That laugh, like wtf.

They're playing a rhetorical game about how "kill whitey" means that they just want to overthrow things they call white supremacist structures. It's the same reason why that one professor said "white lives don't matter... as white lives"

They're defining "white" and "whitey" to not mean white people, but to mean some institutional power structure.

Of course, that won't matter when they smash your head in with a brick while they scream "kill whitey". It's a rhetorical game.

Not to mention do they actually believe they would have had Wakanda if it was not for white people. Do they have any reason to believe that other then wishful thinking?

Yes, because they have this mistaken Marxist understanding of both history and economics that they are rationalizing. They are claiming that Africa had massive natural resource wealth that was drained from the continent by European Imperial empires, and if they had been allowed to be left alone in their perfect ethno-states, they would have thrived.

The ethno-state argument is wrong... because they still have ethno-states and poverty between different African ethno-states is stark because different countries have different economic and political structures. Natural resource wealth doesn't necessitate that you will successfully develop that. Liberia and Mali are perfect examples of that, particularly Mali because it contained one of the wealthiest humans to have ever lived: Mansa Musa. The Mali Empire had huge stores of gold that were being traded with Islamic Caliphates, and the dude himself changed the value of Gold & Silver across Europe because he devalued gold by passing so much of it out (and having a shit ton of that move through European trade roots).

Honestly, African kingdoms had been colonies of Islamic Empires for quite some time. Islam has probably done more damage to black Africans than European Christians have, particularly in regards to slavery & imperialism.

They did not even invent the wheel, they adopted it in the 19th century.

The wheel is only useful economic engine if you have an animal to use it. Good luck fighting off the lions with that docile pack animal. Most places didn't invent the wheel. Most places adopted it from people who had adopted it, and only where it was useful.

I know they had a few kingdoms but the left make them sound like some incredible utopias way ahead of europeans they were still playing with spears while Europeans were working with steam engines.

The arguments are misunderstandings of the problems that many of the African civilizations faced. Most of which involve little high-protein cash crops, no navigable waterways, and malaria. The last one is very severe because it means your population density is effectively capped.

One of the things that I've seen pointed to is that some of the African Empires had very large cities with massive streets that seemed to go on for miles, but the revisionists misunderstand why that's a problem. African Cities couldn't support dense populations when the threat of Malaria is so god damned high. They had to be broad and wide because you have a max density before whole swaths of your city get wiped out. Worse, you don't have significant amounts of running water or sewage. You can't irrigate as you might normally would in Europe outside of just the Nile river basin. Waterways completely dry up, and when they pool, they become breeding grounds for mosquitos... and therefore malaria. Worse, significant trade with the outside world in the Sub-Sahara is effectively impossible. If you can't trade, you can't automate, and you can't have a high population density, particularly during early stages of civilizational development, you're basically fucked. If you have those things, you have exponential growth and development.

The difference in development between Eastern Europe & Sub Saharan Africa compared to Mediterranean Europe & Africa is stark because you're looking at linear development in isolation versus exponential development of connected regions.