Why the fuck does the western world have like at least 85% of

>>608571
Chance and luck. First to the pie, the biggest slice you can take. The more pie you have, the better you can hunt for some more pie's. Hmmmm pie

>make us improve as a species.
"Improve" is a very subject statement

File: the world innit fam.png (316KB, 2000x993px) Image search: [Google]

316KB, 2000x993px

>>608571
LOL

you're a funny guy OP

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gupta_Empire
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahabharata

hahahaaha you're clowning dog but you cool bro, you really be cool

>>608571
Read "why the west rules"

>>608571
Around 2000 BC you could ask the same question about the fertile Crescent and Egypt. We just happen to live in age of globalization and increasing technology right as the Western World is at it's peak.

>>608571
> Western world
Really, it's more like England, France and Rome. Arguably only France.

>>608622
Arguably only the HRE.

File: 1450304135847.jpg (69KB, 739x960px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 739x960px

>>608622
t.Louis Bernard

>>608622
>>608627
let me educate you on Poland

File: 1414642308181.png (618KB, 500x591px) Image search: [Google]

618KB, 500x591px

>>608571
Barbarians claim as part of Roma and Hellenic

>>608632
Breakaway German provinces need not apply.

>>608571
>Please explain this.
dunno, but i think the discovery of America contributed to that. And Europe is a small continent, therefore its stimulated competition between countries, you know, eat or be eaten .

Two things.

First, the West is the only civilisation that is actually alive and growing right now. The last one before us reached the end of its growth phase almost a thousand years ago. This alone means that for the past millennium the West has been the only civilisation that was at all capable of sustained progress.

Still, it's obvious that progress in the West has been far more spectacular than during the growth phases of any other civilisation. This is called the Scientific Revolution, which is something unlike anything that ever happened anywhere else. It was made possible by the scientific method, which is the philosophical product of the unique Western Catholic world view (whether you consider Catholicism to be an expression of the Western soul or vice versa is really just semantics).

>>608571
Moar liek the northern world amirite?

General stability. They do not have 85% of the contributions. If you are talking about the Bible as a contribution, you'd need to understand that the bible was written by Phoenicians, using the phonetics they invented and taken to Rome. They have had immigration. And for the most part your picture is pretty partial.
If you think inventions are a contribution, the majority of the people would patent ideas in Switzerland or U.S. because of general stability in the area and the fact that wars have not ravaged them. IF they didn't pay their dues. Their patents would go to auctions. They have this patent auction book with auction dates you know. And if you bought a patent you could rewrite its history and say your great great great grandaddy invented it.
A lot of the aerospace engineers came from south america because they were taught by the great mechanical engineers of their day. Lets say Russia got a hand of reknown engineers to work on something secret, people would just say not a problem, we'll find their students and colleagues. The americas have contributed to the world a whole bunch of veggies and foods. Philosophy is always partial to those that are heard the most.

Society could be very bigoted. I have a friend whos grandmother was raised by an african couple. his grandmother was white. a white girl raised by black people. with the same ethics and education as her siblings, whom were black. She ended up marrying and having kids and her kids were more successful than their cousins. Just because of the color of their skin and not education level.

File: Western civilisation.png (96KB, 1360x1245px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1360x1245px

>>608742
That's a bad map. Whole world is Westernised nowadays, but only the core areas have contributed significantly (probably also includes the Northeastern United States).

Whites are blessed with superrior intelligence and creativity.

>>608753
>the only difference between race is the color of your skin

I could see how if you believe all races are created equal, and different races succeed more than others on average, than society must be bigoted. But you don't even consider the far more obvious, that races aren't equal, and society is not actually as bigoted as you want to believe.

>>608785
Lol yeah I know but op's map forced my temptation

>>608571
Start with the greeks.

File: 1449805208467.jpg (417KB, 1024x908px) Image search: [Google]

417KB, 1024x908px

>Yet another "eternal Anglo" apologetic thread justifying fucking up the rest of the world in the name of "progress"

I'm sure africa would still be third world if we left them alone but holy hell they wouldn't have a good reason to complain about it if it weren't for us "trying".

>>608571
Because the Eternal altaic destroyed every other civilization

>>608828
> third world
You use that word yet im sure you don't understand what it means

>>608742
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North%E2%80%93South_divide

>>608866
I really wish sarcasm could be more easily recognized over the internets

>>608571
Because on South they are have overheated head because lack of hat, and they are can't think normal. For example idea of deny art occupation (paining, sculpture, music) is product of a sick head of dirty-mind hermit.

>>608571
I have a non/pol/ nontumblr answer.

The current establishment (liberal) professes that Europeans sailed around the world being imperialist colonialist pig dogs and that is where they got the capital to invest in industry and europeans stole all their technology from other cultures to do so etcetera... The colonies did provide an economic surplus, but China and India at the time had enormous highly productive populations. The Romans had millions of slaves yet these same mainstream historians claim this was a factor against the Romans industrializing. The Romans did automate where they could, they had massive mills and the Hierapolis sawmill. Even the ancient Egyptians had enough of a surplus to build massive tombs and temples.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hierapolis_sawmill

Economic surplus does not fully explain it. Neither does the demand for high productivity per person. Why wouldn't someone want to increase productivity? There is never enough productivity, maybe greater returns on investments were an incentive but the colossal improvements in productivity would be there whatever their economic circumstances, this is a minor factor at best.

These views exist to stick it to racists and soothe the feelings of people who for whatever reason find European historical success threatening. It is as much a bias as the actual colonialist imperialist pig dogs in the past and their claims that west Africa had no civilization.

contd...

>>608571
Because europeans have a higher average intelligence compared to other ethnicities (save for ashkenazi jews and northeast asians), probably the result of "medieval eugenics", and developed as well strong institutions which fostered the search, preservation and transmission of knowledge (something China lacked, for instance).

>>608589
The thing is, the amount of innovation which started pouring out of western europe starting in the 15th century is unparalleled. There was probably greater artistic, literary and scientific output in Europe during the single year of 1700 than in the entire history of the middle east.

Because it is the culture that conquered the rest of the world and used their resources to make the jump to industrialization and manufacture of goods.

There isn't much you can innovate when your opportunities are either farming bananas or dying.

>>608908
Industrialization would've happened regardless of colonialism.

>>608898
>Why wouldn't someone want to increase productivity
why WOULD someone want to increase productivity? The christian concept of linear time and therefore "future" opposed to the endless time cicles of the pagans built western civilization

File: Smoking.gif (25KB, 160x120px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 160x120px

>>608571
>make us improve as a species.
Elaborate.

>>608571
It was more successful in the long run.

>>608571
had to poop, this is why this took a while

Technology is the overwhelming factor.

From the late medieval era there were major changes occurring across the globe. The Mongol conquests perhaps mark the beginning, though there are roots running further back, this is about when technology around the globe mingled at a fast pace. Technology generally arose everywhere in the world and spread everywhere, because Europe is smaller than the rest of the world, when they were equals most technology originated elsewhere. However the Mediterranean region is a huge portion of the world's population and an (almost) inland sea which is perfect for trade. It has a natural advantage in terms of people discovering things and it rapidly circulating. The Ottoman empire is another notable influence on Europe, matching European power militarily until the 18th century, testament to the importance of the Mediterranean. Along with easily observable changes like gunpowder and new ship designs there were many 100s of small innovations and discoveries, for example a Welsh town discovering they can import cheap high quality steel from Sweden and Spain. Even though European populations were lower after the black death and during the little ice age, northern Europeans saw many new changes and improvements, north sea and Atlantic trade opened up and they grain producing areas of Northern France, Northern Germany and Southern England suddenly became population centers to rival the north China plain, the Tigris, Euphrates, Ganges and Indus rivers and the Mediterranean trading cities.

So, finally, a huge area of Europe was exposed to this technological and economic zone spanning the Mediterranean and Northern Europe. All population centers of the world were seeing rapid changes but Europe, previously behind the curve, ended up ahead of the curve at this turning point in the history of technology.

contd...

>>608571
You only think the Western world has contributed the most to human technology because you're referencing "technology" and "progress" from a 21st century point of view.

There have been so, so many major, world-changing discoveries that predate the rise of the West by millenia. Things like agriculture, the wheel, mathematics, etc. all had arguably larger impacts on the course of humanity than something like the invention of the internet, yet you're unable to see this because your idea of progress means things like modern medicine and industrialisation.

Hopefully one day you'll realise just how many monumental paradigm shifts occurred long before the modern era.

>>608969
>There have been so, so many major, world-changing discoveries that predate the rise of the West by millenia.
Just like there are a few east asians in the NBA.

What OP is asking is why is the NBA overwhelmingly black. The answer is probably a combination of superior genetics for basketball within the african american community, as well as a culture which fosters the development of basketball skills.

Eh, I'm pretty satisfied with my analogy.

Simple answer: climate

Temperate climates will select for versatile physical and mental traits. Climates that are too cold or too hot will lead to overspecialized traits and give a lesser likelihood of adaptation to change.


So not Europeans per se but specifically "non-archaic, non-infantile racial types that had their racial development in temperate climate regions," because that implies having versatile traits instead of overspecialized traits. And Europe has the largest concentration of people who fit that description.

>>608914
You mean like without the discovery of the Americas allowing Europeans to control trade instead of Muslims?

Maybe after a long while.

If the rivals of the early industries were able to easily cut down supplies of raw matter, as well as limit the shipments of finished products to other countries, it would have been a much slower and painful process.

>>608982
East asia seems to be pretty temperate though

Japan is basically a little colder Italy

>>608982
I've always been unconvinced by the "climate hypothesis" of superior european intelligence. Why didn't native north americans ever develop a high intelligence, although they live in a Europe-like climate?

