Why did western civilisation become so dominant?
Right makes might.
They had guns germs and steel. Nobody else did.
Geographical location meant good access to the New world to colonise for wealth and riches, competition between nations for this made a huge need for technological improvements and advancement. Europe wasn't on top until the 17th century onwards.
The west could i suppose be grouped as a collective civilisation despite our different nations, I imagine we only have a century or so left being dominant. However unlike the past i doubt we'll wane into obscurity while others raise, i actually feel like the whole world will eventually advance to a similar level. Future is actually bright and im not a shitty pessimist.
A better culture, by accident or luck.
>>1085820
Why didn't any North African or western Africans take advantage of the new world?
>USA in debt to China for trillions
>people think the west runs shit
oh haha
>>1085848
Lack of guns
Lack of germs
Lack of steel
>>1085775
Read Max Weber.
Also we don't know but we are struggling to explain it. One might even argue it's the main task of any Western historian.
>>1085848
Too sandy
>>1085848
They didnt have the technology.
>>1085775
The Ming stopped the boats
Primarily by lumping several groups of cultures together which have waxed and waned over time but which generally were and remain somewhat prosperous. Take any individual nation under the grouping of "western civilization" and you'll see that they haven't been dominant on their own for all or perhaps even most of the time for which the whole of all nations under said grouping have been.
>>1085867
I guess they didn't feel like it
>>1085867
Because they were too busy killing each other
>>1085851
>Implying China is in control when the USA is 60% of China's international market
>>1085872
Isn't one of the points europeans were so far technological than we didn't stop killing each others?
>>1085872
Why didn't they develop guns to make killing easier?
>>1085775
Because western europe had good agriculture and was slap bang next to the Mediterranean which was the informatin superhighway of the past.
>>1085888
I tough Tribal warfare was more brutal than other kinds of warfare, the Yanomamis kind of warfare for example kill a lot more people per capita than nearly all other kinds of warfare, with they kidnaping of women and raids to exterminate (ofter caused be people acusing each others of sorcery), and they are far from the only ones to get that far (in nova guine they killed each other for pigs in that way for example).
>>1085848
West Africans were too far behind, North Africans were suffering under Ottoman incompetence. North West Africa is basically just fucking nothing. They don't even want it today.
>>1085956
Tribal Warfare is usually much less brutal, it's usually skirmishes, cattle raids, kidnapping for slaves, and the occasional larger battle. It usually had a well developed honour code. This all developed to keep casualties low, because they didnt actually like to have lots of death and suffering, while maintaining the facade of honour, courage etc.
What you're talking about is actually bitter ethnic rivalries, a war of hate.
Industrialization. The only non-western empire worth its salt did not have the new world to colonize to fuel their development. At this point Chinas has more than caught back up though. if they can avoid a democratic revolution for another decade or so, they are in good shape.
>>1085820
Oops, this. Except a century might be a generous estimate. The world moves much quicker now.
>>1085874
This is not really how economics works. We keep their currency up and in return they get to keep accumulating U.S. debt while they sell us mass produced good and natural resources they are pilfering from Africa at the moment. The 60% thing actually hurts America because we are the value behind their currency.
>>1086082
I would love to see sources for that, the Yanomamis mainly wage war between themselves, and even when is pretty ritualized they kill themselves a lot. They aren't the worse tough, the Jivaros have a religion about gaining more soul power while killing people. They are the worst assholes ever.
western dominance happened because of the invention of the printing press, which allowed the cross-pollination of ideas to happen far more easily and so the intellectual development of our part of the world proceeded at a uch faster rate than other places.
Once we started making intellectual progress faster it was only a matter of time until we became more powerful militarily and economically.
I think having a culture of colonialism and ownership, coupled with competition from nearby nations, really made a difference. Also, geographically there are a lot of coastlines, peninsulas and islands in Europe, which encouraged an oceangoing industry. This also helped them establish vast trade networks and oceangoing empires.
Also, guns, germs, and steel.
>>1086147
>guns, germs, and steel.
I really hope everyone saying this is just memeing
>>1086131
What is impressive is how the printing press wasn't oppressed so fervently in Europe.
The printing press, in simpler form, already existed in East Asia but was strongly controlled by the government who really only used it as a propaganda tool. I don't know why European rulers didn't succeed in doing the same.
>>1086127
My source is just my own knowledge of tribes. Perhaps a loss of habitat is forcing those tribes to get more aggressive and violent.
Ottoman trade obstructionism
Movable printed type (& latin characters)
Christian work ethic
Location (need for spices, "in between" continents)
Timing of the age of discovery
The Black plague
>>1086204
You really cant just leave out the effect colonising the new world had.
Why do you think France, Britain and Spain were the most successful..
>>1086208
I thought it was implied by Location
You are correct though
It was the West's time to shine, every culture or civilization has a timespan and a period where they will achieve the most glory.
I'd wager that East Asia is next.
>>1085867
They didnt need to. Spain and Portugal searched for new roots of trade,while those places had access to the classic path.
>>1085888
The archebus was developed in Europe ( Spain I think) and it was the weapon that really pushed fire weapons as the standard
>>1085848
In terms of the Americas, lack of horses/oxen.
To really start yourself up on the developmental you need to be able to form cities.
Cities are the shit. I mean, sure, being farmers and stuff sucks, but with a city you have
>concentrated populations
All in one place, know where to find them, can focus efforts and resources better.
>larger populations
More people means... well, you can probably figure. Faster growth. More resources. faster technological development.
>persistent populations
This means that if you start building up infrastructure there... say, shipyards, roads, walls, they'll still be being made use of generations later.
Now that has requirements. More people means more food, and this is prior to any good transport system; a city can't sustain itself with hunting and gathering. You need farming.
And farming sucks. Holy shit. You ever tried to go out and till a few hectares by hand? Backbreaking labor in the original sense. That's what oxen, I think, were originally used for- because once you domesticated oxen and developed a harness for them, they could pull a plow, and suddenly it wasn't quite so hideous and awful.
