Talk:White Africans of European ancestry/Archive 2

"African," being racially seperated?

So is Egypt, Morroco, Algeria etc., not apart of Africa? This is pure ridculousness. Haiti, for example, was denied acceptance into the African Union, but Egypt etc. were. Why? The answer is obvious. Haiti is not a part of Africa, while Egypt etc. are. Savvyjack23 (talk) 23:26, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Let's see some numbers in that table. Savvyjack23 (talk) 23:29, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

What are you proposing? --Katangais (talk) 00:07, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Is it because you consider North Africans to be white? It just goes to show how much of a social construct "race" really is. Modern usage seems to exclude people from the North Africa, Middle East and South Asia from the arbitrary category of "White". This is also obviously meant in the context of this article. In other words: What is meant here is people of European ancestry only, as per the very title. Amphioxys (talk) 08:58, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews?

There’s a definite argument for Ashkenazi Jews and even Sephardic Jews if you go by the former group being classed as white in the US and a few other places in the last hundred years and the latter being differentiated from Mizrahim in the Iberian Peninsula, But Mizrahi Jews? That I don’t really get and you would have to count Arabs as being white and of European ancestry then given the origins of Mizrahi Jews. What’s the story here? Obviously nothing against Arabs should be interpreted, just I’m not seeing the cut-off point here. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 19 Cheshvan 577914:00, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Editing conflicts

Please discuss moving the page before moving it. It has had discussions before regarding the title. --BenBezuidenhout (talk) 13:26, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Madagascar

For a long time, the information on this Wikipedia page stated that the local white population of Madagascar was 150,000 people. This was based on this source (now dead), attributed to the Joshua Project (a hideously inaccurate and dubious source that did not cite where it got this information and grossly overestimated the white population of various other African states compared to the official census figures from those states).

I removed that source and replaced it with this one by World Atlas, which was slightly more reputable. World Atlas states that there were 123,000 Madagascans who speak French as a first language. This seemed to be a better gauge of the population of French origin, until I discovered other sources which noted the presence of large numbers of Madagascans other than whites who spoke French as a first language, namely among the notable mixed-race population.

I found an almanac from the 1980s which explicitly put the number of Franco-Madagascans at 10,000-12,000. There was also a more recent source online which stated that there were 19,000 living there in 1997.

Both of these sources seemed more reliable, so I changed the numbers cited on this page to 19,000. Assuming the sources from the 1980s and 1990s are correct, a figure upwards of 120,000 in 2016 just seems too high. There is no conceivable way the local white population grew that large on natural increase alone. It's possible, although unlikely, that vast numbers of French expatriates have moved there in the last decade or so to work, but they wouldn't be representative of the local Franco-Madagascan population, either. I say we keep the 1997 figure as a latest reliable one until something that's both more recent and more plausible is cited. --Katangais (talk) 23:40, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Confused as to the article's information

• Does this article include recent immigrants of white Europeans in Africa or trying to create a separate term from them? Qwepo (talk) 17:06, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

This article covers people of European descent who hold citizenship in various African countries. I suppose naturalized European immigrants in present day would count. --Katangais (talk) 19:20, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Article Oddities

This page has quite a few problems and inconsistences, particularly with the numbers given. We need to come up with some sort of consensus as to the totals. Although it is difficult to do, I think it is of utmost importance. Additionally there are numerous flaws which I think may prove to be misleading to readers and we should work towards addressing those so I have decided to make this post with what I find in my reading of the page. There are numerous examples of poorly sourced information scattered throughout and it makes me question the legitimacy of the information. I want to avoid an edit war before I go a bit crazy on this post and fix the problems I see on this page. Katangais has taken this article under his wing and as he is much more experienced with editing it would be good to hear his insight. It may prove to be a controversial topic, so it would be good to improve the quality of this page.

Opening Section

"A voluntary exodus of colonials accompanied independence in most African nations.[16] Portuguese Mozambicans, who numbered about 200,000 in 1975,[17] departed en masse because of economic policies directed against their wealth;[18][19] they now number fewer than 50,000"

Is it not the case that virtually all Portuguese in Mozambique left, and that many of the ones there are recent immigrants? As is the case in Angola. I can't imagine such a large number would stay in an active civil war, especially given how many left for South Africa and Portugal. Additionally, "voluntary" may not be the best word to use for this exodus, considering over 1 million French-Algerians were expelled in that country. It states "Upon gaining independence in 1962, over a million whites living in Algeria were expelled, being given one week's notice to quit the country of their birth" in the French portion of this page. Additionally is fleeing violence in the Congo really voluntary? etc etc, there are lots of examples conflicting with that view. Even within the paragraph itself, almost all the information conflicts with the voluntarily leaving the country.