Wouldn't it be more logical that intelligence gradually increased thanks to a "eugenic feeback loop" originating in the development of civilization? What I mean is, civilization (well, some types of civilization at least) ensures that the smartest have a higher probability of passing on their genes, and thus the average intelligence slowly increases.

>>608571
So Europe (and the Islamic world near the Mediterranean) benefited from this huge interconnected area. The Christians had more resources due to development of medieval agriculture in the "oceanic" environment which eventually surpassed Mediterranean agriculture so Tunisia and Morocco were prevented from mounting naval expeditions down West Africa as Portugal did, which led to later developments and the whole age of exploration thing.

The region I described earlier in Northern France, Northern Germany, Southern England and the Netherlands too was the most competitive place to center early industries, surpassing Italian trading cities where the "renaissance" began. They remained ahead of the curve during a period of rapid technological development that could have occurred in any of the other population centers. Britain came out on top because as an island it could avoid the ravages of political instability and war on the continent.

>>608916
The first examples of factories in the industrial revolution yielded profits within the lifetime of those who invested in it.

>>608981
>What OP is asking is why is the NBA overwhelmingly black.
He *thinks* he's asking this, but really he's asking "Why do minority groups in societies take to sports in disproportionately large numbers?"

His supposed question deals with a superficial reality, while the deeper question deals with historical trends that can explain ALL the manifestations of the superficial reality that have existed in societies all around the world.

>>608989
>You mean like without the discovery of the Americas allowing Europeans to control trade instead of Muslims?
Yes.

First of all, Muslims didn't "control trade". If you're referring to the indian ocean trade, it was tiny and irrelevant compared to the trade which went on in the mediterranean basin, dominated by Italian city states, and in Northern europe, dominated by the hanseatic league.

Secondly, the discovery of America didn't bolster "trade", it bolstered colonial exploitation.

Anyways, the claim that colonial exploitation causes industrialization is laughable, a phony justification made up by marxist-leaning pseudo-intellectual frauds. Just compare and contrast the industrialized american north to the "colonial" american south. Which one was more developed?

>Maybe after a long while.
Probably not. May I remind you that plenty of european countries industrialized without any colonial possessions. Ever heard of Germany?

>If the rivals of the early industries were able to easily cut down supplies of raw matter,
What?

You think Sugarcane and Tobacco are responsible for kickstarting the industrial revolution?

The only ingredient which could most definitely be labeled "central" in starting the industrial revolution was coal, which was plentiful in Europe.

>>608898
>>608962
>>609006
same person (me)

>>608571
>Architecture is useless
Retarded bait but I'll bite
>The Western "world"

The average bumfuck Bavarian peasant had little to nothing to do with the contributions of German artists, philosophers, musicians etc. The average pleb in the west has historically been on the same level as the average pleb in much of the world.

The West thrived for many reasons, but in particular because it had the resources available that allowed the gifted to reach their full potential

>>609000
>Wouldn't it be more logical that intelligence gradually increased thanks to a "eugenic feeback loop" originating in the development of civilization?
But then Germanics would be dumber than other Europeans, since they only stopped being semi-nomads during the middle ages.

>>609015
>Why do minority groups in societies take to sports in disproportionately large numbers?"
But that's wrong.

Britain has more south asians than blacks, yet there isn't a single south asian in the England national football team. In fact I'm not sure there is a single south asian playing in the Premier League.

What's your "historical trend" which explains that?

>>609006
so does slave labour, I didn't imply otherwise
investments in physical capital and the development of credit are something else though

>>609036
Nomadism is still civilization. A big mistake is to confuse hunter gatherers and nomads. They are very, very different.

Artisanship can be as developed in nomad communities as in agricultural ones. Of course the big disadvantage of nomad communities is the lack of cities, which means that of course there is a zero chance of a nomad society ever undergoing an industrial revolution. But nomads aren't necessarily dumb is what I'm getting at.

So to answer your question, no it wouldn't imply that germanics are dumber than western europeans, because the semi-nomad nature of germanic society would nonetheless create a "eugenic feedback loop" pushing for higher intelligence.

File: IsambardKingdomBrunelGreatEastern.jpg (367KB, 2271x1986px) Image search: [Google]

367KB, 2271x1986px

>>608989
>Maybe after a long while.
I think this is where we ought to leave the back and forth. You seem to be so obsessed with colonialism you completely overstep the overwhelming role of technology (except when lauding noneuropean technology of course). I suppose sticking it to racists was probably your only motivation to be interested in history.

What kind of message does it send to black boys that whenever they gain an interest in Isambard Kingdom Brunel or Richard Arkwright you basically slam their book shut in front of their face, scream "NO", tell them dead white males and capitalists are all evil motherfuckers and insist their role models have the same skin color as them?

>>609051
Sorry I didn't explain my point fully. My point is, pagan or christian and whatever their philosophy on time, people are motivated by what happens in their lifetime, so their views on the distant future don't really affect whether a civilization will undergo an industrial revolution. To my knowledge the industrial revolution did not kick off because people were willing to make investments that would not pay themselves off until long after they had died.

Pagans and Christians invested in slaves and other activities that yielded as much profit as factories did in the early industrial revolution. I am sure personal/cultural beliefs had a slight effect. Though again as I said in other posts, technology plays a crucial role, so beliefs about the philosophy of science maybe would have had more effect.

Western philosophy was a superior combination of greek, roman and catholic thought that produced our modern worldview. Check out scholasticism and its rigorous application of logic and foundation of scientific thinking. Other cultures didn't assimilate the same influences and reach our thought.

>>609026
>First of all, Muslims didn't "control trade". If you're referring to the indian ocean trade, it was tiny and irrelevant compared to the trade which went on in the mediterranean basin, dominated by Italian city states, and in Northern europe, dominated by the hanseatic league.
It was small because Muslims controlled it. It still separated Europe (20% of the world population at the time) from the rest of the world. Note that Muslims controlled not only the pass to Asia, but also most of known Africa. At best, you would have had a Europe with 20% of the market for its goods. And a small market is also a more unstable market.

>Secondly, the discovery of America didn't bolster "trade", it bolstered colonial exploitation.
It bolstered both. Colonial exploitation still pumped a lot of goods into Europe that would then be introduced and traded among European markets, as well as to foreign markets for other goods.

I am not sure why you would say that having more people and raw material to trade with would do anything to trade but foster it. The colonial powers weren't isolationist.

>Just compare and contrast the industrialized american north to the "colonial" american south. Which one was more developed?
Colonial exploitation doesn't cause the exploiters to become industrialized. Yes. It is one of the reasons why Latin America and the North American South failed to industrialize. But you are thinking in a local population scale, not global. The fact some guy is exploiting a colony out there and taking goods to Europe meant a larger surplus of goods in the market, which means cheapening goods over all, which means cheap material for the industry.

The colonial South having a slave population kept it from industrializing itself. True. Its cotton still meant that Britain could in turn gain a lot of raw material for its industries. So while the South didn't industrialize, it was contributing indirectly to its share in industry.

>>608785
>ignoring the Scottish enlightenment

>>609057
The bulk of the Native Americans in most of the United States were also semi-nomad and not true hunter-gatherers, though.

They had to rely largely on small scale farming of maize and the like in order to survive, since there are only like 4 species of non-poisonous fruits native to the united states.

>>608571
>Switzerland
>Poland
>Lithuania
>Latvia
>Estonia
>Sweden
>Norway
>Belarus
>Ukraine
>Russia
>Moldova
>Bulgaria
>Macedonia
>Albania
>Serbia
>Bosnia
>Montenegro
>Croatia
>Slovenia
>Hungary
>Slovakia
>Ireland
>Canada

all should be removed from that map

>>609149
>It was small because Muslims controlled it. It still separated Europe (20% of the world population at the time) from the rest of the world.
Sure, but it doesn't really matter since trade with the rest of the world was, in the grand scheme of things, irrelevant.

>Note that Muslims controlled not only the pass to Asia, but also most of known Africa.
Most of "known africa" at the time was Egypt and Morroco...

>At best, you would have had a Europe with 20% of the market for its goods.
That was indeed the situation. What you're ignoring was that the trade volume occuring in this "20%" absolutely dwarfed the trade volumes occuring in the muslim world and asia. Trade with the far east was not at all a prerequisite for the industrial revolution to have occured.

>It bolstered both.
It didn't bolster trade in the traditional sense of the word, which is commercial exchange of goods by "free agents", because colonial exploitation was very "rigid". It wasn't a free market.

>Colonial exploitation still pumped a lot of goods into Europe
I don't deny that, but once again, sugarcane and tobacco did not cause the industrial revolution.

>I am not sure why you would say that having more people and raw material to trade with would do anything to trade but foster it.
Because it wasn't "organic" trade, where free agents buy and sell goods in a free market. It was colonial exploitation. This might just be that we have a different vision of what trade is, so let's leave it at that. I don't consider gulag labor in the USSR to have been "trade".

>The colonial powers weren't isolationist.
They were most certainly mercantilist. You didn't have a lot of spaniards making a fortune in british colonies, to my knowledge.

cont.

>>609026
Its not just Marxist
Theres also Spanish/Russian Nationalists who are always talking about "MUH SIZE" Despite the fact that South America and Siberia were useless as fuck

>>608589

Terrible map senpai doesn't even correspond to archaeological cultures in Eurasia

>>609149
>>609179
>Colonial exploitation doesn't cause the exploiters to become industrialized. Yes. It is one of the reasons why Latin America and the North American South failed to industrialize. But you are thinking in a local population scale, not global. The fact some guy is exploiting a colony out there and taking goods to Europe meant a larger surplus of goods in the market, which means cheapening goods over all, which means cheap material for the industry.
But no! "Cheap material for the industry". Once again, sugarcane and tobacco are NOT necessary for industry to develop. If it were coal and iron which were extracted from the American colonies, you would have a point, but the goods originating from colonial exploitation were cash crops, completely irrelevant to the development of industry.