There are other downsides too. Farming isn't what humans evolved for, after all. Diet isn't quite natural for them. Farming is dependent on weather and lack of disease/blights. Lots of things beyond your control can fuck your shit up senpai. When you're a hunter/gatherer, you don't give a fuck, you just keep walking.
(Incidentally, living concentrated in a city, with lots of domesticated animals in your city and surrounding farms, is a ripe petri dish for disease... which if it doesn't kill you, makes you stronger. Sorta.)
So to handle cities you need
>farming
>domesticated beast of burden/plow animals
>decent luck
I think NorthAM was lacking on the second one; south america (at least in places, like say, the jungle,) lacked the first. And they weren't Yuropean, so they both fucked up the third.
>>1086189
The Middle Class that was formed by 1400's was too powerful for a Monarachy to completely rule over completely
>>1086259
As an incidental note; in central Africa, indigenous populations learned to avoid bodies of water, because bodies of standing water tended to breed flies. Mosquitoes, tse-tse flies, whatever. And those are bad.
But you still need water, and their response to this was to settle MILES from the actual water. And start their days by walking for a few hours to go get (and carry back) water for the day. It worked, it kept you away from the disease-carrying flies and parasites, and you could get by... but that kind of water limitation really prevents cities.
When Europeans arrived, they thought the Africans were retarded, settled right on the water because that's what they did back in Yuroland, and... well, malaria ensued.
>>1085775
First it was might, now it's imitation.
>>1085848
They were already the home of some of the most powerful and independent empires of the "Old World". Why would they bother?
>>1086259
They had better crops than Europe tough. Maize let's you get a lot more surplus than wheat, and paired with beans gives rounds it up nicely, that's one of the reasons they had massive cities, they could support lots of people with realtively primitive agriculture. The Aztecs tough had the chiapas, than were able to produce a lot more than land crops, so they could support all the cities in the lake of mexico and Tenochtitlan. That's pretty funny too, because the Aztecs only had a civilization for less than 300 hundred years, and they empire was less than 100 when the Spaniards come to curbstomp them.
>>1086290
Being 2000 years behind has its downsides.
>>1086259
Tenochtitlan in central America was likely the biggest city in the world at one point famalam.
Several Mayan cities, Chichen Itza, Palenque, and Tikal, were all huge fucking cities.
The Inca also had some truly massive cities.
Even a few North American cities existed. The remains of a massive city (including the worlds largest earthen pyramid) are in the Mississippi valley, the Pueblo built their clay cities in the desert, and the Iroquois allegedly had a giant city near lake Ontario at one point.
>>1086308
I think N. America being so huge probably hurt the start of civilization. Competition got too tough, or plagues started you could just fuck off and be a nomad.
We are pretty sure that's what happened to Cahokia atleast. Bad shit went down and people gave up farming and went hunter gatherer.
>>1085775
Rome set an example, a standard of success for every following empire to strive for.
I don't really know, I'm talking out of my ass. Really it's going to be access to other civilizations by way of the Mediterranean and colonization.
>>1085775
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQfmv9fIfu0&list=PLXoujgzuzBV68V2Jg-UbWgkhOrZaC4XBi
Niall Ferguson has some ideas.
>>1085775
wine consumption created an incentive to develop transparent glassmaking technology, which led to eye glasses, which were the most important invention of the late middle age, since it allowed craftsmen and scientists to keep working at an old age, thus increasing the technological and scientific output of the west by a huge margin.
China never developed transparent glass since they drink tea or colorless alcohol, so they skipped straight to porcelain. Which is a more advanced technology, but without all the amazing outputs of transparent glass obviously.
>>1086082
>Tribal Warfare is usually much less brutal
http://socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogspot.com.au/2013/02/steven-pinker-on-deaths-by-violence-in.html
Pinker and lawrence keeley argue otherwise but I am not an expert.
>>1085775
Global imperialism and a move toward and freer trade.
>>1085851
>china thinks that investment in us bonds is the best use of their money
>thinking that America isn't still on top
>>1085775
There have been many theories on the rise of the west but the real reason why it became dominant is poorly understood. Western academia loves wanking over its own history but completely ignores the history and development of the other civilizations of the Old World. So as things stand it's impossible to get an objective study on subject.
Given that ancient rome innovated technology on a level that exceeds all ancient civilizations by a wide margin, you have to think there's something intrinsic about European peoples there.
Basic respect for the rule of law and a deeply entrenched legal tradition.
>>1086474
China
>>1086259
Jesus christ how wrong can one post be?
I literally don't know where to begin.
Just... shut the fuck up. Don't talk about shit you obviously know nothing about.
Ancient cities were overcrowded, unproductive disease-ridden firetraps. You don't need cities to have a larger population. The Americans has huge cities. The Americans have so many more good agricultural crops, most of which are stupidly easy to grow.
>>1086505
>>1086505
Niall Ferguson is superior
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETcDMiAVbA4&list=PLXoujgzuzBV68V2Jg-UbWgkhOrZaC4XBi&index=2
>>1085775
ITT: everyone is beating around the bush
No one has brought this,but the lack of unity in Europe was a strenght,that allowed Europe to not isolate itself and become backwards as China did. So thanks to the papacy Europe became the dominant region
>>1085867
Maybe they have on average lower intelligence. There. I said it.
>>1086592
K here is the book the series is based on nerd.
https://kat.cr/niall-ferguson-civilization-the-west-and-the-rest-epub-mobi-t11837332.html#main
>>1085775
White people naturally have higher IQ than shitskins.
>>1086499
impressive, but not nearly on the scale of Rome.
Romans discovered how to make domes, something that eclipses anything china did in terms of engineering.
>>1086619
JANNY
DELETE THIS NOW
>>1085851
>private Chinese investors put money in America instead of their own country
>this is bad
>>1085775
>Why did western civilisation become so dominant?
Because it was threatened with conquest and locked out of control of its traditional trade networks and thus had to change. The Trans-Saharan trade route was the first step in getting back in control of access to Africans goods. The development of the Caravel and the Carrack pushed what could be done in long distance trade and exploration. The Spanish conquest of the Aztec Empire started right before the Rise of Suleiman the Magnificent. A not small part of the gold and silver gotten from that was giving to the Pope, the knights of St.John, and to a number of princes of the HRE. In a very direct way the conquest of the new world payed for the wars to stop the Ottoman advance.
