How does any of that change what I said. You are fapping over facts that were outside anyone's control, even those who took part in it. It just so happened that Europe was the epicenter of sweeping global change. You want to ascribe positive attributes to white people after the fact. But that's not how it works. Attributes that work when applied to individuals do not work on collectives because they are two different types of entities.
A single man can be lethargic and a failure, or he can be resilient, hard working, entrepreneurial and hence successful. But those attribute-outcome correlations only work for individuals, that too in controlled circumstances. Lethargic societies can prosper and industrious socities can fail under other circumstances(that is IF words like "industrious" and "resilient" could even be applied to entire societies).
White people have been there for what? 5000 years now? But we only saw them have such tremendous success in the last 500 years. Human intelligence has not increased by much in last 3000 years why didn't we see all this before if european people were so great? Things like this is why ascribing complex centuries spanning historic events to something as simple as "white man good" is asinine.
Here's another food for thought, you talk of the British raj. But what about the white working class factory workers who were crushed under the industrial might of Victorian London?
It wasn’t a “just so happen”. Look at the IQ scores and cranium shapes. It’s not a just so happen event. There’s a reason afro semites and the other races were in huts and dominated by Europeans.
There’s more of a chance one becomes resilient and hard working if his race is that. The “great man theory” in history still explains white supremacy because 90% of the great men were white
They did. The indo Europeans, Greeks, romans. You’re right; intelligence and white supremacy hasn’t been a recent thing. It’s just the most objective telling to EVERYONE was in the past 500 years.
What about them? It is unfortunate but such is the cause for an industrialized society.
? That's like saying Portuguese people are Spanish. As far as I know Netherlands and Portugal are older than Spain and Germany and the languages aren't mutually intelligible. I agree that Austrians and German speaking Swiss are really just Germans and don't have any bigger right to be independent than say Bavaria.
No lol, the Dutch discovered the whole world along with Portugal. Just Indonesia by itself already had a bigger population than all the countries Germany controlled in WW2 combined. Germany as a united state didn't exist until like 2 centuries ago and thus were very late to the colonization party. Same for Italy. I think both had 1 or 2 African colonies that's it.
If you add up all the African colonies including the Samoa and the one German Chinese one they had influence over a lot. Definitely not a shit ton like with the Netherlands but still a bit
I am not sure if we have the correct iq analysis data of europeans in 17th century. Not sure what you mean about craniums.
That 90% number would look very different if the question was asked 500 years ago. Which brings me to my original point.
White supremacy is pretty much a recent phenomenon. Its a fact that whites as a social group did not exist before 16th century. The concept of whites as a scientifically valid classification of humans is flimsy at best. And if you define them to be people of European origin, then they haven't been as objectively successful as claimed.
And you know how this will end up? By the time rest of the world is industrialized and developed white people will lose all superiority they hold so frantically now. They already hold much less power over places like India or China than they used to. The moment white world stops progressing(technologically) the rest of the world WILL catch up. Nowadays even shitholes like Pakistan can have nuclear deterrents. All that if white people are not fully replaced by immigrants by then. My point is white supremacy is a flimsy concept based on inaccuracies and fallacies.
I only wish I was white in some asian country. I'd rule the world of pussy. Simply being white is not enough, you have to put yourself in favorable social conditions to truly enjoy life. How I wish I was a white, tall man with some upper class accent. I literally fall asleep while dreaming about it, almost every day.
I can't relate to the plight of indian men, but I too hate my native culture and most other cultures other than european. Btw modern mass culture is utter shit too, god bless murrica for making it so widespread.
I can't relate to the plight of indian men, but I too hate my native culture and most other cultures other than european. Btw modern mass culture is utter shit too, god bless murrica for making it so widespread.
I honestly don't care about white supremacy as a concept. More like about the substance of the term applicably to men-women relationships. Couldn't care less about how advanced or intelligent white people are. What I care is: white men are perceived as better looking universally. "White" features, especially in men, are the standards of beauty pretty much everywhere. I truly believe that even ethnics who have never seen a single white man in their life can tell it. Now, about the substance of the term, what I call a white man here: nordic or med, tall, not balding and of course mid to upper class, first world citizen. Because, when we talk about "whiteness" applicably to dating, one can't not notice what features ethnic foids typically invest white men with: "beautiful" hair (not balding, preferably blond), "beautiful" eyes (shit colored eyecels out, only noble light color), "beautiful" features (tall, masculine, square jaw, lean face, etc etc) and there's inevitably the fact that an ethnic foid would expect a white man to be rich and in a financial position to support her and her family. Goes without saying that being a white man you are expected to have these (vastly exaggerated) features to fully impress local ethnic foids. This is the measure of your "whiteness" according to me.
Last edited:
Some Germans can't understand the Bavarian dialect either, that doesn't mean that they're not German by blood.
A language is not the only thing a people have in common, albeit it's usually a good indicator. Dutch and German sound alike, and have many similar words.
Germany has over 2000 years of history and ever changing territories.
The Dutch people, just like most Austrians, are descendants of Germanic tribes who speak a West Germanic language and have similar customs to Germans and are therefore German. The Swiss on the other hand are only partly Germanic, speak several languages including French, and have a very mixed, heterogeneous culture and people depending on the state, so these two countries can not be compared.
Last edited:
D
french and ee foids dont mind ethnic men? Where are u from?
R
i also noticed this but whites gaining technlogoy advancement was a newer and more recent thing, because the Chinese, indians, persians mogged the Europeans before the modern age. anyway china is mogging white right now since whites have declining birth rates and are dying off and getting replaced.
K
High IQ post.
I'm okay being any races as long as chad
Imagine you rope, get reborn, see that your skin is white, get excited, then you see that your birth certificate says Moldova/Belarus/Ukraine/Albania/Monkeydonia
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
