Talk:History of the Jews in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

Intro reference to "following colonization"
The referecne to "following colonization" in the intro means absolutely nothing. For it to mean something, it is necssary to define at what moment the Congo was colonised. Even then, it woud be completely superfluous. Also any reference to something in the 1900s in an African country is obviously within the colonial era. That being said, the Jews could have moved there quite early on, as was the case in a number of other countries. They could have moved in at the time of the creation of the Congo Free State, as other nationals did. Which begs the question as to at what point do we call it "colonization". There are references to the arrival of Jews in many countries in Africa, Asia and the New World. Nowhere has anyone felt the need to spell out that the Jews moved there because these countries had been colonised by Europeans. Thanks, regards Rui &#39;&#39;Gabriel&#39;&#39; Correia (talk) 15:37, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm not sure I understand your argument. Before 1885, there was no meaningful European community of any size in what is now the DRC - I think you're confusing the Congo Free State (which was a colonial state) with the Kingdom of Kongo (which was a de jure Portuguese vassal with no meaningful white presence). We cannot take a knowledge of New Imperialism or African history for granted. So - if your argument is that we should mention the Free State colonisation here, then I absolutely agree. But Jews were not exceptional amid white emigration to the Congo post-1900, but were definitely part of the historical process. I am certainly not making any kind of antisemitic point about colonialism. —Brigade Piron (talk) 18:49, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, Brigade Piron. Apologies for the delay - wrote on your page, then replied here, but my internet decided again to sabotage me.
 * Let me if I can make myself clearer. Let's do this is parts:
 * 1. There was a continuum of European presence from the early (Portuguese) explorations followed by small settlements along the coast, then small-scale incursions beyond the coastline, to large-scale exploration such as Stanley's to a gradual implantation of colonial structures.Throughout this time people were settling, starting with a handful of merchants and traders to the waves of civil servants and other civilians at the last decades of colialism. At what point does this gradual process become colonisation? Just as an example, the aricle Precolonial history of Angola goes to to 1652, Colonization of Angola starts in 1575, which means there is no clarity as to from what point can it be considered colonisation.Therefore, a construction such as "following colonization" for me is vague and adds no real meanning. Also, bear in mind that the first sentence already says that the first Jews started arriving in 1907. I believe that statement by itself does away with any need for further clarificatin.
 * 2. Jews were present among European exploring and settling in the colonies throughtout this process, starting with Jews settled in São Tomé e Príncipe from 1500 onwards and those who were part of the crews of the very first ships that arrived in Brazil in 1500. They were among the first settlers in South Africa in 1652 and New Amsterdam (New York) 1654. So, as you said, "Jews .... were definitely part of the historical process".
 * 3. Lastly, as much as they were part of the process, and in reply to your statement "The Congo was a European colony. Without this fact, it's doubtful that there would be any Jews there at all", I agree, but it need not be so. There are records of small independent Jewish settlements in Latin America outside the areas then seen as 'European'. Granted, these were short-lived, even perhaps experimental with no long-term viability, but the point being that they were on their own, not within someone else's colonies.
 * Rui &#39;&#39;Gabriel&#39;&#39; Correia (talk) 12:58, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I think you misunderstand the Congo's historical situation. As I understand it, the Kongo Kingdom had no European settlement (certainly after the first few years) whatsoever, let alone a Jewish one. Before the 1880s, Europeans died like flies in central Africa from tropical disease unless they stayed right on the coast. As you will of course know, the DRC's coastline is absolutely tiny! Unless you can find any specific WP:RS to support your argument about Jews in the Congo pre-1880s, I'm afraid it's WP:OR and pretty doubtful too! —Brigade Piron (talk) 09:38, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
 * To respond more clearly to your point in (1), the Kongo cannot really be considered a colony of Portugal in the same way that the Belgian Congo can be of Belgium. Vassal state perhaps, not colony. If anything, the Kongo's collapse can be attributed to Portuguese disinterest in the region in the later period. Any kind of comparison between Spanish-Portuguese colonialism in Latin American or SE Asia in the period and Central Africa is very problematic. —Brigade Piron (talk) 09:41, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Nowhere was I trying to amke any comparisons - only trying to illustrate that it is difficult to determine what constitutes coillonisation, at what point does one deem it to have started and secondly that separate processes happen semi-independltly of each other. Rui &#39;&#39;Gabriel&#39;&#39; Correia (talk) 16:02, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:History of the Jews in Abkhazia which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 05:13, 5 June 2020 (UTC)