And before you say "cotton", most of the cotton produced in the world prior to the industrial revolution was produced in India. The industrial revolution predates the cotton plantations of the american south.

>The colonial South having a slave population kept it from industrializing itself. True. Its cotton still meant that Britain could in turn gain a lot of raw material for its industries.
See above. Cotton plantations popped up as a result of the increased demand in cotton due to the industrial revolution. The cotton wasn't the cause of the industrial revolution.

>>609163
>The bulk of the Native Americans in most of the United States were also semi-nomad and not true hunter-gatherers, though.
Perhaps, I have to admit I don't much about them.

File: 1445800052931.jpg (87KB, 718x656px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 718x656px

>architecture is useless

>>609026
>First of all, Muslims didn't "control trade". If you're referring to the indian ocean trade
The fall of Constantinople severely hindered the black sea trade, the southern route was already controlled by Muslims.

>Secondly, the discovery of America didn't bolster "trade", it bolstered colonial exploitation.
A lot of silver flowed into China from C. & S. America, goods back to Europe.

>May I remind you that plenty of european countries industrialized without any colonial possessions. Ever heard of Germany?
Long after the British.

>You think Sugarcane and Tobacco are responsible for kickstarting the industrial revolution?
The industrial revolution in Britain coincides with their consolidation of control over the Indian subcontinent, where they dismantled the Indian textile industry turning her into a purely supply economy for a British textile industry which rapidly made use of machinery and large mills. There is a convergence of factors which I think you overlook but it seems...
> the claim that colonial exploitation causes industrialization is laughable, a phony justification made up by marxist-leaning pseudo-intellectual frauds
... that it would be ideologically driven rather than an accidental overlooking of other ideas, so there's probably not much point me having replied. That you conflate Marxism as a largely apolitical historiographical school of thought with political Marxism is discouraging.

>>608712
>It was made possible by the scientific method, which is the philosophical product of the unique Western Catholic world view
when will this meme die
or is it just one guy shilling this?

>>609194
Historians have plainly acknowledged this from decades, how is it a meme? Once you get over retarded Enlightenment propaganda, it becomes clear that the foundations of science are found in Catholic philosophy.

>>609197
it's a meme because he's a child just like everyone else with a hateboner for the Catholic churhc

>>609197
source?
Aristotle, Ptolemy and Alhasan all described the scientific method, you mean to say they were catholic?

>>609193
>The fall of Constantinople severely hindered the black sea trade, the southern route was already controlled by Muslims.
Right. Muslims controlled => some <= trade routes.

>A lot of silver flowed into China from C. & S. America, goods back to Europe.
Mmh, yes indeed. Could you quantify the amount of trade with China which was a result from this colonial exploitation?

>Long after the British.
Right, how is this relevant? If "surplus goods" is a necessary prerequisite for industrialization, it shouldn't matter.

>The industrial revolution in Britain coincides with their consolidation of control over the Indian subcontinent,
"Control", you mean a few nababs? The consolidation of control over the indian subcontinent only occured after the sepoy rebellion.

>where they dismantled the Indian textile industry
[citation needed]

>... that it would be ideologically driven rather than an accidental overlooking of other ideas, so there's probably not much point me having replied.
I'll wait for a proof of your statement about the indian textile industry.

>That you conflate Marxism as a largely apolitical historiographical school of thought with political Marxism is discouraging.
Yes, marxist historians are renowned for their vehement anti-marxist political activities.

Kill yourself.

>>608571
>Quantification of something unquantifiable.
>Improve
One knows its a shit threat at the start.

>>608571
>Why the fuck does the western world have like at least 85% of all contributions and advancements to civilization
because you only care about the past 200 years and not actual human history

>>609197
>>609215
h-hello?

>>>/pol/

>>609168
I think the shittiest country on your list probably provided mankind with more innovations than the entirety of Africa combined.

>>608589
Probably because the West was the first to industrialize.
Before the 18th century, taken as a whola, the differences between contributions per Eurasian center of civilization (Europe, Mid East, India, China), when taken as aa whole, looks much more proportionate to the size of the civilization. That's fairly obvious because pre-industrialization 95% of the populatipn were peasant farmers with little to no access to upward socioeconomic mobility; all Eurasians populations were mostly on the whole on the same level as far as access to technology goes.

That changed beginning with Europe, and more specifically England. Why England? Probably a coincidence of cultural (military and economic competition), governmental (liberal policies toward academics, encoragement of the arts and sciences), and geographic factors (presence of coal at ground level and around coastal areas near city centers). The first wave of industrialization began in England amd spread outward from there gradually in the early 1700s. Countries like India began industrialization as late as 1960.

I think manu foundational discoveries and innovations had already been claimed by Europeans by the time Asia began industrialization. Industrialization is essential to support modern natipn levels of innovation.

>>609026
>Probably not. May I remind you that plenty of european countries industrialized without any colonial possessions. Ever heard of Germany?
Mentioned this earlier, but you don't really need colonial investments in order to benefit from the increase in manpower, goods (in both number and variety) and markets. Germany gained new crops from the Americas to alleviate its historical famines, got a lot of food from the Mediterranean for cheaper due to imports from countries with colonies increasing supply, and got a boost in demand of its traditional tincture crops, like Woad, in the growing manufacture market.

>You think Sugarcane and Tobacco are responsible for kickstarting the industrial revolution?
>The only ingredient which could most definitely be labeled "central" in starting the industrial revolution was coal, which was plentiful in Europe.
I meant things like plants used for dyes, which I believe were largely brought from India before chemistry finally managed to outmatch natural dyes in the 1900s. But also thought about cotton and other fabrics, which while not necessary for the start of the revolution they would have been necessary to keep it growing until you had most of the population devoted to it.

Also, I don't think it is fair to dismiss sugarcane either. You still need to mobilize massive amounts of farmers to the city in order to kickstart the revolution, which would be difficult without the ability of just importing food for your population (moved goalpost a little bit from my initial statement, I know, but still in line with the overall claim).

>>609082
I only made two posts (now four) and I am suddenly transformed into a mix of Jared Diamond and a liberal professor straight out of a copypasta?

I have to admit that "maybe after a long while" were wrong words, since it implies that the process could have not happened, which is wrong. Europeans not having world dominance would have still greatly slowed down the process of industrialization.

>>609320
(cont)
Not that I am talking about industrialization as the change in the economy of society, not the invention of the steam engine. Note that we know Romans had a steam engine, but never put it to use because they had slaves.

>>609188
>>609179
>Sure, but it doesn't really matter since trade with the rest of the world was, in the grand scheme of things, irrelevant.
Absurd claim. Even in the worst case scenario, the trade brought Europe a variety of products and goods that effectively changed its history, like potatoes.

>That was indeed the situation. What you're ignoring was that the trade volume occuring in this "20%" absolutely dwarfed the trade volumes occuring in the muslim world and asia. Trade with the far east was not at all a prerequisite for the industrial revolution to have occured.
You mean shortly before AND during the industrial revolution? Are you taking into account the fact that colonial powers would take the products from their colonies and then trade with other Europeans themselves?

>It didn't bolster trade in the traditional sense of the word, which is commercial exchange of goods by "free agents", because colonial exploitation was very "rigid". It wasn't a free market
>Because it wasn't "organic" trade, where free agents buy and sell goods in a free market. It was colonial exploitation. This might just be that we have a different vision of what trade is, so let's leave it at that. I don't consider gulag labor in the USSR to have been "trade"
>They were most certainly mercantilist. You didn't have a lot of spaniards making a fortune in british colonies, to my knowledge.
It wasn't free market and thus was slower, clumsier trade, but the bulk of the products were still going to their colonizers, who would then trade them with other European countries. It was still a lot of goods semi-continuously flowing into Europe, helping an aristocracy to form and stand up to nobles, while devaluating the goods of rival powers into full irrelevance

>>609417
(cont again)
>And before you say "cotton", most of the cotton produced in the world prior to the industrial revolution was produced in India. The industrial revolution predates the cotton plantations of the american south.
So, it was produced in another European colony?

>See above. Cotton plantations popped up as a result of the increased demand in cotton due to the industrial revolution. The cotton wasn't the cause of the industrial revolution.
In this case you can see it as not necessarily a prerequisite, but it is still allowing the industry to continue to grow, which means more Europeans going to the city to work, becoming literate, with a few going into maintenance and production of machines, which means speeding up the process of industrialization.

>>608571
Because technological development is exponential and Europe has dominated it for the last few hundred years thanks to fast ships and big guns allowing them to dominate global trade.

Cuz Jews

>>608828
It's ironic considering the most successful African countries underwent the most extensive colonialism. Just look at the contrast between Liberia and Ghana.

inb4 das raysis yo da evil wite man be keepin us down

>>608571
The West is superior to the East.

File: 1452295686966.jpg (166KB, 1077x934px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1077x934px

>>609715
fuck off racist

>>608618
Pretty much. If you are going to pick the most important region in the world, it would have to be the Middle East, historically. Europe was nothing prior to Ancient Greece, and they built directly off their foundations.

>>608622
Eurocentrism. Let's completely ignore Egypt, Sumer, Babylonia, India, etc. Without their framework, there would be no civilization.

>>608798
>>608803
Hate to break it to you, but from Rene Descartes, to all of the Greek philosophers, to Isaac Newton, none of the Western geniuses were very white looking. As a matter of fact, the white they get, the less achievments they have as a whole.