>>1086570
The papacy didn't cause that, the collapse of the roman empire and the peculiarities of germanic succession laws did. The popes merely profited from that.
>>1086685
Dome were in use in Europe since 2000 bc, Rome didn't discover it
>>1086672
Lol at you're bluntness
>>1086619
It is one of the correct factors though. Not only one, as many polacks think, but one of many.
Western people like spices.
But can't grow them at home.
Or at least used to.
>>1086672
Assuming that this is correct for a moment, why did this dominance only really start in the 18th century? I mean, sure lots of africans are primitive, but the middle east had large and powerful civilizations, as did eastern and southern asia. The people who built these civilizations weren't idiots, and they were in fact quite intelligent.
>>1086863
When subsaharans negroids are factored out, the average intelligence of the shitskins (lol, my first time using that word) increases.
>>1085800
Kek
>>1086735
>Le Ottoman had a chance of ever conquering Europe meme
Because of our ability to remain open to new ideas instead of shutting them out like China and Japan. I believe it was due to our ingenuity by taking shit other people made and improving on it
>>1085775
What I wanna know is how, when, and why Europe urbanised after suffering de-urbanisation ever since the crisis of the third century.
Also interested in when the Europeans surpassed the Muslims and Chinese. According to eu4 it happened somewhere in the 14th century, but I'm not sure.
>>1086980
>Also interested in when the Europeans surpassed the Muslims and Chinese
You can't really put a precise date on that and it doesn't matter. It's not about gross product surpassing that of China, it's about political dominance too.
>>1086474
Ancient Rome was stagnant as shit post Pax Romana and on par with China in some respects, but far behind (technologically) in many others
>>1086619
And you're assessment is wrong
There. I said it
>>1086474
>rome innovated technology
every time
>>1085775
Sea trade, they found new land and routes and colonies to create.
>>1085800
Aryan superiority + geographic factors
>>1089273
You never saw the dozens of GGS threads in the early days of /his/?
Ok so it's not genetic because it took until the 17th century for the West to become dominant. I would say it was imperialism that did it. Europe just realized they could split up Africa and the New World before the Ottomans realized they could do the same. They got there first and got the natural resources. Then when the Ottomans collapsed after WWI Europe snatched up the Middle East too. The Far East had no chance at that point. Done deal.
>>1086474
You know there were several rival cultures and civilizations that were on par with Rome even at its height technologically speaking right?
>innovated technology on a level that exceeds all ancient civilizations by a wide margin
Topeka
>>1089273
This guy is right in most of what he says but the "wrong!" thing ticks me off.
>>1089389
name them
Better culture
>>1089393
The Persians for one.
>>1089402
they didn't even have cement are you fucking kidding me
next
>>1089276
I didnt know that iranians and indians are considered western now
>>1089408
>muh cement
That only applies to the Achaemenids, both the Parthians and Sassanids had that.
Also had heated flooring before the Romans were even an empire or even an independent power from Estrucan yoke, built road networks across their lands and territories, used qanats and underground irrigation systems for centuries to name a few.
Also the single largest arched structure made of brickwork in the world was devised by Persian engineers.
Try again.
>>1086474
>rome innovated technology
if you mean co-opted and combined a bunch of other shit they gained from other people developing it, then sure they "innovated" it, but that isn't unique to Romans.
>>1089418
just looked it up, they had mortars that resemble cement, but they didn't have actual cement which requires lime and gypsum.
>>1089488
it was written by a leftist with the last name diamond. what did you expect
>>1089488
hitler dubs pls go
>>1089485
Wrong.
>The new dam currently under construction by the Islamic Republic near Rāmhormoz in the southwestern province of Khuzestān will eventually devour 1700-year-old Jareh Dam, which is the best preserved dam from the time of Sasanian dynasty (224-651 CE), said the team of experts working on the site after announcing that the dam could not be relocated on Friday.
>The site had been surveyed last May, and the team proposed that the ancient dam be relocated, but new studies show that will be impossible.
>“We discussed the issue with Iranian and foreign experts and all of them believe that the use of cutting equipment will result in the collapse of the dam,” team director Mahnāz Sharifi said.
>The dam was built using riverbed rounded stones and saruj, a mortar of cement and gypsum used in Sassanid dynastic era architecture, and will not be able to withstand the jolts of relocation operations.
>>1086308
Too bad the missispi valley started shit with the Spanish.
>>1086308
>Tenochtitlan in central America was likely the biggest city in the world at one point famalam.
Got wrecked by 200 spaniards.
American "empires"
>>1086368
This is a huge tangent but it's honestly a very interesting theory, assuming it's not a shitpost and that ive been spooked
Care to expand, anyone?
>>1090722
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Tenochtitlan
Go back to >>/pol/ please
>>1085851
The Chinks may have won the worldly struggle, but the west has won the culture war
>>1090774
>>>>>>>/pol/
What is it with the pseudo-/pol/itical scientists brigading us
How the fuck did you jump to the conclusion that /the current year/ is the end of the game?
Also there is no way to verifiably measure culture. Chinese culture tends to absorb foreign cultures and make their own, highly sinicised renditions of it, as is currently happening. For all intents and purposes this does not benefit the west in the long term
>>1090755
Just one city fucking lol
>>1090790
It's true, as much as you don't like to admit it.
Most other cultures try to ape the West in some way, and the Chinese are no different
>>1086308
>Tenochtitlan in central America was likely the biggest city in the world at one point famalam
Hello my historically illiterate friend.
The world's biggest cities have always been located in the old world
>>1090824
>Spanish conquistador Hernán Cortés arrived in Tenochtitlan on November 8, 1519. With an estimated population between 200,000 and 300,000, many[who?] scholars believe Tenochtitlan to have been among the largest cities in the world at that time.[14] Compared to Europe, only Paris, Venice and Constantinople might have rivaled it. It was five times the size of the London of Henry VIII.
>>1085956
How much killing the Yanomami actual do is up for debate since Napoleon Chagnon's research has been discredited. They do appear to be a warrior society, but they also like to boast and likely exaggerated things to impress Chagnon.
