Why didn't anyone outside of Europe try colonizing? Could

>>389212
Because Europe is keked by Islam and Italians off the Main trading routes of the world.

Meanwhile the likes of China, Ottomans, Indians aren't.

The only one that tried was Japan and boy did it fail.

>>389226
>gorious nippon coronies forded 1000 times

Sauce?

>>389226
That makes sense.
What happened to Japan?

>>389212
America was more or less discovered as a side effect of trying to find a route to India. The other Eurasian powers didn't really know it was there either.

The Indians didn't really need to colonize India since they already lived in it. Same goes for the Chinese.

Next question please.

>>389242
>>389243
I think he meant the 1592 Invasion of Korea.

File: dooku.jpg (36KB, 309x331px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 309x331px

>>389246
>invasion of Korea

That's fucking stupid.

>>389226
This desu colonization happened in order bypass the ottoman taxes .

>>389246
>1592 Invasion of Korea.
Wouldn't that be a conquest and not a colonization?
I thought you had to be at least 1 tech level ahead before its called colonizing.

>>389263
I think colonization is more of a two part deal.

First you conquer
Then you let your own people move there

It's a very big question, so if you don't mind I'm going to narrow it down.

The Ottomans conquered Egypt in 1515 and with that gained access to Arab cartography and geographic information that the Turks were previously ignorant of, and following this the Ottomans entered a sort of cold war (which went hot frequently) with Portugal for control of the Indian Ocean. Many cities on the coast of India developed a minority caste of settler Turks throughout the 16th century, and the Ottoman state expanded into Mesopotamia and Yemen, which I would argue means they had colonies.

Your question might be "Why didn't anyone outside of Europe try colonizing America or Australia etc.?" Consider how Columbus was trying to find a quicker way to the East, as in the riches of India. If you were already in the East, why would you need another route to where you already are? Remember that it's important who colonised America now, because we live in an American hegemony, but back in the 16th and 17th centuries especially, colonising the Americas was a huge drain on resources, human or otherwise. A country like Morocco or the Ottomans didn't need to sail to Cuba or wherever, there just wasn't an interest in it.

>>389212
>Why didn't anyone outside of Europe try colonizing?

Because the West wanted more economic growth. In fact, the West wants never-ending economic growth. And historically this has taken some ugly characteristics, such as slavery.

>>389288
Drain of resources?

Didn't they send entire fleets filled with gold back to Europe?

>>389289
Yeah pretty sure economic theory is what drove Vasco Da Gama to round the cape and shoot a bunch of natives.

I think it's more likely he just wanted loads of money like the king that sponsored him.

>>389212

How are you defining "colonizing"? Because if you mean it in the sense of

>Moving people in, subjugating or displacing the natives and ultimately incorporating it into your own people

Holy shit yes, non-Europeans colonized. Han "China" was basically just the stretch between the Yellow and Yangtze rivers in 200 AD, and it took millenia of, well, colonization to spread the Han to the extent that they live in today.

If you only mean overseas colonization, it's primarily the development of oceangoing craft that are reliable and swift enough for economic contact between continents like that to be viable.

European civilization was born from the Mediterranean, so they already had a well established tradition of sea faring. All they needed was a reason to explore the Atlantic, which was encouraged by a desire to have direct access to the Indian Ocean, to convert pagans, and to get an advantage over Muslims. Once the whole thing kicked off in the 15th century with the circumnavigating of Africa and the colonisation of the Americas, it just kept growing bigger and bigger.

No other major civilization really had the same incentives and capabilities. East Asians weren't very interested in trade or expansion, and they already had the Silk Road trade anyway. Indians and Muslims had direct access to the Indian Ocean and Silk Road. Russians were too far inland, so they expanded into Siberia instead.

Morocco actually did try to expand into Africa, but they couldn't rule over the Sahara.

>>389306
Yeah but it's not just that you can get loads of gold or whatever, a colony is a big investment of time and resources and people in a basically new and hostile environment. Like, a lot of early colonies just failed. They ran out of food or got attacked or something and it was over.

And also just to point out that although the Spaniards especially brought over fleets of silver, the inflation that caused basically caused a global financial crisis and helped destroy Spain's empire.

File: dune-original1.jpg (152KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 1920x1080px

>>389337
The Spice must flow.

>>389317
Well if you look at colonization in that way then the ottomans colonized the balkans as the balkan peoples were heavily influenced in a cultural and linguistic by the turks.

