Is there any reason why western military doctrines were not adopted by native Americans en masse?
Was it not efficient enough to them, despite the fact that they suffered devastating losses from battles against Anglo soldiers?
>>392171
And where were they going to produce an enlightenment state governing a proto-capitalist mass economy from?
>>392202
Copy and paste whatever the fuck the colonials were doing.
As if they couldn't see the thirteen colonies's administrative and military efficiency.
>>392208
Yeah, because you'll suddenly generate university trained patrician land owners operating export oriented estates.
>>392216
>university trained patrician land owners operating export oriented estates.
>implying they didn't have any
>>392224
It wasn't the habitual mode of economic life, and the impact of the marketised world system resulted in a kind of silk road of furs in what is now Canada, but this didn't produce modern states or proto-nations capable of withstanding the force of a European model state.
>>392171
Look two good examples of modernisation and adaption in war are the Zulu and the Maori. The Maori in particular developed capitalism, "Christianity" and "anti-Christianity", and state like formations; and, they still got the shit kicked out of them in two wars (with Maori on both sides of course).
>>392227
>but this didn't produce modern states or proto-nations capable of withstanding the force of a European model state.
They did come pretty close with the Iroquois confederacy
>>392235
Yeah, I'm not going to down play that, but OP thinks that dramatic social change is like a light switch. Dramatic social change typically involves revolutionary dislocations.
Most native American tribes were matriarchal societies
They were the biggest kucks back then
There are countless written records about X and Y's mother, sister, daughter sleeping and breeding with white European settlers willingly.
That shit is fucked up.
K U C K E D
U
C
K
E
D
>>392243
>pic
>the deconstruction of lines of division between groups of people is somehow bad despite massive correlation between globalization/internationalization and a massive global rise in the quality of life
This thread went well.
Time to move on to another thread.
>>393401
>Governments should be organized along the lines of a mental phenomenon less than half of the human race experience.
>>393401
>a massive global rise in the quality of life
Ah yes, that.
>>392243
applying evolutionary ideas to modern society is my favourite meme
>>393401
>massive global rise in the quality of life
is this what liberals actually believe?
>>393401
>>the deconstruction of lines of division between groups of people is somehow bad despite massive correlation between globalization/internationalization and a massive global rise in the quality of life
Yeah globalization has worked out really well m8
>>393440
The average quality of life right now is higher than at any other point in history. That's not even up for any kind of debate.
>>393446
Globalisation is responsible for the rise of religious fanaticism but not in the way you think it is.
>>393459
Explain yourself.
>>393487
Could I get some prominent examples of Hindu fanaticism?
>>393497
You know those stories about how Hindus treat cows as sacred, and let them do what they want?
9 out of 10 times that's an excuse for mob violence.
"Some Muslim hit a cow with his car. Clearly we must beat the shit out of him and chase him out of our community, because something vague about cows."
>>393497
The rape of Bangladeshi comes to mind.
Also during the partition of Pakistan there were huge fucking riots between Hindus and Muslims. It was basically gang wars on steroids.
>>393455
>quality of life
Undefined. Please define.
>>393497
Cow protection movement started (IIRC) in the 1980s well before the 25 year rule
>>393497
I wasn't saying that as if Hindu fanaticism was a serious issue, although I've heard scattered news stories about Hindu attacks on Muslims. I meant that Hindus aren't as widely radicalized and violent as Muslims worldwide are.
>>392235
The Iroquois confederation was largely backed by Brittain which even helped them write their founding documents as a way to combat french expansion and a war in North America which despite their best attempts happened anyway. It was still a massive leap in the right direction but it was a little too late for it too develope properly especially since with the french indian war stressed brit relations with colonists and indians.
>>393517
Overall health, life expectancy, the quality, diversity and regularity of diet, access to clean water, hygiene, housing conditions.
You could probably also include the fact that the work that a human being needs to perform in order to provide to himself is less physically arduous these days thanks to current levels of technology.
>>393568
Also literacy and education.
>>393568
>>393577
So those are some measures, but they aren't a scale, and they don't deal with relatives or absolutes. I'd hold Bangladesh against society in 300BC and argue that human suffering has been greatly advanced.
How do we sum textile workers with 18 hours a day burning to death against over-weight americans?
You've still not got to the crux of the point.
>>393606
>extinction
Yeah, uh, the populations of Western countries are also higher than they have been at any point in history,
>>393602
I said average quality of life. Yes, human suffering has also increased, and it probably wouldn't be unreasonable to say that getting the short straw in our age is arguably worse than getting it in times past. But if you had to choose a point in human history without knowing what kind of position in society you'd end up in, the modern era would be the safest bet, no contest.
>>392171
A couple things.
First, many Indians learned Western military tactics through their alliances with Western militaries.
Second, Western military tactics were not essentially better than native tactics, which is exactly why Westerners adopted native ideas of war into their own strategies.
Third, going off of the second point, Western dominance has far more to do with technological superiority, both in arms manufacturing and being able to conquer, set up a fort, conquer, set up a fort, etc.
Indians "en masse" weren't any more united than Europeans "en masse" at this time. In fact there was far more division, since Europeans at least only had a few language families while North America had incredible linguistic diversity. Ultimately, that's the difference: Europeans made themselves fairly homogeneous through conquest and enforced homogeneity through politics, religion, and economy. If you look at the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois League/Confederacy), for example, the Natchez, or even the Hopi, there is no equivalence. These were all ultimately formed based on establishing peaceful interrelations and mutual cooperation.
Which isn't to say that none of them went to war, had slave systems, etc. mess up shit, but there's a fundamentally different attitude in the American continent. Despite their great diversity, Indian societies shared a lack of interest in imposing their wills on others, at least until European contact threatened to have a foreign will imposed on them. Even then, they still signed treaties with the Whites time and time again.
>>392243
>Most native American tribes were matriarchal societies
No they weren't. Many were matrifocal, however.
>>393630
>the populations of Western countries are also higher than they have been at any point in history,
And the same goes for sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East you dip shit
>>393703
Right, so we should obviously enter into a breeding contest with them instead of exporting the value base, societal models and technologies that stopped us fucking like rabbits.
>>393736
>exporting the value base, societal models and technologies that stopped us fucking like rabbits.
>exporting
See, here's the thing. Exporting has failed. They prefer to come to come to western countries and take advantage of western welfare while more of their kind keeps breeding like human livestock.
>>393740
There's a metric fuckton of studies that show birth rates among immigrants steadily dropping as they integrate into the host culture. The problem is mostly that Europe can't into effective integration.
>>393758
Social democracy on this scale is unprecedented. There is a good chance this could have unprecedented, negative effects with regards to integration and assimilation due to complacency and enclaving. A lot of people have no desire to join the prevailing host culture and if nothing forces them to, they won't.
>>392171
Because they would rather try to fuck the next tribe over than unite. Then they did unite they were able to hold their own against the colonies.
Today, I will remind you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f82d7-SVzCw
>>393439
I say the researchers lacked the programming language to describe the rat utopia.
