […]
LikeLike
Agabond, can you do the numbers without including the Hispanic category? After all Hispanic is not really a race but an ethnicity which means that within that group you can have every other race represented. I suspect what you might find is that you have to create a category for mixed race people. Or to take it a step further, maybe you would have to count several of them as Native American due to their ancestry being mostly South American native. But my point is that you are showing more of a cultural shift than a racial shift in the USA. Or am I misunderstanding they way the term is used in the US?
LikeLike
@blackherbmans
I understand what you mean. There are Dominicans that I know of who are black or half black but don’t consider themselves black and they hate it if someone says that they look black.
LikeLike
I’m pretty sure you meant Latinos though. I did that before myself.
LikeLike
India has a lot of people, doesn’t it? 😀
The maps are intriguing and the subject, ambitious, but are US population categories going to always be so neatly tied off? When Abagond says “Hispanic”, it sound vague — is it really another way of saying “mixed race”?
This is not clear.
I think Anne has it right when she says:
LikeLike
The population maps come from RIA Novosti:
http://en.ria.ru/infographics/20111110/168551293.html
It is interactive. You can watch Europe shrink and Africa grow.
LikeLike
Hispanic is an ethnicity and a pretty broad one too, covering anyone whose family comes from a Spanish-speaking country. They come in all races and various combinations thereof. Most of those in the U.S. see themselves as white. On the other hand, most are racialized by Anglos regardless of race:
Although it is not a true race, I think leaving it out in this case would be more misleading than not. At this point it is unclear to what degree they will assimilate as Black or White American and to what degree White Americans will expand their idea of whiteness.
LikeLike
@ Kiwi
Yup. I noticed that too.
LikeLike
Well, they could also bring their own concepts and attitudes towards racial identity to USA.
LikeLike
“Anne,
Agabond, can you do the numbers without including the Hispanic category? After all Hispanic is not really a race but an ethnicity which means that within that group you can have every other race represented Or to take it a step further, maybe you would have to count several of them as Native American due to their ancestry being mostly South American native.
But my point is that you are showing more of a cultural shift than a racial shift in the USA. Or am I misunderstanding they way the term is used in the US?”
Linda says,
La Raza, La Raza
you are assuming that people, like mestizo’s from Mexico or central America, the group that is larger than “pure” Native Americans, are willing to do a one-drop and say, they are “Native Americans” (aka Indio).. on a good day, you can’t get some people to admit they are part Indio, it all depends on what country they are from
Same with African… some people are mixed African and Native American, but the Indio is stronger genetically, so people think they are just “Indio”…and some have all 3 and you can’t get them to admit the Indio or African, especially if they look “white”– and some “mulato” who look “black”- don’t want to be called “black” and will fight you — Oy vey– it gets crazy!
…then of course, you have the people that go by the “how you look” standard and are considered ‘white” in their country (and probably by most black people) — until they get to the USA and the Anglo whites tell them otherwise
of course, the people who are unmixed, probably don’t want to have their culture/Ethnicity snatched away from them just so that Americans can make everyone “fit” into the box — they are “proud” of their Latin American heritage and find it more financially lucrative to blend into both Anglo and Latin worlds.
Latin Americans barely want to call themselves “Hispanics”, there is no real cohesiveness as a “group” because they view themselves by Nationality (as do most non-American immigrants) — but they are now recognizing that in the USA, they have to be labeled “something” according to Anglo-American standards, since they cannot be recognized by Nationality and many, do Not Wish to be absorbed by Anglo-Americans (aka white Americans)
In recent censuses, about 40% of Latinos have chosen not to select White, Black, or one of the other races listed and have instead marked themselves as “Other” race.
“The intertwining of race and ethnicity in the national imagination has created greater solidarity within the group. That can improve the situation of all Latinos rather than the lucky few. A common racial identity allows those with lighter skin and greater advantages to share resources and information with those with darker skin. In other words, the Latino race, whether embraced or imposed, might help to lift the entire group and not just those members who are able to jump across the color line into Whiteness. –
As they form a strong political voting bloc and gain the ability to self-identify on official documents like Census forms, American Latinos will continue to further express their identity and challenge the ways Americans have traditionally thought about race and ethnicity.”
http://thesocietypages.org/papers/creating-a-latino-race/
“The term “La Raza” has its origins in early 20th century Latin American literature and translates into English most closely as “the people” or, according to some scholars, as “the Hispanic people of the New World.” The term was coined by Mexican scholar José Vasconcelos to reflect the fact that the people of Latin America are a mixture of many of the world’s races, cultures, and religions.