>>1090798
Yes, did you see what I read? China takes Western (for the most part selectively 'American', not so much European [excluding the fact American culture has overlaps]) culture, mixes it with its own existing culture and creates more effective forms of sociality for ITSELF, and this doesn't in any way benefit the 'West' so I don't see how it's remotely a victory
Also my point remains in that this could change hugely and if the West economically and politically declines, other countries will start manufacturing their own culture and follow whatever new superpower's culture that arises, your initial reply made it seem as though >Anno Domini 2016 was the end of all years
>>1085775
Many reasons. But ultimately, no Jews.
No, this isn't a /po/ meme. Starting with Edward I of England they were all either expelled or subjugated all across the West one country at a time. The Jews had always been the middleman in society. They dominated trade, banking, moneylending and finance. And these practices were different then they are today. Many of these businesses were purposely designed to keep people in poverty by the ruling classes. The Jews kept a lock on these businesses through extreme ethnic nepotism. Forcing the Jews out allowed the lower classes room to rise up in society. And when they began acting as the middleman, they didn't have the extreme ethnic and religious hostility towards their kin that the Jews had.
On the downside, the Jews all went to Eastern Europe began doing exactly what they had been doing in the West. Which explain a lot.
>>1085827
>by accident or luck
Or maybe something else. It's unreasonable to leave the possibility out.
>>1085775
WHITE POWER
>>1091188
But there were even less jews in Asia/Africa and none at all in the new world. That dosn't explain anything at all.
Trying to figure out why each and every new technology arose in a particular place would be endlessly complicated, however technology often spreads in a similar manner and we can gain a rough impression of which regions had an advantage and why by looking at geography and economics. Being part of a large interconnected area like the blue area meant you were more likely to be among the first to receive a new idea, though for centuries technological development was slow and much of europe beyond the Mediterranan was a backwater so this did not offer an overwhelming relative advantage.
The Mediterranean was still a major contributor of innovations, especially during the Roman Empire, but it lacked large densely populated expanses like the Indo-Gangetic plain and the north China plain. After the fall of the Western Roman Empire, China/Mongols were a source of many innovations and were apparently ahead until the 15th century at which point it becomes less clear.
From around the time of Charlemagne onwards, European agriculture had been developing with the help of innovations like the heavy plow and 3 field crop rotation to eventually become a large agriculturally productive region connected to thriving Mediterranean trade and later expansion of trade along the Atlantic coast, North Sea and Baltic. The 15th century saw the rise of the printing press, the popularization of gunpowder, steel plate armor, caravels and a multitude of other things, technology became more relevant and having even just a few decades worth of innovations above another group gave a strong advantage.
The Ottoman empire was part of the Mediterranan world and also enjoyed these advantages, giving the Europeans a pasting, however India was a bit further behind Portugal in naval technology by the time Vasco de Gama arrived.
>>1085851
>If you owe a thousand dollars, the bank owns you. If you owe a billion dollars, you own the bank
>>1091314
Sure it does. By the time of European colonization the Jews had already been forced out, with trade now being dominated by native Western Europeans.
Asia and Africa also didn't have access to New World riches.
Like I said, it's not the only reason. But it's definitely and important overlooked one.
>>1091957
Nice try /pol/
Now fuck off
>>1085775
Never, it has been in decline since the Minoans
>>1085785
/thread
>>1085851
>China thinks we'll pay them back honestly
That's the funny part.
>>1090790
it's quite easy to compare cultures, which language are they using, what clothes, ideologies etc, chinese people aren't wearing chinese clothes, they're wearing t-shirts, jeans, suits and other european clothing.
We're a product of our enviroment.
If Africans or Asians had been put to the test like we were, they would have developed the same.
You could also say that Africans or Asians have perfectly adapted to their given enviroment.
>>1089389
Han Chinese. Probably surpassed the Romans with exception to concrete.
>>1092351
Tenochtitlan's population in 1519 is estimated to have been between 150,000 and 250,000 people (Calnek 1976: 288, 1978: 316; Hassig 1988: 59; Sanders, Parsons, and Santley 1979: 154; Hodge 1994: 45). While acknowledging that the available data to reconstruct population figures are very scant, some historians proceed to estimate Tenochtitlan's population as ranging between 500,000 and 1 million (Soustelle 1962:9). It is likely that this enormous figure might approximate the number of people who lived in all the communities in and around the southern lake system at the time of the conquest. Cortés notes that the lakeshore communities in the vicinity of Tenochtitlan extended into the lake. This seems to indicate that they were expanding, and doing so in the same way Tenochtitlan had been: by building onto the water (Soustelle 1962: 9).
The Aztecs New Perspectives - Dirk R. Van Tuerenhout
>>1085775
The unleashed power of the Word of God available to the plow boy.
>>1086344
The never reverted backed to hunter-gather society. Agriculture is a genie that you can't just put back in the bottle once it is unleashed. No, what happened to Mississippian culture is that for some reason -- probably some kind of climatic collapse of the like, we are not sure -- they abandoned their cities (Really more like their large towns: the largest discovered settlement in the Mississippi, Cahokia, only had a population of 20,000.) and broke up into more disparate tribal villages (Another misconception, with the exemption of some plains tribes, most Natives were never truly nomadic.). They still relied most one agriculture for sustenance, its just that they never after the collapse did they again recover to the point of forming large settlements.
>>1085775
Secured resources in the new world before anyone else.
What really favored Europeans in their colonization of the Americans was deseases. When 90% of your people have an unknown sickness to who you have no immunity, you just can't fight. The truth is that Aztecs kicked the ass of Spaniards in the day of La Noche Triste but Cortez came back a year later when Mexicas were infested and weak.
Then you also have the enemies of the Mexicas that allied with conquistadors + steel weapons/armors/canons. To end the tragedy, Mexicas predicted that a god (Quetzalcoatl) would return to claim is throne and Aztecs (mostly Moctezuma II) thought that Cortez was Quetzalcoatl with his army. Seems logical to think that when your enemy has weapons that shoot "fire", are covered of metal armor, have big boats and have bulldogs while Mexicas had their smaller Xoloitzcuintli.
