racial superiority

more like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guns%2C_germs%2C_and_steel

>>1
Whites had the intelligence to use guns and steel. Whites sufferred from disease aswell, but were intelligent enough to get over it. Compared to the conquests of white lands, the white conquerors and colonists experienced very little resistance, this is because whites are of inherantly superior masculinity and have the balls to resist pirates and colonists. This is why eurasia was not colonised by the mongols and the arabs at times in history when european technology was inferior.

Europe's climate was not always the peacefulk countryside seen today. Jared claims that the only advanced civilisations were in eurasia, yet there were many other thriving economies at the time which had existed for longer than those in eurasia. However it only took 400 years of rennaissance for europe to dominate the world, yet china spent 1000 years as a large and prosperous empire, but achieved very little since it's technology never surpassed it's neighbours as they did not have to compete with whites. Europe is a paradise because whites worked and discoverred ways to turn it into paradise and get the most out of the land. If whites had the resources of sub-saharra Africa at their disposal Africa would be the richest region on the planet, in fact it was rapidly becomming so after the end of world war 2, until the end of colonialism.

You will find everything I have said to be an irrefutable fact which tears all of Jared's arguments to shreds.

>>2

HAHAHA YEAH OK

Asians are superior to whites, but whites had luck on their side and asian societies didn't develop as well. Arabs were at one time superior to whites, but their society was destroyed by religion. Mayas and other civilized indians got close, but their society too was plagued by religion and developement was stagnant for long time. Blacks were also attempting to build a lasting culture numerous. Nubia which was essentially wannabe Egypt was black nation and it actually worked for some time, but  eventually collapsed and no-one remembers it today. Basically key to white people's success is luck and adaptive changing society.

The intelligence needed to adapt in the ways expressed in this thread are only possessed by 0.0001 percentile of human beings. Boil this down along racial lines and you start to get how trival  it really is. You really think an African or an Asian or East Indian saw a gun and didn't think about using it?

Come on, now, get real.

Secondly, Nubia and Egypt are pre-dated by an African mother-culture where Mali, Bantu and all the rest orginate. This isn't afrocentrism but historic fact that's supported by the evidence present in the "Out of Africa" theory.

 

>>link "[D]on't words such as 'civilization,' and phrases such as 'rise of civilization,' convey the false impression that civilization is good, tribal hunter-gatherers are miserable,...?" On the contrary, according to Diamond, civilization is a thoroughly mixed blessing, in ways that he describes.

This destorys his credibility.  He's a hippy and a new age asshole.  Not worth listening to.

Combination of luck and ability.  Whites aren't the most capable race, but there are other races that should have been more successful than they actually were (bix nood cough) who failed miserably.

>>7

Exactly, One Zulu was better than 10 white european soldiers. One Samurai had more guts and brains that 10 white european soldiers. Lock and ability? Hm...refer to >>5. Luck I'll give you. Ability? No.

And >>6. How about you try and debate his assertion. Or are you unable to? (Due to your lack of intellect)

Quote:
I don't want to sound elitist or arrogant here, but who here has actually studied the record of Historical European Martial Arts for over a decade, done a great deal of research on European swords and weapons, test cut with accurate replicas of both Euro and Japanese swords, and cross-trained with practicioners of traditional Japanese sword arts?

I have, and the only question in my mind is not whether or not the feudal European warrior could win, but what the margin of victory would be for the Europeans if you could match up say 100 knights in individual duels with 100 samurai and take statistics.

The European's sword and especially his armor was metellurgically superior. His technique (both armed and unarmed) was just as good, if not better, given the European leaning towards pragmatism. To top it off, the gap betweens Whites and Japanese in size and strength was more prounounced then that it is now. I respect the Japanese sword and it's practicioners as being very, very, good, but it was never extensively tested on a continent wide basis in all manner of conditions, like European or Chinese technique. The Japanese simply fought themselves almost their entire Feudal history, and that is one reason why the Katana and it's systems are so grandiously regarded by the Japanese, and by diffusion, Westerners.

Viking period skeletons have been found in Scandinavia that have been completely cut in half, from shoulder to hips, by sword strokes. So whilst Katanas may have been able to do the same thing, in terms of cutting ability it's hard to see how a Katana could be considered superior to European swords.