Europe is a multicultural place; it always has been. Almost every single one of those great inventors had brown eyes, brown hair, and obvious Mediterranean phenotypes. Just because it happened near "white" people, doesn't mean they aren't idiots.

File: 1350791023314.jpg (224KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 1200x1200px

>>609981
Nordics have not contributed a single thing to the world.

>>609755
WE

>>609981
>brown eyes and brown hair means you're not white

Only nordicists use that definition of white.

>>608875
>For example idea of deny art occupation (paining, sculpture, music) is product of a sick head of dirty-mind hermit.
Christian monks liked those a lot, and a lot of them were very ascetic.

>>609000
>Why didn't native north americans ever develop a high intelligence, although they live in a Europe-like climate?
They had some pretty cool stuff.

>>609715
I still haven't heard how come Ethiopia is a complete shithole despite never being colonized and countries with evil colonialist legacy like Botswana or Namibia are doing much better.

>>609981
>Southern Europeans aren't white

back to stormfront with you

>>610121
Imagine how much worse it would be if it wasn't colonized

>>609168
All those countries had some pretty cool inventions.

>>608571
Why the fuck do we call it the Western World and not The North?

>>610155
This is a good question actually.

>>610160
I mean I get it, there was the Cold War, but nowadays there's really nothing separating the US, Russia and everything in between.

Why is it that everything 60* north is so innovative?

S T E A M
T
E
A
M

File: Partition of Poland.jpg (415KB, 630x630px) Image search: [Google]

415KB, 630x630px

>>608632
Poland? What Poland?

File: CanterburyCathedral.jpg (398KB, 1200x923px) Image search: [Google]

398KB, 1200x923px

>>610288
Yeah the Europeans accomplished nothing without steam

>>610310
Pretty much

praise tengri desu

I feel like this entire thread could be answered with

>china

>>610438
>China

That's the other 20% we're talking about

>>610452
Then what about India? The Middle East? Also, equating Russia with "the West" is pretty intellectually dishonest.

>>608632
Germanic-Slavic buffer zone

>>608622
>>608627
>>608632

What have England, HRE, France and Rome in common? Invaded and cultivated by Goths, norsemen and Vikings. Truly, when we speak about the western world, we speak about Sweden.

>>608571
What is China

>>608947
>what are roads
>what are rifles
>what is artillery
>what is public sanitation
>what is vaccine
>what is medicine
>what is the internet
>what is the radio
>what is the tank
>what is the car
>what is the airplane
>what is 4chan
>what is the phone
>what is concrete buildings
>what is AC
>what is the latin alphabet
>what is the english language
>what is smithian economics
>what is industry
>what is a tractor
>what is agrotoxics
>what is State
>what is roman/french/prussian law
>what is electricity
>what is the haedron collider
>what is lower death rates
>what is human development index improvement
>what is scientific method
>what is apollo program
>what is artificial sattelite

Go suck a fucking dick relativist piece of shit.

File: qualitypost.jpg (30KB, 720x438px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 720x438px

>>610881
>4chan

>>608903

You are exageratting things so much, i dont think any amount of dialogue is possible with you.

>There was probably greater artistic, literary and scientific output in Europe during the single year of 1700 than in the entire history of the middle east.

This sentence alone is just so ridiculous considering the middle east invented fucking cities and farming.

>>610934
> the middle east invented fucking cities and farming.

That in no way disproves his statement

>>611064

Name 2 things that even come close to this that were invented in the year of our lord of 1700, as per your comment.

protip, im not saying euros didnt invent shit, restrict yourself to the comment in question

>>610934
>the middle east invented fucking cities and farming.
>implying Egypt, China, India, Mesopotamia, Mesoamerica and the Andes didn't all independently invent this

>>611072
I'm too lazy, I was just pointing out your logical fallacy

>>611080

Actually, according to this site

http://theinventors.org/library/inventors/bl1700s.htm

nothing at all was invented in the 1700.

>>611087
I never said there was. But it's a logical fallacy to conflate the development of cities and farming with the publishing of notable literature pieces.

>>611087
Oh you're being sarcastic, my bad

Alright, I'll entertain your little game.

>what are roads (seriously wtf Europeans didn't invent roads you cretin)
>what is the wheel
>what is maths
>what is civilisation
>what is agriculture
>what is organised religion
>what is the compass
>what are canals
>what are the rules of war
>what is philosophy
>what is political entities
>what is alcohol
>what is currency
>what is blacksmithing
>what is the plough
>what is writing
>what is the chinese/farsi/arabic/sanskrit/etc language
>what is economics
>what is glass
>what are gears
>what is paper
>what is gunpowder
>what is the blast furnace
>what is state institutions
>what is law enforcement
>what is lower death rates (seriously it's not like mortality was consistent throughout the pre-modern world until modern medicine came along. Get some perspective, sheesh.)
>what is the crossbow
>what is shipping
>what is diplomacy

All of these inventions have just as radically altered the course of human history as your selection of modern inventions. Just because you take them for granted nowadays doesn't mean their impact was no less revolutionary/

>>611303

This post is meant for >>610881

>>609162
Scottish Enlightenment is pretty much just Adam Smith.

>>609215
No they didn't. There's a lot more to the scientific method than just the concept of experimentation, and even that concept was completely foreign to Aristotle and Ptolemy.

>>611303
>what are roads (seriously wtf Europeans didn't invent roads you cretin)

The first roads were Roman. The Chinese, Hindus, Persians and other civilizations had trails at most. Rome had pavemented street, with actual tiles. Some Greek cities had that too, notably Athens. The roads that connected the late Republic and early empire could transport several thousand troops at the same time. Petroleum roads, the ones we use now, were developed by the British as soon as they found out about industrialized applications for oil

>what is the wheel
The wheel was not an invention, it was one of the most simple discoveries that probaly all homo sapiens already knew that instinctively. This is like giving credit to Africa because Africans knew how to make fire and use a stick. The wheel is a meme.

>what is maths
Roughly all formulas that you know were created or at some point, further developed, by Europeans. Fourier's passage, Plank's equation, seriously. just google "famous mathmaticians" and tell me how many aren't european.

>what is civilisation
The only "civilizations" that were actually civilized until the 1800s were the Europeans, Persians, Chinese, Hindus, Japanese, Indochinese, North African, some of the native American empires, Indonesian. After that, Europe spread all that they knew to the uncivilized world with colonization. If they didn't, dindus and redskins would still be killing each other with spears to this day.

>what is agriculture
The tractor, the plow, advanced windmills, circle crop rotation, agrotoxics, GMO, commercial farming, and many other agricultural techniques were developed by the western world.

>what is organised religion
Europe is home to many beliefs. Roman/Greek mythology, nordic paganism, slavic paganism. Christianity is an European religion. The Church is European.

>what is the compass
Chinese, Arabs had it but didn't put it to any use. As soon as Europe had the technology needed, it set sail across the atlantic. (will continue)

>>611303
>what are canals
Which one? Kiel canal? Suez canal? Panam canal? They were all developed by the western world.
>what are the rules of war
Are you talking about Geneva convention? Because that agreement was written by European delegates in an European city.
>what is philosophy
An European thing. Plato, Socrates, Diogenes, Aristotle, Hypocrites, Gaius, Aulus, and those are only the Greeks. There are another 40 countries in Europe.
>what is political entities
The first nation states are European. From ancient times, Europe was very involved with politics. Democracy was developed in Europe, so was the Senate, the idea of a constitution, written laws and so forth. There were countless city states in Europe before Christ even was born and they were all pretty organized.
>what is alcohol
The best beers are Irish, Czech and German. Vodka is Russian. The best wine and champagne are either French or Italian.
>what is currency
Smithian economics are British, the dollar (international trade currency) is American. Salary is a Roman word.

Will continue.

>>611303
>what is blacksmithing

Greatly developed by Europe during the so called dark ages. The European longsword, handed by a knight, can easily defeat any of the best trained samurai. If a Japanese katana was to ever clash with a longwsword, the katana would simply break.
>what is writing
You're writing and reading in English, using the latin alphabet. Vietnam uses the latin alphabet because when the French first got there the Vietnamese were suprised by how much better it was, they simply stopped using their own alpahbet because the latin one is just better. Printing is a German thing. Pens and pencils date back to Italian city states of ~300 bc.

>what is the chinese/farsi/arabic/sanskrit/etc language
Europe, Russia and North America have their own language too. This is not an argument. Language doesn't matter.
>what is economics
Fredman, Austrian school, Chicago school, libertarianism, fascism, socialism, communism, capitalism, mercantilism, statism, free trade, liberalism, libertarianism, neoliberalism, developmentatism, protectionism, the bank, interests, Bretton Woods, the dollar, gold standard, inflation, and so on, were either developed in Europe or America.
>what is glass
They are used to make European cathedrals look beautiful, have you ever seen the Notre Dame's ceiling?
>what are gears
Their primary use is in factories, which were developed by Europe.
I'll give you that one
Will continue.

>what is gunpowde
As soon as Europe found out about it, it was already developing matchlocks, muskets, armor against firearms, artillery, a few centuries later and Napoleonic warfare was already a thing. The grenade was even developed by Europeans. The Chinese only had to share gunpowder with Europe. They didn't have any of that. As soon as Europe was getting a solid income of gunpowder, firearm technology "skyrocketed" (no pun intended). Matchlocks, bolt action, semi automatic, automatic, machineguns, revolvers, assault rifles, shoulder rocket launchers, tanks, missiles, IFVs, gunboats, destroyers, etc, nukes - all western inventions.Tell me one good modern firearm that wasnt developed in either Russia or Germany.
>what is the blast furnace
Independently developed by French blacksmithers in the early middle ages.
>what is state institutions
You mean, the legislative? Executive? A senate? The judiciary? The three powers are an European thing. Most political systems you know of were developed in Europe. Absolute monarchy, Constitutional monarchy, feudal monarchy, enlighted despotism, republic, federalism, confederationalism, unionism, fascism, socialism, anarchism, communism, etc. Ministries, counciliership were greatly developed during European modern age.