>>1085775
living out of the mediterranean success
>>1086262
the middle class only became relevant in politics at the end of the 18th century, and only in a few progressive countries
>>1086368
>wine consumption created an incentive to develop transparent glassmaking technology
first sentence, total bullshit
stopped reading
>>1086980
>What I wanna know is how, when, and why Europe urbanised after suffering de-urbanisation ever since the crisis of the third century.
efficient farming + industry -> peasants move to towns and cities
>>1092479
If we play that game, then most of what you consider to be 'European Culture' is merely an adaptation of originally extra-european culture. Starting by Christianity itself.
>>1093365
TONS of Mexicans also died to native diseases also. Just because they were exposed to their native diseases doesn't mean people still didn't die in droves. I thin something like 80% if the native population died BEFORE the European population got to them.
>>1093439
>I thin something like 80% if the native population died BEFORE the European population got to them.
[citation needed]
>>1090844
>[who?]
>>1087358
t. Butthurt injun
>>1090824
By old world I hope you also include china ?
Cause Jesus believed in the west.
Now that the west has fallen, Jesus is going to bless Africa and China.
It's all downhill from here.
Geographic positioning and climate. Europe had some of the most fertile land in the world along with easily domesticated animals and direct connection with Asia and north Africa.
The fertile land made food production easy and thus reacourses where abundant. Population growth was inevitable and due to the relatively small territory population density influenced social interaction. Africa couldn't sustain the same crops as Europe and the land was difficult to cultivate. Surface coal also powered Europe's industrial industries putting European manufacturing power above that of India and China which needed vast populations to compete with European industry.
Domesticated animals mean permanent settlement is easy and work loads are lessened. The permenant settlements and abundant animal life also induced the change from village to cities. This is what prevented native American populations from progressing into large scale agriculture. Africa did have many domesticated animals too however the climate also allowed disease and infection from insects to wipe out entire herds of said animals. This made permanent settlement troublesome and impressed population growth and city growth.
The position of Europe in the world made it able to exploit Asian and north African trade whilst maintaining not making it reliant on that trade. Technological advancements could be shared and foreign goods could be acquired. This is what prevented technological advancement in sub Saharan Africa. Whilst some trade routes did exist they lived and died with the trade lines. This also allowed disease such as the black plague to effect the continent and the resulting population decimation also benefited Europe, increasing pay and inducing the fall of serfdom.
The climate of the area prevented tropical diseases and infections from permanently affecting the population allowing steady growth. The climate also made famine rare further aiding the steady climbing population.
>>1095043
>dat massive lithuania wew
>>1095043
>easily domesticated animals
>Europe
I hate this meme
>>1095110
Its true to some extent. Africa and America's animals are shitty domestic animals. It's why China and Mesopotamia got their early start, at least.
Exodus 32.
Moses set us free.
>>1095063
Nigga u neva played Eu4
>>1095255
I don't like vidya desu
>>1095122
What about them was so easy to domesticate? Without relying on nebulous arguments of docility, only evidenced by the current domesticated stock and not by any wild ancestor, it seems there aren't many differences between a Eurasion cow, an African buffalo, and an American bison.
>>1092353
How do they think that?
>>1095043
Central Europe was a frozen shithole for the vast majority of history.
You're somewhat right, but there is a deeper ecological analysis needed, one that includes talking about energy and social structure.
>>1090850
It could be, even then there are a lot of other tribals than kill a lot more people per capita between them, like the Jivaros.
>>1089390
I like the one !bizzare! tho
>>1090844
Bullshit meme
"Tenochtitlan covered an estimated 8 to 13.5 km2 (3.1 to 5.2 sq mi), situated on the western side of the shallow Lake Texcoco."
14814 per square km
to
37500 per square km
Manhattan population density = 10,194/km
Manhattan has skyscrapers - people stacked on top of people
Tenochtitlan was mostly one-story houses
>>1085775
gaining vital neanderthal dna for increased muscle strength & intelligence combined with extreme climate (winter, ice ages etc) which in effect improved the natural selection of the inhabitants
"They estimated that 7.9% of the changes in human DNA compared with that of the chimpanzee occurred after the split with Neanderthals. They dated the split between the ancestors of modern humans and Neanderthals to 465,000 to 569,000 years ago. They also found that the effective population size of the Neanderthals was small. Their success in sequencing this amount of DNA indicated that a large-scale project to sequence the Neanderthal genome is possible.
Neanderthals have contributed approximately 1% to 4% to the genomes of non-African modern humans.
http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics/ancient-dna-and-neanderthals/sequencing-neanderthal-dna
the lack or abundance of beasts of burden is an absolute meme, there were many potential beasts in africa that had the ability to do what euro-asian beasts could, the inhabitants didn't attempt to domesticate them, or they simply failed. Zebras for example were domesticated under a decade in England as it was transported there.
>>1085848
in hindsight it looks like western nations "took advantage" of the new world. at the time this was not exactly how it was perceived.
the entire old world, europe, africa, arabia, near and far east all wanted what classical rome or greece had. controlling places like alexandria, the levant, and asia minor meant grabbing the old world by the balls. you controlled trade between the continents. because europe failed to control the center of the old world they discovered the new world by accident. it was supposed to be an attempt to control the old world again. so they said why even bother with the old world. and if you were an empire that controls the old world why would you give a shit about another world. north africa, arabian and asia minor were dominating while western europe was playing catch up.
dont know too much south american history but you could speculate that since the new world discovery was the product of an old world power struggle, its no surprise that right away europeans came on super aggressive.
>>1085800
fuck off with that
>>1095933
Oh boy.
>>1095933
Tamed, not domesticated. Zebras aren't more difficult to domesticate than any other herd animal tough, heck we even have domesticated Foxes.
>>1096456
taming is the first step to domestication
>>1095043
>>1091343 here
>The fertile land made food production easy
China and India had higher populations, barely a few of Europe's cities had populations above or around 100000 by the 15th century.
>Domesticated animals
Again, the rest of the old world had domesticated animals, it does not explain why Europe in particular.