Another statement which struck me as odd was "The majority once lived along the Mediterranean coast, in South Africa, or in Zimbabwe". It seems quite indecisive, and I think the geographic spread makes it incorrect. Maybe we should just rework the whole introduction.

Inconsistencies begin at the very introductory and fundamental figure. It stands: In 1989, there were an estimated 4.6 million white people with European ancestry on the African continent. And besides: The African country with the largest white population of European descent both numerically and proportionally is South Africa, at approximately 4.9 million people (means more than on the whole continent). I can understand that for each of these numbers an established and considerable source stands but this is not enough. The data are as strikingly discordant that it requires adopting some attitude of wariness.5.172.232.188 (talk) 15:06, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

British section

Citations are definitely needed throughout, especially the opening portion regarding the British in the Cape. Overall the quality of information and many linked articles corroborate the points made. I think expanding some parts of this section would be good as well, e.g. the distribution of English speakers in South Africa. The Zambian portion of this section also needs more citations. I'm not so certain about the relevance of name changes either but I'll accept that. The Kenyan portion of the page must be expanded too because they were quite a significant population, both politically and numerically. Larger than the population of Zambia/Northern Rhodesia was at one time. Additionally with the British involvement in the Mau Mau conflict. Maybe it would be good to mention the modern situation as well.

French Section

"There are about 37,000 Franco-Mauritians (2% of the population) the smallest ethnic group."

Every source I can find states that the white community is mostly South Africans in Mauritius, ~22,000 of which. And there is a smaller Franco community numbering about ~13,000 with a similarily sized community in South Africa. Additionally the inclusion of "Mayotte" seems odd, as it is just an empty section.

Another flaw is this, "As of December 31, 2011, there were 94,382 French citizens in all three countries, Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia." The article is about ethnic French/Europeans, not citizens. A previous dispute(Regarding the inclusion of British citizens in the European population of Kenya) stated that because we do not know the ethnicity of citizens, it is unreliable and should not be used.

Portugese Section

Should we adjust this section to mirror the other layouts of this article? E.g. the separation of each country getting its own section like in the Afrikaner part of the page. Again the numbers given are very conflicting, it states "It is estimated the population of Portuguese people in Mozambique has increased to over 20,000 since the peace settlement of Mozambique in 1992." whereas the number in the opening states 50,000. Additionally I think linking it to the Portuguese South African page might be helpful as it has significantly more details on the topic. However, it too has its issues but we'll deal with those when we get to it.

An idea which spawned during the 20th century was that of Lusotropicalism which may be worth mentioning too.

Germans in Africa

We definitely need to an add a section about the Germans who migrated to South Africa, of which many did. There's even a unique German dialect in the Natal as well as numerous German schools. Some of which have closed down however. Plenty of place names originate from German settlers as well. There's even a small city that still speaks mostly German in South Africa, although many have likely assimilated into the English or Afrikaner populations, I think it is still important to reference the German immigration to the country. Although it is referenced under "Languages" it still lacks context.

Partially implemented

Spanish

Canary Islands are geographically part of Europe? Does it not count because it is still part of Spain? Should we include its history similarily as to how the Greeks of antiquity were included?

Geographical definitions

Some would argue that outlying Indian or Atlantic Ocean islands are not a part of Africa, others would maintain that they belong to the closest continent. In that vein, why are the Canary Islands (with about 2m Europeans) and La Reunion (about 200,000) not listed on this page? Particularly since Mauritius is. Surely, this is not about national sovereignty.

Languages

Just added a bit more information. Y

Sports

Complete rewriting. Y

End

Thanks to anyone who read all of this, I think it would be good to keep improving this article. It definitely needs more consistency regarding information and quality improvements. I'll probably begin with some minor things. Cheers, ( SailingOn (talk) 22:51, 21 November 2017 (UTC) )

In most African states, the exodus of whites was indeed voluntary. For example, you'll note that in examples such as Kenya, Guinea, Tanzania, and Zambia white emigration greatly increased immediately prior to independence (I have the figures for the three former federal territories in the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland somewhere, and you'll note that white emigration was at its highest the year prior to independence, gradually leveling off past the year of independence and decreasing every year afterward). By the time independence was formally bestowed by the governing power, the whites who remained were either determined to stay or simply waiting until they had an opportunity to leave (ie waiting to qualify for pensions, waiting to acquire enough funds for emigration, etc). It's perfectly reasonable to state that this was the case in the majority of African states - especially in Francophone Africa, examples like Burundi, the ex-Belgian Congo, and Algeria notwithstanding. One could argue that the decision by most of the Portuguese emigrants to leave Mozambique was also voluntary, albeit as a direct reaction to discriminatory policies...FRELIMO nationalized all their businesses. White Zimbabweans departed voluntarily in this sense as well, most probably didn't want to leave until their property was taken, but they weren't forced to leave as a matter of explicit policy or at gunpoint.