In fact, the full term coined by Vasconcelos, “La Raza Cósmica,” meaning the “cosmic people,” was developed to reflect not purity but the mixture inherent in the Hispanic people. This is an inclusive concept, meaning that Hispanics share with all other peoples of the world a common heritage and destiny.”
http://www.nclr.org/index.php/about_us/faqs/the_truth_about_nclr/the_translation_of_our_name/
LikeLike
@mary burrell
Those are definitely the 2 languages Americans should be learning after English, for both internal domestic reasons and for international trade, commerce and tourism. French is barely hanging on to 4th place in the USA, soon to be surpassed by Tagalog.
–> The top 5 languages of the USA are exactly the ones I focused on learning in addition to Japanese.
But, re: future global powerhouses, maybe we should learn Hindi/Urdu and Bahasa Indonesia.
LikeLike
2 questions:
– why does the Philippines hardly change in size even though it will soon surpass Japan and is still growing at a very fast rate. It should currently be 1/3 the size of the USA, about only about 1/10 a hundred years ago.
– Why does Brazil shrink so much after 2050?
LikeLike
Linda, White South American are proud of our European heritage and we have nothing to do with mix race, asian and blacks, Latino is not a race in fact Latino is a term related with Europe, French, Spanish, the real ones, Italian, Romanian, Portuguese are the real Latinos not you guys, you are brown because you are half American indian, one thing is to be born in Latin America and another thing is your race I am a white Colombian of french and Irish background I have nothing to do with brown and black Colombian racially.
LikeLike
“Rick Violette
Latino is not a race in fact Latino is a term related with Europe, French, Spanish, the real ones, Italian, Romanian, Portuguese are the real Latinos not you guys, you are brown because you are half American indian, one thing is to be born in Latin America and another thing is your race I am a white Colombian of french and Irish background I have nothing to do with brown and black Colombian racially.”
Linda says,
Rick, why you feel the need to tell me you are “white” is beyond me because all you did is act like the typical Puerto Rican, Cuban, or South American “white” Latino who likes to brag about their white European roots when they want to distant themselves from any Indio or African heritage and stress how “white” they are beside having Spanish heritage– these people check the “white” box on the US census also, even the ones who look “black” by US standards.. so you are not unique.
and if you are a Latino who has an unmixed European background, then you are not the stereotypical Latino that the average American views as a Hispanic/Latino, so you can play into both worlds, as my comments mentioned — good for you, the Ryan Lochte’s and Carmen Diaz of the world
in the mean time, the rest who are considered “white” in South American but their one Irish or French grandparent couldn’t erase the olive tint to their skin and causes them to be “racialized” in the US have to stick together to get stuff done… they don’t have the ability to switch sides like you do.
So, Rick, keep checking the “white” box on the US census and keep it moving.
—————————
and by the way, the term “Hispanic” is the term that covers Spanish-speakers because of Hispania (aka Spain)–
and by USA standards, being born in a Latin American country (aka central/south America or Caribbean), is what makes you Latino — the USA could care less about Italy, Romania, or France, that’s why those groups are not referred to as “Latinos” in America– they’re just white Europeans.
When Labels Don’t Fit: Hispanics and Their Views of Identity
http://www.pewhispanic.org/2012/04/04/when-labels-dont-fit-hispanics-and-their-views-of-identity/
LikeLike
Linda, you mean “white” like the “white” Colombianos I know who say their grandfather only looks a littel “canela” (cinnamon coloured skin-tone) because he spent time “in the sun”? Or have the habit of removing their chest or pubic hair because the too curly and peppercorn-like hair against their pale skin is a such a giveaway…Or “white” because they have GREEN EYES?
😀
LikeLike
Bulanik,
Exactly! 🙂 I found this story amusing (about Brazil and their new affirmative action movement
http://blackwomenofbrazil.co/2013/09/20/young-white-male-declares-himself-an-african-descendant-to-take-advantage-of-affirmative-action-at-diplomat-academy/
But in all seriousness, the Caribbean, Central and South America do have real white European (non-Spanish) people from colonial times and large immigration — look at Jamaica, there are white people but they are not the majority.
but to say you are racially unmixed means you are upper class or you come from a community or region where most of the white European immigrants grouped together, like Seaford town in Jamaica back before the 1970’s —
only Argentina or Uruguay can truly make this boast, (having racially unmixed whites) due to their large influx of “white European descendants” immigrants (and the steady absorption, emigration, or elimination of the Natives and Africans)
“Probably more than any other Latin American people, Colombians remained conscious of their white Spanish heritage. The white group usually emphasized racial and cultural purity and wealth derived from property.
Members of the upper class were equally secure in their status as white Colombians, whether or not they appeared Caucasian to the casual observer, because their status automatically defined them as such.