>not making it reliant on that trade
Not sure how important this factor is, I find it difficult to believe that a large continental state needed silk and incense in order to forge steel and raise crops, most states were more or less self-sufficient. Only cities like Malacca and Rome were ever highly dependent on grain imports
>The position of Europe in the world made it able to exploit Asian and north African trade
> Technological advancements could be shared and foreign goods could be acquired. This is what prevented technological advancement in sub Saharan Africa.
These are true. Though I wouldn't describe it as preventing technological advancement in sub Saharan Africa, more like causing it to lag behind.
>black plague to effect the continent and the resulting population decimation also benefited Europe, increasing pay and inducing the fall of serfdom
meme, pay dropped again relatively shortly, serfdom had started to decline long before the black death
>The climate of the area prevented tropical diseases and infections from permanently affecting the population allowing steady growth
you say this after mentioning the black death, disease is a bigger problem in hotter climates but it did not stop ancient Egypt, India and South east asia from flourishing
>The climate also made famine rare further aiding the steady climbing population.
I haven't seen any evidence of this
To be honest I have seen these meme explanations before and there are a multitude of problems with it that mainstream scholars never seem to question. I'm not really mad, more like depressed that this is allowed.
>>1096468
>>1096456
Considering the behaviour of the Zebra is very very different from other equine is what people refuse to acknowledge and deliberately ignore.
Even then why use a fucking Zebra when you have bovine as beasts of burden? Why ride a Zebra over a horse as later on, Camel (also an amazing source of milk and meat) or the mule?
>>1096645
Modern equines do not represent those that were tamed long ago.
Domestication effects the entire species, Zebras never went through this long and extensive process
>>1096645
The African list of ungulates is longer than in any other continent. The largest number of modern bovids is found in Africa (African buffalo, duikers, impala, rhebok, Reduncinae, oryx, dik-dik, klipspringer, oribi, gerenuk, true gazelles, hartebeest, wildebeest, dibatag, eland, Tragelaphus, Hippotragus, Neotragus, Raphicerus, Damaliscus). Other even-toed ungulates include giraffes, hippopotamuses, warthogs, giant forest hogs, red river hogs and bushpigs. Odd-toed ungulates are represented by three species of zebras, African wild ass, black and white rhinoceros.
>>1085775
>Why did western civilisation become so dominant?
Market incentive.
>>1096877
Why did the people who domesticated horses look into the "future of hindsight"?
>>1096877
a lot of them
>>1086337
>Again, that's kinda wrong. The Chinese Government artificially keep their currency weak to increase exports.
How exactly do you think the Chinese export economy boomed?
Also, the Yuan has been following market value in HK since 2005 and now the Central Bank allows it to move .5% each day.
The Yuan also appreciated from 8.5 to 6.0 a dollar over the decade.
>>1086717
Maybe since mid-2015 but 1970-2014 China didn't even allow investment outside the country.
Now they do so people diversify their portfolios. That's only healthier for China in the long term.
>>1096877
The Russians are domesticating the fucking moose. They have farms of them for they milk.
>>1095122
Goats, donkeys, and bovine are shitty?
>>1096877
Well, the wild ass was domesticated by them.
>>1097493
Those are tamed though and it's just a gimmick since there's not point in domesticating Moose at this point and the ancestors of humans living in Mooses habitats did not have the tools we have today.
Since the golden age of Greece, there has been only one era of reason in twenty-three centuries of Western philosophy. During the final decades of that era, the United States of America was created as an independent nation. This is the key to the country—to its nature, its development, and its uniqueness: the United States is the nation of the Enlightenment.
In its great era of capitalism, the United States was the freest country on earth—and the best refutation of racist theories. Men of all races came here, some from obscure, culturally undistinguished countries, and accomplished feats of productive ability which would have remained stillborn in their control-ridden native lands. Men of racial groups that had been slaughtering one another for centuries, learned to live together in harmony and peaceful cooperation. America had been called “the melting pot,” with good reason. But few people realized that America did not melt men into the gray conformity of a collective: she united them by means of protecting their right to individuality.
>>1099762
You say men of varying racial groups and yet almost all of them were varying European groups. Some Chinese came to California, although they were still very much a minority (and were eventually kicked out). The only other non-white group that existed in statistically relevant numbers were Africans, and vast majority of them were slaves to the Anglo plantation owners.
The melting pot is meant to uniquely refer to the coming together of Europeans; It's been adapted in the 20th and 21st centuries to try and apply to a melting pot of global cultures and races, many of which simply can not exist together because of the vast systematic differences and cultural priorities.
For majority of Americas history, only white people could become citizens - for vast majority of Americas history, and all throughout the industrialisation of America - there was strong immigration restrictions on non-Europeans.
You also say that America was founded out of the enlightenment, and that It is the best refutation of racist theories, and yet many of those enlightenment thinkers believed in European supremacy and scientific racism.
>>1089273
Thanks for this
>>1085848
Cause of dem zebras mane, just can't domesticate them hey
>>1089273
Holy shit, I can't believe this image isn't a joke.
>No significant cultural exchanges occurred in Eurasia before the 15th century
What in the name of god. I mean holy shit, I don't know where to begin. All I can say is that if you read past here and still though there was an ounce of credibility in this post, there's something seriously wrong with you.
>Europe is isolated from Central Asia by the Alps and Urals
Very, very bad understanding of basic geography.
>Incas only had potatoes and maize
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inca_cuisine
>European agriculture was based 'overwhelmingly' on wheat
And barley, and oats, and rye, and millet, and so on.
>Chinese agriculture was based 'overwhelmingly' on rice
And millet, and soybeans, and wheat, and oats, and so on.
>America and Africa having crops somehow refutes the argument that Eurasia had more
>America and Africa having domesticated animals somehow refutes the argument that Eurasia had more
>nomadic conquerors are the same as actual empire-building civilizations
>Attila was one of the greatest conquerors in history
>Genghis Khan didn't use technology developed by sedentary civilizations (metal, siege weapons, writing, gunpowder, saddles (Assyrian), stirrups (probably Indian), etc)
>the Indus Valley was destroyed by Indo-Europeans and not drought/declining trade.