With special regards to the Portuguese figures for Mozambique, and the sentence that "the majority once lived along the Mediterranean coast, in South Africa, or in Zimbabwe", these are statements which are taken directly from the reliable sources cited for each. The Encyclopedia Britannica article on Africa cited for that last sentence, for example, states that the majority of white Africans lived either in North African Mediterranean states or in one of two southern African states: Zimbabwe, and South Africa. Feel free to replace either statement with a more credible source if said source indicates something different.

Anyway, this is reflective of a larger problem that has come up again and again, namely the issue of conflicting sources. The truth is most African nations have not published statistics on their respective white populations since achieving independence. The censuses for Malawi and Namibia for example, explicitly dropped references to race after independence date. South Africa, Zimbabwe, and possibly Kenya are three of the very few exceptions. Others like Togo, the Ivory Coast, Mozambique, Angola, and Ghana do not differentiate well between whites who are citizens of those countries and those are foreign expatriates/recent foreign immigrants. Therefore when it comes to exact figures a lot of what we have is educated guesses by ethnologists and historians. To make matters more confusing, there is a large transient white African population which goes back and forth between Africa and Europe, or between separate African states. This is especially true for white Namibians, Zambians, Swazilanders, Botswanans, and Zimbabweans, who tend to live as expatriates in South Africa for business reasons. I've personally met a white Swazilander who was born in Swaziland, lived in Zimbabwe for most of his life and now resides in South Africa, and holds three passports(!)

Just about every section in this article needs more citations, and needs the conflict of preexisting sources mentioned in explicit detail, especially where no modern census figures are available with regards to population size. The "Spanish in Africa" section needs to be split into two separate sections: one for independent African states and the other for Spanish territories and enclaves, reflecting the unique geopolitical realities of that particular country's extraterritorial holdings. The information will then be categorized into subsections for each.

Debates over the presence of Europeans in Africa during antiquity have generally yielded nothing (example, Greeks and Vandals in North Africa), etc and have become compromised increasingly by the fact that some contributors perceive Berbers to be white, and have argued that if Greeks and Vandals are included in the article, there is nothing to prevent the Berbers of antiquity and related modern ethnic groups like the Mauritanian Moors from being included as well. Therefore I've refrained from taking a side on this topic and generally focused on populations descended from various colonial overtures from the sixteenth century onward (we have since simplified this somewhat by adding "of European ancestry" to the article title). The discussion about Europeans of antiquity residing in Africa does have merit and is a worthwhile topic to examine more closely in the future.

The content of the "Spanish in Africa" section would ideally be split into separate subsections, one for Spain's extraterritorial holdings and the other for independent African states, to preempt confusion and reflect the unique geopolitical realities of that situation. As it is, we don't have enough information there to justify the creation of two subsections along these lines (there's only one subsection currently, and it discusses Equatorial Guinea).

While I've had an eye towards reorganizing this article for some time now, I do not currently have the time to do so. What I've tried to do in the meantime is focus on the overview section to provide a general history of Europeans and their descendants on the African continent.

Thanks, --Katangais (talk) 19:31, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Fair points. But I think the impact of the Congo Crisis on the psyche of many Europeans in Africa was significant. Additionally the Mau Mau rebellion. I have heard at one point that the British intended to leave Kenya in the hands of the white settlers but it did not come to fruition following the rebellion. But I suppose leaving in fear about the hypothetical is still a voluntary action.

This is something I've thought of about poor data keeping, but there are some merely mathematical problems. E.g. 4,000 French in Angolan but then elsewhere it states 220,000 whites in Angola while also stating all 220,000 are Portuguese. I think it would be reasonable to total it to 224,000 when there is information like that for the sake of consistency. Additionally I'm not sure if we should include percentages under the main section, the populations in Africa grow rapidly so this information is likely out of date by the time it made it onto this page. Interesting point about the transient status, I also saw something in an article about the Portugal Mozambicans which stated that many just stick it out for a few months before going back.

I've been working on improving citations quite a bit today, especially under the "Sports" section and the "Languages" portions of the page. Additionally I'll keep trying to fix the various uncited portions elsewhere on the page when I get to it/correct information if it is incorrect.