>what is law enforcement
This was independently developed all arround the globe as soon as the first human settlements had relevant population to the point a government and laws were needed, even in sub saarian africa.
>what is lower death rates (seriously it's not like mortality was consistent throughout the pre-modern world until modern medicine came along. Get some perspective, sheesh.)
Obviously decreased with the implementation of vaccine, medicine, antibiotics, technology, better life quality, public sanitation, etc. After Japan, basically all of the top life expectancies in the world are either west european or north american (obviously excluding mexico)

will continue

>>611303
>what is the crossbow
What is the matchlock, flintlock, the revolver, artillery, cavalry charge, napoleonic tactics, square formation, roman defense tactics, tanks, nukes, missiles, destroyers, submarines...

>what is shipping
The economic trade center of the world has always been somewhere arround east europe that is, between west Europe, North America, China, and India.

>what is diplomacy
Embassies, international law, diplomatic envoys, the UN, diplomatic protection laws, and so on are european creations. most good books on diplomacy and foreing affairs, written by authors like machiavelli and HG wells, are western.

There. Done. Refuted all your points, proving most of these things you apparently attributed to other indo european socities were in fact greatly developed by europe and america.

now please go take your disgusting revisionist ass somewhere else, if you want to talk how great anywhere else in the world is anyhow more relevant than the west, you can always move back to either reddit or tumblr. here on /his/ people actually know what they're talking about.

Y'know, for the longest time, all the /his/ threads we had on /tg/ made me hope that a real /his/ board would amount to something. That we'd be able to have decent conversation, thought provoking, and intellectually honest ones. But Christ, threads like these just fucking ruin it for me.

It's not like the "West" was anything but an economic periphery to the larger Old World global trade networks for the longest times, only briefly rising during empires like Rome prior to mechanized industrialization. China and India were much more important for the longest time and China often ran the global economy as most of the time the West really fucking wanted goods from China, and India for that matter.

The innovation of the last 500 years is something, there's no doubt there. It's hella important, but it's disingenuous to assume that the West is all there is before that too. The Greeks are really only important because we pretend they were. Later cultures like Rome, Persia, and the various Islamic Caliphates picked through the untold layers of intellectual garbage to find the good shit we use to this day. For every Plato, there's a hundred shitty Greek philosophers. We only emphasize the few we care about because that's our Western lens.

>>612299

All you've done is shown how the West took other ideas and improved upon them. That's not innovation, that's improvement. There's a pretty clear difference you're pretending doesn't exist.

I'm not that guy, but shit. Get it together.

>>608571
Game was mostly tied in terms of science and culture until the 1700's when white people happened to get really really good at war compared to the rest of the world. Then colonization and globalization happened, and the people with the most guns got the most stuff. Better economy -> more tech -> more power -> better economy etc.

>>612325

How the fuck is it tied? You don't see the Chinese or Indians sending ships in droves to bring back goods from Europe, like, ever. They could not be paid to give a shit as to what was going on in Europe, it was just Europeans interested in getting goods from the rest of the world. No one gave a shit about what was going on in Europe outside of Europe, whereas Europe gave three shakes of a shit about the rest of the world simply because they were unimportant comparatively.

>>612316
The fact that the west improved anything that they had no way to originally develop within their own geographical limits is evidence of its superiority. Theorically, the Chinese should have developed the printing press, advanced firearms, and set sail to colonize western america, but they didn't. Europe didn't have any of that but as soon as they heard about it, they put all their work in that kind of thing and quickly became a powerhouse.

Even if the west indeed simply "just improve" things, let's try to imagine a world where such improvements do not exist. No pavemented roads, no industry, no internet, no cars, no airplanes, no engineering, no vaccine, no printing press, no advanced firearms, no space program, nothing, we'd be at least some 300 years in the past.

Let's be honest, China had everything they needed to dominate the world, they were big, prosperous and rich. They didn't do it simply because they were fucking lazy. If you don't like western contributions you can start by stopping bronswing 4chan, which was created by an american college weeaboo. then you can move on to other things, like abandoning your cellphone, your cotton clothes, your internet, not getting into vehicles powered by combustion engines, instead of a pistole defend yourself with a stone pointed spear and so on.

Today, half of India's population shits on the streets, Chinese have to work 72 hours a week and sub-saarian africans live in huts. Meanwhile, NASA is planning to build the first human settlements in Mars.

Again, go suck a dick.

>>612299
>>612290
>>612269
>>612229
>>612228

noice enjoyable read, wish i could say that much off the top of my head as you did, even if the concepts or ideas aren't particularly difficult.

>>612337

Not that guy, so there's no real "again" to be applied here.

You're attaching a lot of emotional baggage to anyone who's pointing out the flaws in your argument here, bucko. No one is saying that the West's improvements haven't been hellaciously important to the modern world we live in. No one's saying they don't like them. The only thing going on here is that people are saying it's intellectually disingenuous to presume that the West is the only group that has contributed anything to society. The West would not have the printing press if the Chinese had not invented it first. It wasn't viable to create a press revolution in China, or in Persia, so it took off in Europe, which had a vastly simplified alphabet by comparison.

China had everything they needed to dominate the world because, according to their definition, they already were. They didn't need to find America, they didn't have any incentive to do anything different. They were kicking ass and taking names simply because everyone was coming to them, if you excuse the brief period in which Zheng He did his thing on his treasure voyages. China had no reason to go beyond their borders. They paid for it because the West lucked out by (re)"discovering" the Americas and colonizing the rest of the world because they were extremely interested in imitating China and India and being able to compete on their level. Ultimately, they surpassed both. No one is arguing otherwise.

I know this is 4chan, but can we leave the /pol/-tier shit out? No one's shitting on the West, just the idea that the West is all there is.

>>612347
When you're arguing with somebody this willingfully ignorant and resilent to clear facts there's no way you won't get mad.

I never said everything comes from the west but at least 85% of things do. just look arround your room for a second, what do you see? a computer, the internet, a family photograph, a book, an AC system, a CD, a coca cola bottle? take the time to quickly google who innvented all of those little things on the internet and see how many are westerner. there shouldnt be an argument over the fact virtually most things come from the west and i never said evverything is westerner, just most.

China could have developed a press by simply developing their own variant of the katanan/hiragana, something first made by the japs which have the same group language as the chinks. besides, the aryan alphabet is perfectly fit to be used in printing press, their letters/syllabs are simply a rearrengement of small lines and triangles. obviously you dont know shit about languages.

there are rupestrian paintings in cave walls of belgium, germany and france, and theres evidence that etruscans of the early 1000bc period developed their own alphabet, so complex we cant decipher it to this day, which is indicator that many languages were independently developed arround the world roughly at the time and rate of advancement. even in native america they haad their own language system based on strings and amulets.

If the Chinese didn't have any incentive to do anything you're basically supporting my argument that they're lazy gooks, they could have at least colonized unsettled formosa, australia and indonesia, as well as far east siberia, which they had knowledge about. did they do it? no. they didnt even go on merchant missions to india even though they were much closer and could even use the silk road to get there.

Facts are not poltier, but your unreasonable and pre determined biased point of view is, faggotron.

>>612389
Reported. I hope you get banned.

>>612394
Is that all you can say, faggot? I give you 6 paragraphs of solid argumentation, I completely destroy any of your points and you have to rely on reporting me, implying I'm a racist mysoginistic sexist xenophobic cis pig white man. from /pol/ who's leaking their shitposting to other boards. Go suck a huge black dick and go back to whatever subreddit you come from, faggot. If anyone should be banned for not discussing history right thats you you cunt.

>>612389

My, aren't we saucy. I'm sorry you so subhuman you can't detach emotion from a conversation, or for that matter fall to base insult, but please, do continue being a complete ingrate.

Congratulation, you are describing globalization, a process that currently favors the West for the first time ever, and has for the last 300ish years due to, surprise, mechanized industrialization (the West didn't invent industrialization either, just the whole mechanized aspect). Surprise, the crux of innovation prior to the beginning of the European Industrial Revolution rested almost solely in Asia for 10,000 years.

Right, so, we're using outdated terminology, ok. The reason the press took off in Europe instead of China was convenience of preexisting simplified alphabet compared to the fact China had no reason to simplify their alphabet because they made everyone work on their system. Essentially all this "muh West" you're describing is exactly what China did for millennia. Their press was used for a lot of things other than books, though. Printed money comes to mind. I assume you mean the Greco-Latin variation of the Phoenician alphabet, which if we're not counting the Middle East as Western, is not a European invention and we're still using it, with slight variations depending on whether you're using the Cyrillic or Latin alphabet. As Hanyu/Kanji is descended from pictographs, it's not really an accurate comparison to the Western simplification of the Phoenician set, simply because the Phoenician alphabet was itself a variation of other scripts, which were descended from pictographs. Hanyu is fairly easy to trace to its pictograph forms well before the first Phoenician alphabet, so....

Yeah, various groups around the world have invented scripts that are no longer used, "so advanced" we can't figure them out now. If, in 2000 years, someone finds an Atari, and they can't figure out how it works after studying it for a few hundred years, that doesn't make it superior.Cont

>>612325
The West had clearly progressed beyond any other civilisation by the 1300s.

>>612333
By your logic the most important people on Earth are the isolated tribes of the Amazon.

>>612439
> 1300s
Nope. 1500s at the very least.