Insistence on racial purity within the white group varied among regions and sometimes was not as important as light skin and an old, respected Spanish surname. In fact, many people who came from families that had been considered white for generations were actually descendants of people of mixed ancestry who purchased certificates of white ancestry from the Spanish crown. Whites did not usually marry dark-skinned individuals, however, unless economic hardship necessitated bringing a wealthy mulatto or mestizo into the family.
The Spanish created a hierarchical society in which they occupied the top stratum in terms of prestige, wealth, and power; slaves and Indians occupied the bottom. White skin became synonymous with being Spanish and therefore of high status. Offspring of mixed unions fell somewhere in between, adopting the dominant culture if recognized by their Spanish fathers, remaining on the social periphery if not”
http://countrystudies.us/colombia/37.htm
LikeLike
….In fact, many people who came from families that had been considered white for generations were actually descendants of people of mixed ancestry who purchased certificates of white ancestry from the Spanish crown ….
Lmao!!
LikeLike
@ Linda, when Abagond says, re Hispanic ethnic identity:
That does suggest that the categorizations (Black or White) will remain fixed and unchanging. But they might not. Those categories might change whether White Americans expand their ideas of whiteness, or not.
********************************************
This ^^ is essentially the conflict you have explained above.
It’s also the gist of the excellent articles you posted. As one of them* said:
Obviously, the way an ethnic groups can “resist” this rigid Black+White binary, is by emphasizing ethnicity over race. Subtle but effective!
Its necessary because there are more costs to being classified in “racial” terms. In the US’s racial set up it is shrewder for Latinos to occupy a more indefinite strata, and let the “whiter” ones pull them over, or at least closer to, the White line.
Hence the consternation, incomprehension and anger from black Americans who do not wish to accept why black Latinos won’t primarily and exclusively identify as Black (as recounted in the article). This boils down to whether one internalizes the one-drop rule themselves, and follows the mandate of “If you’re mixed, you’re Black.” That was the reality.
LikeLike
Linda, it is paramount to educate the uneducated American Society, regarding South America, is not right to racialize a group pf people only because they speak the same language, Southern Amerricas was a melting pot just like the Northern one. The reason I mention I am white is because unless many “Latinos”, specially those from central and the caribbean, in the States I do not need tot hide behind misleading terms such as Latino and Hispanic, because I am proud of who I am, that is why I call myself wht I am colombian by nationality and Caucasian by race, if those so call Latino/Hispanic are so proud of what they are why they use Eurocentric terms like Hispanic and Latino and even Spanish to identify themselves? why don’t you guys call yourself what you guys are Mestizo, Mix blood or Mix race?
LikeLike
Rick Violette @ I do not need tot hide behind misleading terms such as Latino and Hispanic, because I am proud of who I am, that is why I call myself wht I am colombian by nationality and Caucasian by race, if those so call Latino/Hispanic are so proud of what they are why they use Eurocentric terms like Hispanic and Latino and even Spanish to identify themselves? why don’t you guys call yourself what you guys are Mestizo, Mix blood or Mix race?
Linda says,
Rick,That’s a question you would have to ask Americans and the US government — they are the ones who have and continue to refuse to recognize “Mestizo and mixed-race” people
as you must know by now, in America, ethnic groups don’t get to name themselves or their “race” officially– they are told what to choose based on the US government “choices” listed on the boxes on most documents.
and these labels are arbitrary and do change —
“The federal government periodically alters race and ethnicity questions to keep up with shifts in the social fabric of the nation. For example, “mulatto” was a Census category in 1920. “Negro” may finally be dropped in 2020″
(link in next post)
LikeLike
“Bulanik @ Obviously, the way an ethnic groups can “resist” this rigid Black+White binary, is by emphasizing ethnicity over race. Subtle but effective!”
Linda says,
for the next census (2020) , the US government is planning to eliminate the ability to choose Hispanic origin or “Nationality” on the census to make it “less complicated” –
so in essence, the US government plans to turn the term “Hispanic” into an official “race” (that’s why I say this whole “race” business if arbitrary– once again, white people making sh’t up as they go along and everyone has to follow)
and to be fair, I think the US government decided to do this because many Hispanic/Latinos were not happy with their only choice of having to choose “black or white Hispanic” in terms of race — being proud of your lineage is one thing– being told “who” you are, is another thing all together
Hispanics historically have had difficulty identifying with existing race categories.
“The potential Census changes don’t please some Hispanics even though many feel boxed in by the current race categories: white, black, Asian, American Indian. When the Census added a fifth in 1980 — “some other race” — so many Hispanics chose it, that it is now the third-largest race group behind white and black; 95% of those who selected “some other race” are Hispanic.
‘I do see the difficulty with the government classifying Latinos in one category or in many categories,” says Elizabeth Zamora, 23, a Dallas native and daughter of Mexican immigrants. “We’re not just white or black or Asian. Our parents may be coming from Jamaica, Mexico, Argentina, Europe. … You can’t put us in one category.