Regarding Berbers being white I think is a poor dispute, and it doesn't really belong on this post. Even if they were considered to be white, they are not of European ancestry so they should not be on this page.

Regarding the Europeans in Africa during antiquity. The best solution would likely to be to seperate this page as being the one dedicated to the more modern European presence, and a separate page called something like "European Presence in Africa during antiquity" so that the information doesn't get muddled and conflicting.

I will attempt to create some subsection regarding the Spanish presence in the Canary Islands and Ceuta etc once I gather enough references to accurately portray the situation.

Thanks for taking the time to reply, I stumbled across some of these disputes since I wrote the initial post in the archives. I hope my recent additions have at least helped to improve the situation on this article. Your work is much appreciated! ( SailingOn (talk) 20:29, 22 November 2017 (UTC) )

Napata102 (talk) 00:00, 27 December 2019 (UTC) There is a fundamental error here. You cannot assert that someone is a White African because he was born in Africa. If he was born in Angola or South African he may be a White Angolan or White South African. There is a great imperialist assumption that Europeans can determine other people's identity! In order to be African you need to be accepted by other Africans as African. Being African is not a self description. This confusion between national identity and African identity is simply a claim for benefits. This is a claim to have the same benefits in law that are given to any Africans in South Africa even though they previously were entitled to the status of Whites which was completely different from the status of African. Does Europe accept the status of Black European? No! They are either European or non-European. Same in Africa ..you are either African or non African and that is not determined by other white people or your skin colour. There have been many white people who have been accepted as African (Note not white African) one of whom became President of Zambia. The idea that being African is determined by your skin colour is so so insulting to Africans. There are many children who have African fathers or mothers who are almost completely white - to Africans they are simply African - not White African. There is NO SUCH STATUS as White African, legally, culturally or politically.

Perhaps it should be called 'Whites in Africa of European descent" or does that make the silliness completely explicit? The French in Algeria were not accepted as Algerian even after so many years - or should it be called 'White settlers in Africa'?

A plurality of white South Africans have always identified as being African, as opposed to European. Hence the self-identification as Afrikaners.

“White Africans” is just as applicable as the terms “White Americans” and “White Brazilians”. True, none of these groups of people are, strictly speaking, indigenous to their respective continents, but they’ve lived there for so long and have adopted such unique cultures that they can no longer correctly be described as Europeans. --Katangais (talk) 04:46, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Interchangeability of colonies, colonists, etc and settlements and settlers

Hello all,

It has come to my attention that the terms "colonisation", "colonists", and "colonised" have been used in a blanket manner to replace the terms "settlement", "settlers", and "settled" in the overview section of the article. It looks like a contributor simply replaced them with zero regard for context whatsoever, using a word search function. This is problematic for several reasons.

Firstly, colonisation is not interchangeable with settlement. Most European colonies established in Africa failed to attract significant degree of European settlement. They existed primarily for resource extraction, nothing more. This is a necessary distinction we have to make when we're discussing European settlement patterns on the continent, as opposed to merely where Europeans built mines, infrastructure, and forts rather than permanent homes. Following this line of thinking, there is a second distinction that must be made when we're discussing Europeans colonising African territories and Europeans settling African territories. For example, while it is correct to state that Europeans both colonised and settled Southern Rhodesia or Angola, it is only correct to note that Europeans colonised Nyasaland; very few settled there.

"Colonists" and "settlers" are mostly interchangeable, so I'm OK leaving those changes as is.

The recent revert of the page by anon contributor revealed these word changes, and as the original author of the overview section I'm disappointed by the intellectual laziness demonstrated by whoever replaced that language in such a ham-fisted, indiscriminate manner without due consideration of context. I'm reverting the word choice for the most part, as well as a quote from the Christian Science Monitor which was edited so it no longer actually reflects the original quote.

Thanks, --Katangais (talk) 12:39, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

White Nigerians

There is no way in hell Nigeria or west Africa would have that number of White people than southern africa where they settled. I have never come across such data. Where is all this cake information coming from..? Very misleading Seakrate (talk) 04:22, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes there are white people in Nigeria all over the country, but they are few and far between and that's an understatement. Unless your in a bigger city like Lagos Abuja or Port Harcourt, you may never find a white person in Nigeria. You may see some expats working for the government or diplomats in embassies or there for some event. Representatives for multinational corporations are also often white and of course your tourists which will likely be near the nicer parts of the bigger cities Seakrate (talk) 04:44, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

I personally think it comes from some confusion of whether Lebanese people are considered white, I believe there is a rather Lebanese community throughout West Africa. Possibly some study included them which has then been passed on as correct on this page. SailingOn (talk) 23:58, 23 February 2022 (UTC)