It just keeps getting worse.
>"European" diseases didn't weaken "non-Europeans"
That only applies to the Americas. This idiot doesn't even understand the most basic point of the argument he's 'refuting'.
>European colonial armies could never be defeated by anyone
Except, you know, all the times they were.
>Pizarro had a tiny army
A tiny army with tens of thousands of native allies.
>Epidemic diseases only became a factor post-conquest
Yeah, like how the Inca's were thrown into a civil war because of the disease, 'post-conquest'.
I can't go on this is physically painful.
>>1089390
>>1099929
You stupid motherfuckers better be joking.
>>1099626
They are tamed, of course, because those are the first steps for domestication. And even when they use modern tech to know were are the moose, they use natural behaviors of the moose to farm them (the security of the farm to raise youngs, to give them oats and salty water than they love etc). Shame we don't need Moose cavalry anymore, the original plan of the russian, imagine how cool would be going from place to place in a moose.
>>1100039
>They are tamed, of course, because those are the first steps for domestication
Indians have been taming elephants for millennia and it never lead to domestication. Africans domesticated things like zebras and giraffes to export abroad as novelties. There's evidence of tamed giraffes in the neolithic. Taming only leads to domestication in very rare cases.
Here's a thing: http://anthropology.si.edu/archaeobio/cm/Zeder%202012%20JAR.pdf
>>1100018
>all of this literal non-arguments and projections
>European colonial armies could never be defeated by anyone
>Except, you know, all the times they were.
le_dying_chinesemen.jpg
>>1086523
You are barely coherent
>>1085851
>THE WEST STARTS AND ENDS WITH AMERICA
>>1100070
Are you actually defending that fucking awful post?
What the fuck is wrong with you?
>>1095933
>increase of strenght
Negroes are stronger on average than whites, they have thicker bones too
>>1093610
Yes, I meant it as Eurasia + Northern Africa
>>1100081
>are you kidding me?!?!
>>1100231
>Stronger.
From were do you get that? Also what negroes, a Somali I'm sure as fuck isn't as fast as a west african descendent jamaican, and both are negroes.
>>1095730
>Only 20.000.
>That's a lot of people desu.
Rome had a population of 1 million over a thousand years earlier...
>>1085800
>guns germs and steel
*capitalism
>>1100321
Depends on definition but capitalism as in market economy was common to every single place on earth.
>>1100235
Rome had a population density of 72,150 per sq. km and it didn't exactly have skyscrapers.
>>1092479
> they're wearing t-shirts, jeans, suits and other european clothing
that is made in, wait for it
.
.
.
China. As are most of the consumer goods you use, and probably the computer from which you heap upon us your unresearched opinions and uneducated guesses.
>>1085775
They actually listened to and took advice from the insane liberal people more often than anyone else.
Prove me wrong.
>>1100579
social/cultural progression/change =! liberalism
>>1085851
>i dont know how how the market of US treasuries work, the post
The US and the west have a shitload of issues relating to finance that are bound to be a serious, serious issue, but China holding US bonds isnt one of them
The problem with understanding the sucess and global hegemony of the west is that such analysis is still completely limited to the study of material factors.
Notice on how this thread so many people still argue about climate, diseases, material production and the supposed results of these material conditions.
Its not that these explanations are wrong, is that they are incredibly incomplete to the point of being meaningless.
The main factor that allowed for the dominance of the west was his fundamental world view, the common cultural link that made the west what it is today.
The constant search of expansion and progress, of unbound ambition in everything and anything devised: ideas, wealth, power...
This is connected to the western particular conception of space has an unbound, infinite plane, wholly detached from the spatial notions of Classical Culture, which based the notion of space in matter and physical limits.
Thats why, despite having already all the resources and possibilities to do so, the Romans and the Ancient Greeks never expanded beyond the mediterranean, and looked forward further expansion. Nor did they developed an industrial base, despite having the know how to do so.
The same goes for the Chinese, who also had a specific notion of reality and themselves that never allowed them to see an expansion or curiosity towards the wider world as particularly important
>>1089389
Roman Empire was the only Empire at that time with a standing army.
It would have wrecked every other power of its time.
>>1086222
This. I never inderstood how cunts can be too dense to realize this. Also thanks for grabbing my birthday trips.
age of exploration led to world domination and things really took off
>>1100231
reality says otherwise
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World%27s_Strongest_Man#Most_championships
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-time_Olympic_Games_medal_table#NOCs_with_medals
>>1101527
i think he means average african american being stronger than the average american, this is more because americans have become weak and degenerate, whereas blacks are too poor typically to afford such luxury
>>1101541
which yet again there's no sources in his post to prove that with while the olympics and strongman statistics says the opposite
>>1095043
Jared Diamond get off the chans.
>>1085775
For West vs Islam it was usury.
For West vs Asia it was technology (which was fueled by usury).
The middle east will remain a shit hole for the next 500 years because they don't have a competent banking system.
However China, will surpass the west because they have embraced usury and technology.
>>1085851
>implying it's not tribute
>>1101546
But not many blacks do strongman events.
It's just like how people said black couldn't do athletics then got proven wrong.
Even then west Africans are far from dominating events new world blacks are in.
>>1103450
>The middle east will remain a shit hole for the next 500 years because they don't have a competent banking system.
Modern middle eastern nations all use usury, except maube Saudi Arabia but even there meh. There are so many more problems in the ME other than not being integrated in the world market which again they use interest so that isn't what is stopping them. In fact historically Muslim societies used interest de facto if not de jure for a lot of their history just as Catholics and Jews did despite it being against their religion as well. Do you think everybody follows their religion %100 of the time?
>>1103450
>China, will surpass the west
lol
>>1085775
The European Ancestors had an Ice Age that killed off most of their population and forced the best of the best to survive and become creative after being forced out of the competition in Africa.
>Indo Europeans were the first "Underdogs".
>Blacks never had to deal with a near extinction event.
>Blacks never were forced to grow and adapt to a harder environment.
The migration from africa was a forced tribal one because if there was a lack of resources then all humans would have migrated out of africa.
>>1103450
China lacks the masculine drive and conviction to surpass the west.