>>612427

There are paintings on cave walls in Africa that vastly predate the European ones we like to pretend are the first; really only the Spanish example is an accurate measure, not the Belgian/French shit. But we can pretend that South Africa and places like that don't have earlier cave paintings to France and Belgium, that's fine. I grant you one cave in Spain appears to be older, but most of this shit is so faded we've lost the oldest. Likely there are examples lost to history that predate Spain across Europe, Africa, and Asia.

We also can't decipher a lot of alphabets of the Americas, that doesn't make the American civilizations magically more powerful than the rest of the world.

The Chinese never went to Australia, they set up trade settlements in Indonesia, and they didn't have to colonize Taiwan because they were already exploiting it well before the Europeans made it their base. Indian Ocean trade hot spots were largely undefended prior to Portuguese exploitation on account of no one having a viable navy beyond pirates, so no one needed to build forts before Europeans. Europeans just happen to be asshole enough to take advantage of that, but it was inevitable that someone was going to, not necessarily the Europeans. White skin does not automatically make one magically more superior, though apparently it's rotting your brain.

China had trade relations with India that didn't require the Silk Road, it's called Indochina for a reason. Indo as in India, China as in China. China and India interacted therein, reflected in the mixture of culture, products, values, and history therein.

I mean, most of your examples above come from the last 300-500 years. History does not record the person who came up with zero, but that doesn't make it any less important in the Mediterranean sense that it appeared in. Newton stood on the shoulders of giants; most of those giants we'll never know the names of, simply because of the lack of documentation.

I think this board gets more retarded every day.

Only good post ITT:
>>608712

>>612444

Except no one's going to them for trade. China and India were hubs of trade and drove world trade for centuries after the rediscovery of the Americas. The 1700s are really when Europe begins to shift the flow of resources and goods away from Asia and towards Europe.

>>609301
Egypt is in Africa, bud.

>>612448
By the 1300s Western science had created the concepts of physical force and momentum, discovered the laws of motion, invented the mathematical function and the basics of calculus, and laid the foundation of the scientific method. Westerners knew how to build Gothic cathedrals, mechanical clocks, or make eyeglasses. This already goes far beyond what any other civilisation was capable of at the time.

>>612427

Holy fuck you're so fucking retarded, just look at what you're saying faggot.

>a process that currently favors the West

Literally what? Globalization is considered to have started from the 15th century and has always since then favored the underdeveloped world, they were the ones who didn't know about toilets and basic medical care.

>(the West didn't invent industrialization either, just the whole mechanized aspect

No you idiot, never before the first and second industrial revolutions things were mass produced in cities by factories. industry is by definition a manufactory/factory. Read a fucking dictionary, Jesus.

>the crux innovation prior to the beginning of the European Industrial Revolution bla bla bla

No it has't. England didn't even need colonies to start industrialization, as that was the case with England. All they needed was the knowledge to use the stream machine and the manpower to work, issue solved with the circlement policy by Queen Elizabeth I of the Tudors.

>The reason the press took off in Europe instead of China was bla bla bla

Clear idioticy. I already pointed how easily China could have developed the printing press by simply developing their own version of the katakana or the hiraganam, if you didn't get this you dont know what those words mean, you didnt read or you're just dumb. Tell me how else you could have made that slip. And besides, most neighbors of China used their own alphabet, even the machus with tengri conscript. You obviously are ignorant about history. And again, even if I'm wrong at all, Japan, all of the Aryans and totemist america could have easily developed the printing press, as for their writing are either more simple or equally simple to european latin alphabet.
Printed money wasn't printed, by the way, retard. And I'm not talking about any Phoenician alphabet. I clearly stated the widely accepted fact that there are rupestrian paintings in north europe and the etruscans seemingly had their own language.

>>612459
Europe traded with the East to get things that don't grow in Europe, like certain spices. The fact that Orientals weren't interested in buying anything from Europe might only speak to differences in climate and biodiversity, but really it only speaks to Oriental arrogance and self-centeredness.

>>608571

Because Christianity is the One True Religion and God granted prosperity to those who followed Him

:)

>>610098
>only nordicists
and /int/

>>612468

Ok, let's break this down.

>Globalization begins in the 1500

Let's define globalization. If it's the trade of goods that favors the West, no, again, 1700s. If it's the domination of the rest of the world by a single culture, that never truly took place prior to the 1800s when English-speaking societies begin to dominate the rest of the globe. If it's the spread of goods outside of the context in which they are invented, and the drive to acquire these goods, then globalization begins long before Henry the Navigator gets on a boat headed for Africa. Most global historians put the beginning of globalization around 1200-1300 based off of the rise and fall of the Mongols. Not just trade goods spread with globalization, but disease as well. The Columbian Exchange is important, sure. But it's not the invention of globalization.

>Industrial Revolution
Mechanized Industrialization occurred in Europe first, yes. But industrialization, or the process of moving from a society that favors agriculture to one that favors production, occurred in India and China waaay before it hit Europe. Sorry, there's just really no debating that. The Industrial Revolution hit Europe first, but industrialization came from Asia well before that. Seriously, look at the definition of what industrialization is. Factories are not what makes a region "industrialized." It's production.

>Whatever the fuck you're arguing here
Feel free to define this magical circlement policy by Elizabeth I of the Tudors. The English Industrial Revolution occurs when they invent steam power and use it to reach their resource base, as in they needed more coal. Then they figured out they could use engines for more than mining and it went from there. Pretty sure that's not Tudor, but Stuart or Georgian, I'd have to run and check. Georgian, I think.

But seriously, the crux of innovation was Asia between the Agricultural Revolution and the European Industrial Revolution. That's not really up for debate.

Con't

>>612316
improvement is innovation you idiot, and half those inventions were simply developed first or so fucking broad you might as well say "civlization", Europe developed the compass on its own, for example

>>612478
>Europe
>Oriental

Nothing going on here.

>Orientals weren't interested in buying anything from Europe
They were interested in buying silver.

>>612478

Well, let's see. Porcelain doesn't grow, nor do other material goods like certain wood products, other pieces of art, animals, etc. Spices were a major part of European desire for trade, but they were by no means the only. Asians wanted nothing from Europe because Europe had nothing they didn't already have or want.

That said, China was intensely self-centered and arrogant. That's well-documented. They're the fucking Middle Kingdom, for God's sake.

>>612503
>the crux of innovation
You need to stop saying this.

Is this the point where we start subjectively rating innovations and inventions as if they didn't all come about as a direct result of their environment and necessity?

>>612514

>Porcelain doesn't grow, nor do other material goods like certain wood products, other pieces of art, animals, etc.
None of those things were imported by the West in any significant quantity except maybe porcelain briefly during the 16th century, but Europeans started making their own almost immediately.

>China was intensely self-centered and arrogant.
Same with the Ottoman Empire. Just saying those old civilisations' attitudes towards the West don't mean anything, they continued to have just as much disdain and superiority complex to the West right up until the 19th century when they finally collapsed under global Western imperialism.

>>612468
>>612503

>Accusations of Dumbfuckery
China had no need to create their own hiragana, and those systems as we currently know them were still developing in Japan, which was basically bumfuck nowhere by Chinese standards, so they didn't give a shit about hiragana. They had no reason to utilize their woodblocks because they had mass produced books via handwriting factories that pumped out literature at a pretty decent pace (see: INDUSTRIALIZATION, FUCKNUT). There was literally no reason to do so.

The printing press took off in Europe initially because it was more economic than hand-writing those gorgeous fucking Vulgates Western Europeans were spending countless bits on. It takes almost a fucking century between Gutenberg and Martin Luther for the printing press to have any other real purpose than the mass production of religious or political pieces meant for the aristocracy, clergy, or moderately wealthy merchants. After Martin Luther and the Church's failure to control the press, it becomes an incredibly useful tool for all aspects of written language in Europe.

>Aryan or "Totemist" America
Ok, seriously, are you a 19th century German anthropologist? This is getting fucking ridiculous. Update your fucking terminology to the 21st century

What the fuck does the Etruscan alphabet or Northern European cave paintings have to do with the development of Western civilization? Cave paintings are a human universal, and the Etruscan alphabet was neither the first nor of any real importance to the development of Western civilization. No one beyond Etruscan historians and archaeologists give a shit about it, it's only 2800 years old. If we're going to argue for ancient Indo-European scripts that aren't the alphabet, why aren't we arguing for Balkan scripts that predate the alphabet? Or are we being selectively racist now?

>>612508
>>612523

I'll grant that improvement is innovation, and I should stop saying that.

I'm pretty sure Europe didn't invent their own compass, they just never wrote down where they got it from because they probably had no idea. It followed trade routes, like everything else.

>>612537

True, but that imitation of Chinese goods took almost a century to master to the point where Europeans weren't able to tell the difference between European-made and Asian-made; they weren't just getting it from China, either.

The difference with the attitudes, though, is that the Chinese and Ottoman attitudes were pretty well founded. The British were pretty arrogant all the way through the quiet collapse of their Empire into the neat little Commonwealth that exists today. Pretty much any massively powerful empire remains arrogant even until the barbarians tear down the gates.

>>612228
>The first roads were Roman
Incorrect.
>The Chinese, Hindus, Persians and other civilizations had trails at most
[citation needed]
Shifting the goalposts.

Street paving has been found from the first human settlements around 4000 BC in cities of the Indus Valley Civilization on the Indian subcontinent, such as Harappa and Mohenjo-daro. Roads in the towns were straight and long, intersecting one another at right angles.

>The wheel was not an invention
Shifting the goalposts.
> it was one of the most simple discoveries that probaly all homo sapiens already knew that instinctively
Incorrect. Incas failed to create the wheel. Are Incas not human?

>Roughly all formulas that you know were created or at some point, further developed, by Europeans.
[citation needed]

>just google "famous mathmaticians" and tell me how many aren't european.
Shifting the goalposts. Not inventions.