The current form “really does separate Latinos from the rest of the population in a way,” she says. “It does make me feel excluded to a certain extent.’
Latino civil rights groups don’t embrace the change because they like the separate Ethnicity question, which offers check-off boxes for national origins such as Mexican, Cuban and Puerto Rican.”
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/03/hispanics-may-be-added-to-census-race-category/1808087/
To me, it’s all so divisive and messy and I’m not sure how I feel about it because this is a country made up of immigrants (both voluntary and involuntary) — after the 1st generation, everyone is supposed to be “American” — but due to history, everything in America is predicated based on race and it seems just about everything Has to be divided by “race” in order for society or Institutions to function
This country does not have the ability to “not see race or colour” — if it had to the ability to celebrate and be proud of different “Ethnicities” — then white-owned companies/media wouldn’t have to be forced, shamed, or reminded to add people of colour and non-white European “ethnicities” into their marketing promotions/ advertisements and employment — they would just do it automatically because they would see black, brown, or Asian people as being just as “American” as they are.
LikeLike
@ Linda
I wouldn’t really call it history. From where I’m standing, I’d call it “design” or “construction”. So when the in-betweeners want to self-describe themselves outside of those tidy boxes, there’s going to be fragmentation.
Could there ever come a time of revision…?
Somehow, right now, I don’t think the US has any intention of doing that. The realisation that the nation is a mosaic that encompasses many different shades and kinds of Americans, rather than the monochrome blanket thrown over everyone — may not be on the cards.
LikeLike
…because that’s how it lives in peoples’ heads in that country.
LikeLike
I’d take population projections with a grain of salt. It’s impossible to know the changes to trends that are likely to occur between now and then.
UN’s world projections (from the 1960s) for 1990-2000 were famously overestimated, and I dare say these are just as overestimated. Will rapidly urbanising countries like Nigeria and Ethiopia whose economies are growing at 7-10% a year continue to see high population growth? Not likely, if other developed countries are any example.
Also, the US projections are also likely to be wrong b/c they assume that current trends will persist, even though they have already started to change. For example Latino immigration in the past 5 years has slowed quite a bit while Asian and especially African immigration has quickened.
LikeLike
@Jefe: “Why does Brazil shrink so much after 2050?”
Brazil is shrinking right now. Most of the country has zero population grown, the notable exception is the indigenous population and, of course, the extremely poor areas.
LikeLike
Updates to this post:
1. I replaced the 1914 map at the top of the post with a 1900 one.
2. I added a map showing rule by race in 1900. You can see which regions were independent of white rule and which multiracial or non-white ones were ruled by whites.
LikeLike
I think one day humans will live on the moon or other planets because the Earth is going to get or more likely, it is getting too crowded.
LikeLike
Wasn’t Puerto Rico and Cuba ruled by the USA in 1900?
LikeLike
@ Jefe
Right, the US ruled both Cuba and Puerto Rico at that point. That counts as white rule.
LikeLike
Japanese mapa is do cool!
LikeLike
I’ve been looking into future demographics, and it appears that Oceania will exit this century with a noticeably younger population than South America. At least, that is according to the website ‘populationpyramid.net’. Interesting, I didn’t realize that South America was going to start declining in population as early as 2060.
LikeLike
2050 and especially 2100 look bleak for the West. No Western countries in the top 10. (The US will cease being Western by about 2045)
LikeLiked by 1 person
If it’s okay for a black to rule a mostly White country (B. Hussein Obama), then it’s okay for a White to rule a mostly Black country. (Ian Douglas Smith, may his memory be a blessing)
LikeLike
@ Paul Kruger
I agree with the principle, but if you want to find a matching for Barack Obama (a Black individual leading a majority White nation, the USA) you can’t refer to Ian Smith.
Ian Smith was the leader of a White minority regime, which was governing a country (Rhodesia/Zimbabwe) against the will of its people. He was an illegitimate leader.
On the contrary, Barack Obama was elected president by the American people, which is majority White, as I stressed before. He was a legitimate leader.
An appropriate comparison to Barack Obama would be Guy Scott of Zambia. He was president of Zambia (a Black majority country) between 2014-2015 succeeding Michael Sata. He was a perfectly legitimate leader.
For more details about Guy Scott, see the Wikipedia article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Scott
By the way, and projecting into the future, one can perfectly think that one day a White individual will be again president of the Republic of South Africa, by the will of its people as a whole. In that day the wounds of the past between racial communities in that country will be already a thing of the past, and the elected individual will be judged mainly by the merit of his(her) political proposals of governance.
LikeLike
Smith was democratically elected by those worthy of voting rights.
LikeLike