>>389346
Weren't the initial exploration voyages sponsored by kings, sending out a small fleet of three ships might cost the equivalent of a sober feast.

Then there is the fact that most conquistadors volunteered. I'd say the Spanish colonization paid itself off more than a few times.

>>389358

But (and I'm not an expert on Ottoman history) did the Ottomans actually move large numbers of turks into the Balkans? The Jin dynasty, for instance, forcibly resettled literally millions of people south of the Yangtze in an effort to develop the areas further. They fought with the indigenous people quite a bit because of this, it wasn't just linguistic and cultural assimilation.

And regardless, the larger point still stands, importing people after gaining political control of an area is hardly a uniquely European phenomenon.

File: African-civilizations-map-pre-colonial.png (156KB, 644x600px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 644x600px

>>389212
>Asia
You ever wonder why China is so large? Colonization
>Africa
Songhai Empire, Mali Empire
>Arabia
Arabs are responsible for the colonization of Africa, especially it's Eastern coast. The Sultan of Zanzibar was from Oman.
>Americas
Aztecs and Inca

The truth is, the very first civilizations practiced colonialism. That's how they spread. It just doesn't fit the narrative when it's not white people doing it.

>>389271
Not really. I mean, it's easier that way, but it's not necessary.

>>389255
Wouldn't worked out pretty well if their navy didn't suck cock

>>389436
Well what else distinguishes colonization from conquest?

>>389462
It didn't suck.

It was way worse than just sucking, it was absolutely abyssal

>>389393
Well the ottomans consisted mostly of converts as the original turkmen weren't in very large numbers compared to the locals in anatolia But eventually a lot of balkan people got assimilated. I read somewhere that like 1/3 of turkey's population in the early 20th century were balkan converts.

>>389471
Colonists can go and establish themselves into a land without official conquest by their government. Even without a conquest at all. They can even colonize a place with the agreement of the locals.

>>389462
>>389471
I just don't understand how an island nation can't into naval warfare

>>389462
>>389471
>>389562
I think it's more that the Koreans had one of history's greatest naval minds on their side.

China did a lot of colonising but it was to extend and secure their borders not in search of resources.

Still doing it too because they arent retards who hate looking after their native population.

>>389562
What >>389570 says

And the Japanese had high sided oared warships and no cannons while the Koreans had ships full of archers and cannons and no real deck to climb on. A nation that was almost entirely reliant on boarding faced ships you couldn't board and had cannons that could hit them from a distance.

File: Toyotomi_Hideyoshi_on_his_horse.jpg (65KB, 468x468px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 468x468px

>>389255
>>389263
The Japanese Objective was far more stupid: Hideyoshi aimed to Invade China, its just that the plan meant going through Korea but Koreans wont let them.

I believe he was trolling by this point to keep his Daimyo busy enough to not plot against him Hideyoshi wasnt a shogun but a mere Lord Protector due to his non-noble birth. S

>>389407
Pretty sure there is a tangible if qualitative difference between assimilating your immediate neighbors and searching the entire world for regions to assimilate.

Depending on how you define colonized, both the Arabs and Chinese colonized

File: lebron-james-michael-jordan-uncle-luke.9787420.87.jpg (53KB, 565x500px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 565x500px

>>389289
You're welcome to post period sources expressing this goal. It shouldn't be hard to find a handful, given that this ostensibly has driven history over much of the world for the last 500 years.

>>389788
>tfw nobunaga actually would have conquered ming

>>389562
Late to the party

Because for the last 100 years or so the Japanese were fighting almost exclusively land battles

>>389212
look up satrapia

>>389909
Look, as glorious and many folded as those Japanese matchlocks may have been, they would not be able to deal with being outnumbered by China 20:1

File: 1426367595508.png (45KB, 231x277px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 231x277px

>>391255
>they would not be able to deal with being outnumbered by China 20:1
Well they did a pretty good job all things considered

>>391761

>Posting worst girl

>>389212
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congo_Arab_war

I KEEP TELLING YOU AFRICAN WARS ARE FUCKING COOL.

>>389909
>>391255
>>391761
>Japan could have moved past the great wall
Even if the Japanese would have conquered Ming, which is highly unlikely considering Ming was also into firearms, to not forget their non shitty navy, the newly formed Japanese Empire would be keked by the Manchus.

>Why didn't anyone outside of Europe try colonizing?
If you talk about Early and Late Imperialism. It was because Europe was the only one who cared about the Americas. There where really nothing left to colonize beside that and Africa. What >>389407 said basically.