>The only "civilizations" that were actually civilized until the 1800s were the Europeans, Persians, Chinese, Hindus, Japanese, Indochinese, North African, some of the native American empires, Indonesian.
Shifting the goalposts. The first civilization was not European, which is enough to prove his point.
>After that, Europe spread all that they knew to the uncivilized world with colonization
Through butchery and practices that were uncivilized (see Belgian Congo, British Raj, New World).
>If they didn't, dindus and redskins would still be killing each other with spears to this day.
Europe cannot go 40 years without a major genocide. T-they dindu nuffin! We build empires an shit.
>The tractor, the plow, advanced windmills, circle crop rotation, agrotoxics, GMO, commercial farming, and many other agricultural techniques were developed by the western world.
I didn't realize that agricultural societies began with GMOs and commercial farming. Tell me more!

It's kind of alarming that a post like this goes by undeleted. No sources, no citations, no actual reasoning. Not a good look, /his/.

>>612523
crux is a word for vagina

>>612621

Kind of what I'm saying with how embarrassing this board is. I had high hopes. I'm glad I don't come here often.

I'm still not that original poster, but I assume the shitposter OP abandoned ship when he ran out of 8th grade /b/-level insults concerning linguistics and phonology.

>>612625

Vagina as in origin.

Because we all came from a vagina.

>>612228
>Europe is home to many beliefs. Roman/Greek mythology, nordic paganism, slavic paganism. Christianity is an European religion. The Church is European.
Literally none of this refutes what he said. There are probably as many "beliefs" in the Indian subcontinent than there are in all of Europe.
>Chinese, Arabs had it but didn't put it to any use.
[citation needed]
>>612229
>Which one? Kiel canal? Suez canal? Panam canal? They were all developed by the western world.
The Suez canal was one of the first ever? Got a source? These are inventions after all.
>Are you talking about Geneva convention? Because that agreement was written by European delegates in an European city.
True.
>The first nation states are European
[citation needed]
> From ancient times, Europe was very involved with politics
This is an inherently European concept? Amazing.
>There were countless city states in Europe before Christ even was born and they were all pretty organized.
Most of them were engaged in endless war and strife, while the Middle East, China, and India were epicenters of development.
>The best beers are Irish, Czech and German
[citation needed]
Shifting the goalposts from concrete inventions to subjective opinions. Was faulty reasoning developed by Europe as well.
>Smithian economics are British, the dollar (international trade currency) is American. Salary is a Roman word.
Currency evolved from two basic innovations, both of which had occurred by 2000 BC. Originally money was a form of receipt, representing grain stored in temple granaries in Sumer in ancient Mesopotamia, then Ancient Egypt.
>Greatly developed by Europe during the so called dark ages.
During the Chalcolithic era and the Bronze Age, humans in the Mideast learned how to smelt, melt, cast, rivet, and (to a limited extent) forge copper and bronze.

>>612632
A forum dedicated to history requires strict moderation to ensure quality, I think. Strict moderation and 4chan seem to be mutually exclusive.

Unfortunately it seems as though /his/ will never rival /r/askhistorians or even other text forums when it comes to historical discussion.

(I didn't expect much better though.)

>>612656

How could we with /pol/ a hop skip and jump away?

Best of luck. I'm out.

>>612656
>>612632
>>612667
>8. Complaining about 4chan (its policies, moderation, etc) on the imageboards may result in post deletion and a ban.
You should delete your post, mr rule breaker

>>612523
Your comment is an invention yet its not a direct result of your envorinment and necessity.
Suck a dick, deterministic faggot.

>>612621
>>612646
Do yourself a favor and read the thread

OP said ADVANCEMENTS to civilization, saying that Europe didn't invent everything is completely irrelevant and >>611303 is a dumbass for ignoring this. Metaled Roman Roads were more advanced than any other roads of the time. Mathematics, as we know and use it today, was created by Europeans. European advancements to agriculture vastly surpass everyone else. European gunpowder weapons surpass the Chinese in every standard. Modern smokeless gunpowder, with nitrates, is European.

I'm not that anon, his assertions were stupid, but he's not entirely wrong. Fuck off to reddit if it's so much better

>>612742
>complains about mods not deleting posts
>calls me a child for mentioning how you're breaking the rules
Consider it done, friendo

>>612750

That wasn't me, but he had a point. A lack of citation more or less renders this entire board pseudointellectual unless people are willing to back up their claims like he was criticizing. He wasn't breaking any universal rules, nor was I by insulting /pol/. Everyone hates /pol/shits. /pol/ hates /pol/shits. And God knows the mods certainly do.

That's all this thread really is. /pol/baiting.

>>612772
Asking for citations is fine, but he went on a little autistic diatribe like the newfag he is.
>oh noes, the mods won't delete that post
>clearly reddit is superior
Nobody wanted a serious discussion chamber, they want entertainment and light discussion. 4chan isn't a forum for learning, it's an imageboard for entertainment. He should right well and fuck off back to those superior forums since he clearly doesn't want what is offered here and nobody is asking him to stay.
>He wasn't breaking any universal rules
Complaining about moderation. The mods don't care, he should stop trying to change the board to his autistic ideals and take what he is given.
>Everyone hates /pol/shits
You know what is worse, /pol/boogeymen

I hate /pol/boogeymen more than actual /pol/. I used to browse back in 2012, stopped after awhile and now I only pop in when something interesting is happening. Literally all the shit people attribute to /pol/, is made up crap. /pol/ isn't one person, nor is it one ideal. Spend more than a minute there and you can blatantly see that. All the "nazi redpill white power" shit is what /pol/ hates, the ironpill stuff exemplifies this.

I'll reiterate this point once more, /pol/ isn't one person, there are sandniggers, niggers, chinks, kikes, sudacas, europoors, amerilards, and aussies. The only thing that really unifies them is that they're conservative, but that's a given since 4chan has almost always been conservative.

>>612817
>implying you know what other ppl want
I was actually interested in the educational aspect of this entertaining debate. So speak for yourself

Just cause it may be as you claim it
>Entertainment
Doesn't preclude learning.
>light discussion
Doesn't preclude serious discussion.

It really wouldn't hurt if anyone backed up what they claim is fact with some source, reputable or not so it can at least be researched if anyone feels compelled to do so.

But you're right if he's gonna report anyone he should stop being a whiny bitch about it and just do it, or don't. But shut the fuck up about it.

It's not his job to warn anyone about the rules.
...these fucking newfags derailing threads FFS...

>>612931
It's not that we can't have serious discussion, it's just that it occurs in tandem with entertainment and memes and the like. He's holding this board to a standard as if we should ban all fun and culture, which defeats the purpose of 4chan. Learning is fun, we make memes and have giggles about it, but mr. autistic redditor thinks we need " strict moderation to ensure quality."

And all of this because someone made incorrect assertions, which should be corrected for the better of everyone, not deleted.

Now back on topic, I'll contribute on the compass
Alexander Neckam wrote De naturis rerum in 1190, in which he describes a functioning nautical compass for navigation. This predates the accounts of the compass in the Middle East (which date to mid 1200's i believe). So, it is plausible it got passed through, but more likely that it was an independent development. Additionally, he refers to the compass passively, as if it's a commonly used item. Further, another writing, De utensilibus, describes the compass, as an instrument.

This is a good source:
>http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Alexander_Neckam

Original in Latin:
>https://archive.org/details/alexandrineckamd00neck
Can't find a translated version for these but I know it exists

Aside from the compass, Neckam also wrote a good amount on science of the time and tells quite a bit about knowledge of the time

As far as gunpowder weaponry goes, by at least the late 1400s they had breech-loading cannon, which is a huge development.

>>608632
Copernicus aside, you've got a nice culture and history but not much in the way of contribution to western culture and science

>>608712
>unique Western Catholic world view
rofl. scientific revolution was epitomized by Newton and Galileo. The former was not Catholic and the latter worked independently of the church, even though his persecution has been misconstrued

>>612996
>scientific revolution was epitomized by Newton and Galileo
>Galileo
No. Brahe did miles more. And two figures are far from the epitome of a whole period

>>612656
>/r/askhistorians

Askhistorians isn't that great either. It's a centrist liberal censored circle jerk. And questions rarely get answered even if you really want PC "well ACTUALLY" bullshit answers.

>>612989
>Copernicus
>Polish

This fucking meme.

>>612228
>The first roads were Roman
Persian Royal road came first

>The wheel was not an invention, it was one of the most simple discoveries that probaly all homo sapiens already knew that instinctively. This is like giving credit to Africa because Africans knew how to make fire and use a stick. The wheel is a meme.
The Aztecs and Incas didn't have the wheels you idiot

>The tractor, the plow, advanced windmills, circle crop rotation, agrotoxics, GMO, commercial farming, and many other agricultural techniques were developed by the western world.
those are all derivations of the methods first invented in mesopotamia/africa/china

>Europe is home to many beliefs. Roman/Greek mythology, nordic paganism, slavic paganism. Christianity is an European religion. The Church is European.
not invented by europe

>Chinese, Arabs had it but didn't put it to any use
they used it to great effect in the massive old world trade stretching across the islamic world

>Which one? Kiel canal? Suez canal? Panam canal? They were all developed by the western world.
China had a extensive canal systems. Ever heard of the Grand Canal?

>An European thing. Plato, Socrates, Diogenes, Aristotle, Hypocrites, Gaius, Aulus, and those are only the Greeks. There are another 40 countries in Europe.
Confucius, Mencius, Lao Tzu, legalists were philosophers

>The first nation states are European. From ancient times, Europe was very involved with politics. Democracy was developed in Europe, so was the Senate, the idea of a constitution, written laws and so forth. There were countless city states in Europe before Christ even was born and they were all pretty organized.
still didn't invent political entities

>The best beers are Irish, Czech and German. Vodka is Russian. The best wine and champagne are either French or Italian.
invented and best are different things

>Smithian economics are British, the dollar is American. Salary is a Roman word.
none having to do with the invention of currency.