>>1104616
The entire world went through a bottle neck ~70,000 years ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toba_catastrophe_theory
And humans have been constantly expanding since.
>>1104622
How is that more relevant? Im talking about an event that occurred after that bottleneck at about 27-10 thousand years ago and contributed to some of the more distinct differences between humans.
>>1104641
Show proof then?
>>1104643
Proof of what? The relevancy? Didn't you bring it up?
>>1104658
proof of
>Im talking about an event that occurred after that bottleneck at about 27-10 thousand years ago and contributed to some of the more distinct differences between humans
>>1104616
>because if there was a lack of resources then all humans would have migrated out of africa.
What about the middle ground; e.g. limited resources that only allowed a limited subset of the population to survive; rather than no or plenty of resources.
Either way, it's doubtful that a selection event more than 10K years old would have defined the culture of modern European populations.
In terms of genetics, Africans are capable enough of constructing shelters and building homes. Human intelligence, enough to survive harsh climates, originated while humans were still in Africa; to allow us to socialize and hunt better; it's not clear more would have been selected for in Europe, if that's what you're getting at.
Europeans would have had to have initially been more inventive to figure out how to deal with their new living conditions; but once they had figured it out "invented" shelter for example there wouldn't be any continued selection pressure in favor of improved intelligence or creativity. For the vast majority of human history, technology has progressed not at all, even in Europe. Once Europeans figured out how to deal with their niche, they sort of just settled down. Quality of life saw no change until about 10K years ago with the inception of agriculture.
>>1085775
Discovery and colonization. Europeans were the first to connect to every other continent. This has brought incredible wealth and power to them.
What kicked these things off, is another question entirely.
>>1104659
http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/ancient-dna-shows-earliest-european-genomes-weathered-the-ice-age-and-shines-new-light-on
>>1104690
>contributed to some of the more distinct differences between humans
It has no mention of ^
>>1104686
So you actually believe that no significant cultural exchanges occurred in Eurasia before the 15th century and that Europe is isolated from Central Asia by the Alps and Urals?
>>1104664
Despite what the situation was, they still forced the European ancestors out, which in the modern globalist mindset people see as wrong.
It was about 30 thousand years and while it was not enough to produce a different species, it did produce a difference in so many qualities that the populations are easily discernible from each-other.
What was selected for in Europe is the cold weather, which the warm blooded mammals were not typically used to. The cold forces creatures to have a low time preference because food becomes scarce in the winter, the immediate gratification of high time preference has been only possible in warmer climates.
You make it seem like this adaptation is not a big deal, they were warm blooded, and a body that has dealt with nothing but warm and hot weather is likely to take a while to learn how to develop clothes, hunt smaller more illusive game, store food, survive sickness, lactose tolerance etc.
Agriculture was heavily influenced from these adaptations however and perhaps would not have taken off as it did without them.
>>1104741
Post sources for your claims?
>>1104693
Do i look like a geneticist to you? Im not gonna explain to you the micro details of how exactly it happened, i can only work on the macro level of knowledge and know from inference that such a drastic change in environmental conditions is highly likely to have contributed to the vast differences between the Europeans and the other major populations.
I will never understand why there is such a stigma against inference, sure its not perfect but it has been good enough to help humans survive so far.
>>1104757
If you knew anything about evolution you wouldn't be making such certain claims.
>>1104759
What exactly is wrong with the Ice Age theory? It explains European excellence well without writing it off as pure privileged unearned luck as Guns Germs and Steel would have you believe.
Its like the Ice Age theory actually makes it seem that the Europeans EARNED their superiority.
>>1104775
You ever read a book m80?
>>1104779
How much of a smug asshole do you have to be to actually say that?
>>1104788
Are you aware that all your claims are at best speculative correlation?
And you've clearly never read the books your talking about.
>>1104791
You're not providing any counter theories yourself, which explain the variance, only telling me to read more as if books had some magical property relevant to this discussion that i could not find through inference of obvious historical realities.
If you're not going to contribute anything then fuck off then, i don't have time for books and you don't have time to provide an alternate theory.
>>1104814
Try to include more than one factor in your explanations.
>i don't have time for books
pic related
Just liked killing each other was more fun
>243 replies
>5 posters
This needs to stop.
>>1104856
This thread actually has over 130 posters in it.
>>1086619
Evil racist nazi! You are stupid and your thoughts are bad thoughts!
>>1085800
This post triggered a lot of butt hurt because it is right
>>1101136
...are you fucking retarded? The Romans absolutely expanded beyond the Mediterranean, as did the greeks.
We have records of Greek kingdoms going to war with fucking china,Greeks conquering northern India, and the romans were happy to conquer gaul, britain, parts of germany, pats of the balkans, asia minor, and expand eats as far as they could without being killed by the locals.
>>1085775
Discovery of the New World and subsequent scramble for Africa. Better cohesion between Western Europe than cohesion between the Ottomans, Indians and Arabs.
>>1085775
>Fall of western roman empire and rise of feudalism
>Black plauge and serf power grab in the west, second serfdom in the east
>Englands american colonialism not as succesful as Spain, Portugal and France from an economic point of view. Crown let's go of trade monopolies creating a civilian fiscal powerbase.
>Said powerbase moves against the crown
>Glorious revolution
>Industrialization
Boom
It all started because Italians had the european monopoly on the Spice Trade.
The recently unified Portuguese look up to the sea in a mad dash to secure an alternate route to said spice trade.
Said mad dash ended "discovering" new territory across the ocean, and portugal also gets mad rich.
Other countries try to copy portugal sending european culture across the world.
Eventually Industrialization happens and the technological differences between the trading countries grows and the rest of the world can't compete with the europeans
gg.
>>1106174
>anyone who disagrees with me is butthurt
k
>>1085775
Oceans, the need to traverse them, and traversing them. Europe led the way completely in that sphere. Plus the endless wars.
>>1089273
To be fair, the potato is the only crop nutrient dense and diverse enough to sustain on alone.
>>1100018
This is a really bad refutation. Just wanted to let you know that. Not to say that the shitty cap was right or any less shit, but you're no better.