>>612347
this

>>613001
Are you serious? Newton was goat and his system is still taught in basic physics classes today.
Brahe was good too but it doesn't detract from my point because he was lutheran. Galileo made meaningful contributions to science too

>>613014
He was of a german family under subject of the kingdom of poland. He was educated in the kingdom and lived there most of his life. Polish-lithuania was a composite state containing many ethnicities not just poles.

>>612157
But not to Alhasan.

>>613001
also
>are far from the epitome of a whole period
this is what epitome means by definition. the scientific revolution skirted the 1600s

>>610040
except for an assload of chemical knoweledge

>>608753
>the bible was written by Phoenicians

>>611303

>the rules of war

>>612311

go back to /tg/

>>612146
>who is James Watt

Also plenty of Scottish contributions from outside the enlightenment as well, Andrew Carnegie, Alexander Graham Bell, John Logie Baird, Alexander Fleming...

>>610121
Ethiopia was doing completely fine up until commies came and decided to fuck things up.

>>614996
Scotland literally invented the modern world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Enlightenment#Wider_impact

>>613013
How is it censored?

>>612347
>china simply chose not to expand
Not him but this is almost as bad as saying "these Chinese were lazy". Are you so afraid of /pol/ you have to leap to meme answers before someone says "muh aryan master race"?

>>615083
Any time anyone asks an important question like this the reply is usually "well, meme answer, and that's that", any further debate becomes catty and passive aggressive constantly implying that you are secretly a troll so they get their 10 billion upvotes.

Reddit by default never wants to properly discuss anything remotely controversial, their brains are saturated with normy biases.

>>615115
....
examples boy.

File: image.jpg (224KB, 1024x573px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 1024x573px

>>608571
If you extend it to Indo-Europeans, it will really blow your mind.

>>608589
>Islamic Golden Meme
The greatest achievements were by Persians (in Math & Science) and ethnic Iberian Muladís (in architecture and art).

>Gupta
>Mahabharata
Aryans.

It's all environment and luck, of course.
There's no way the environment could possibly cause populations to evolve higher or lower intelligence to suit their surroundings.
Humans are exempt from evolution, and stopped evolving mentally the second they stepped out of Africa.

>>608712
>unique Western Catholic world view

But there were at least a few Persian scientists that started to formulate the scientific method until the Mongols fucked the Abbasids up

>>615298
>muh strawman

File: proboscis monkey.jpg (15KB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 480x270px

>>615298
>It's all environment and luck, of course.
>There's no way the environment
you wanna try that again?

Basically once you have access to a few inventions/technology/ideas, it's a combination of the environment and stability that cause those things to erupt into new ideas and new tech. China and the Mid East had access to some of those things but due to various sociopolitical hindrances (regressive Islamism for example) those things never developed further in those areas.

>>609310
> The first wave of industrialization began in England amd spread outward from there gradually in the early 1700s.
Just to nitpick, I think the Dutch actually industrialised about a century before the English.

>>615083
Beside the self censoring already mentioned I've camped out at least one or two threads where the mods were actively deleting any and all comments that weren't conforming to their preferred biases. It's hard to know how extensive this is because Reddit doesn't tell you what was deleted and of course the mods always insist that they were justified and you can trust them in knowing that whatever was deleted wasn't anything worth seeing.

I'm not gonna win any friends with this, but yes, it involved the Jews
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/399uoi/when_did_jews_migrate_to_eastern_and_western/

The top comment is biased bullshit, but it SOUNDS plausible and conforms to the narrative the mods wanted so it's the only one left. I watched it live any and all mention of undesired voices like Israeli historian Shlomo Sand, who's central thesis would be very relevant to this question, were deleted. The same "problematic" genetic studies were independently posted and deleted at least three times by my count because the mods clearly didn't want the public to see and form the "wrong" opinion:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23241444
I remember a similar thread more recently and the mods have now clarified that citations/primary sources are against the rules, apparently. You have to write your own commentary, though how much is not known (people were doing that in this thread along with their citations and still got deleted). Of course writing commentary that is "controversial" without citation will also be deleted. If your post conforms to the same mainstream PC biases of the mods none of this applies.

With authoritarian mod culture your moderation is only as smart as your dumbest mod. Just as a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. And there are some pretty stupid and immature mods on askhistorians. It was originally started and run by a high school student after all. Don't be fooled by their PhD Internet cosplay.

>>615477
Here's a piece of the puzzle that the mods wanted buried:

No one knows where modern European Jews came from. I know that sounds crazy, but from everything I looked into on this subject it's true. There is this big black hole in our historical knowledge of where or when Jews might have migrated, if they migrated at all, from Israel after the destruction of the second Temple to Germany and Spain by the medieval ages.

Therefore asking "When did Jews migrate to Eastern and Western Europe, and why?" is like asking where the Sea People came from. We can speculate, but we have to be honest with what we don't know. The mods however are apparently extremely uncomfortable with the implications of this uncertainty. Clearly they wanted to censor any mention of narratives of mass conversion explaining the origin of European Jewery as exemplified by the Khazar Hypothesis. They wanted to perpetuate a false impression that the Khazar Hypothesis is not backed with reason and the issue is not under contention. As well as perpetuate the belief that there is a clean and certain record of the diaspora.

Keep in mind it's not a question of what's right, it's a question of being honest about what we don't know and what the options are. The more orthodox explanation for those that have looked into this is good too, but it also has problems. To believe there was no major conversion/pure diaspora hypothesis the proposal is that a couple of families in the DOZENS migrated out of Jerusalem through the Roman Empire over the course of centuries (around 300-800 AD), took some non-Jewish wives and then settled in Germany/Spain. This small band of families then exponentially grew into the millions that defined modern jews
> while at their (Ashkenazi) peak in 1931 they accounted for 92 percent of the world's Jews.

>>615491
This however doesn't explain why European Jewish growth would be so incredibly lopsided compared to Jewish populations elsewhere like in the Middle East. Nor why they would cluster in primarily Germany and not somewhere closer, richer, more cosmopolitan like Greece, Italy, or Egypt. Nor why Jews, a notoriously literate people obsessed with self chronicle, have no historical record of this migration - or anyone else for that matter. Nor why European Jewish culture came to dominate and define all Jewish culture, i.e. Yiddish as a lingua franca, rabbinical Judaism becoming the norm over something like the Karaites, Mizrahi Jews being an extension of Sephardic traditions, basically being all Jews of religious prominence or otherwise after 700 AD or so.

Anyway, I don't know what the answer is. There's evidence for and against all the options. I just know it's not for sure the self certain narrative that eventually emerged after mass prunings implied. And that's only because I was there to watch the thread live and was looking into this matter a little while before the thread on a related subject started. Who knows what you miss when you don't know what you don't know or aren't paying attention to the deletions.

I don't know if the mods are Jewish and threatened by the idea that they are not a racially pure "chosen people" descended from Abraham but a mixed group of localized converts, or if they were idiot liberals who shit their pants when the issue of "the Jews" came up and mashed the delete/ban button out of panicked confusion since they figured anything not comfortable to them must be neo-nazi rhetoric. Probably a mix of both imo. Either way censorship happened.

File: 1451519275845.jpg (344KB, 1600x1538px) Image search: [Google]

344KB, 1600x1538px

>>615500
Not that anon, but the paper you linked said

>European Jewish genome as a mosaic of Near Eastern-Caucasus, European, and Semitic ancestries

So a combination of multiple populations? (as are literally all modern day groups, except maybe the Sentinelese etc), I'm not aware of what's meant to be controversial about ashkenazi origin though?

>>608828
>Impling Anglos and Americans aren't literally the only reason you're able to post this on 4chan

File: smug5.jpg (11KB, 212x238px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 212x238px

>>608571
Because your retarded ass was spoonfed the western canon of the histories of those fields.

Because you're too braindead to even research if the premise of your question is correct

Because you're a shitposter that just wants to bait people into replying by asking a loaded question

Serious response:
Because those fields are developed and adopted first int he western world, and any foreigner has to overcome to communication barrier first before contributing.

However, there are still plenty of foreigners that made significant contributions and even developed entire fields, such as Chern, Yang, Zheng,

>>612311
you're right, we need more neckbeards of your sort rather than some /pol/ v SJW circlejerk

>>608589
WE WUZ FARMERS AND SHIT

>>609000
Inheritance isn't synonymous with genetic inheritance. There are cultural and environmental factors to consider that affect development. For example, I believe mesoamerican civilization would have likely been more advanced if not for the droughts and scarcity of useful metals. I "inherited" the English language from my parents, that doesn't mean it's embedded in the nucleus of all my cells.

>>608982
There is literally no reason intelligence is more useful in a temperate environment than a cold or hot one. The first civilizations began in hot areas, Jews have high IQs despite being a desert tribe, and Inuit people have high IQs.

>>608571
I like how Russia is western when it suits you, but becomes eastern as soon as they arent useful anymore.

>>617282
>there is only one person who makes these maps
Russia is part of the west as far as I'm concerned, especially in recent historical context

>>615477
>>615491
I could care less about da joos, but I absolutely agree that askhistorians has a really repressive air to it. There are quality answers but conversation and historical banter is extremely limited. I also hate how all the posts are written in this tone that strikes me as enthusiastic to an artificial degree.

>>617282
>but becomes eastern as soon as they arent useful anymore.
eastern europe, don't think anyone considers them asian

>>614996
>who is James Watt
Some businessman. Literally the Steve Jobs of his time.