Folding steel to make swords, known as pattern welding in the west, is a very well known, and very old skill, in the west as well. In fact, if you're ever in London, go to the British musuem where they have several fabulous examples of pattern welded swords from Anglo-Saxon times, circa 1,000 - 1,500 years ago. Western swords were also made with steel that contained a much lower carbon count, and thus were much more flexible than Katanas, and thus less likely to break.

Even so, no sword, and no cutting implement in existance, can cut through 4 inches of steel. European knights were essentially impervious to cutting weapons whilst wearing plate armour that was considerably thinner than 4".

Stop listening to the Samurai wannabes and actually do some research yourself.

http://www.ejmas.com/jwma/
http://www.thearma.org/HEMA.htm
http://www.aemma.org/onlineResources/library_startPage.htm

what's the point of this debate, or that book for that matter
you don't think any 1 race can stay dominant forever?
once that changes all these theories are pointless...

The mongols were the ultimate medieval fighting force. Some compound bows could store the same amount of energy as an English longbow in only half the size, this would push the absolute limits of endurance and strength, but the mongols didn't need to fire 6 arrows a minute, their battles were pure attrition, you may only fire a few arrows an hour, but you did this for a few hours a day for weeks, riding into range and gallopping away before they can respond and if light cavalry chases after you, all you have to do is get back to your main body of troops and fresh heavy cavalry will be ready to lance their tired horses. If the enemy has no light cavalry left, then they are completely fucked.

What use is a sword if an enemy can kill you from 50 metres or if you starve to death as the enemy rides around you and loots the countryside whilst you helplessly chase after them?

Eventually the Rus and Turks caught up and used mass light cavalry who would stay garrisonned in central installations and go out to crush any hoarde of horse archers which is laying siege to some back water province that has fled to a fortification.

>>8 makes grand claims, which history bears out.

Oh, wait...

>>8
This is just dumb. A samurai was certainly an elite, but not a Zulu. This is blatant liberal apologetics, take the facts you want, ignore the ones you don't like. Luckily we are not living in a liberal despotism yet, so both facts can be provided.
The british fought a catastrophic battle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Isandhlwana
Then retreated to some agricultural buildings and entrenched and scored a decisive victory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rorke%27s_Drift

The Zulus used a shoulder to shoulder hand to hand infantry charge in both encounters, the British in isandhlwana were dispersed and in the open, and the british in rorkes drift were prepared with plenty of ammunition, in cover and formed into a dense firing line. There is nothing the Zulus can do to stop the british if they use the tactics used at Rorkes drift, therefore the British were superior. Even at isandwhala the kill ratio was 2 to 1.

kill ratio = 37 to 1 in Britain's favour.
subjugation ratio = 32 to 1  in Britain's favour.

>>4
Luck?
Africa gets sweeping grasslands and floodplains, the arabs get their fair share of flood plains, the Indians get the Indus valley and 100s of square miles of sub-tropical grassland and the Chinese has a mediteranean landscape the encompasses 100s of square miles and some very large rivers that allow plenty of inland travel and communication. Yet all whites get are dense forests and swamps that freeze over each winter and some land sticking out into the mediteranean that is mostly dominated by the superior populations and technology of the Persians, Syrians and Egyptians. Perhaps you can explain to me how a gentleman named Alexander from some tiny backwater fiefdom of a dry mountainous peninsula managed to defeat the persian empire? Perhaps you can explain how 100 years after the black death, after 100 years of war and into the little ice age Europe was the most technologically advanced region on the planet, whilst China with a population over 3 times that of europe and 100 years of peace since the mongol invasions still pounded rice from their kernels by hand instead of using a simple wind or water mill? Perhaps you can tell me how the Chinese with all their luck failed to discover the americas, undergo an industrial revolution, colonise anything past south east asia (they were no angels either) or prevent a few pirates flooding their country with opium? Go ahead, call it luck, since you are in denial of reality there is nothing I can really do except shower you with facts. I just want you to call it luck so if anyone has any sense they can see how much of a completely bat shit fucking loco crazy caloolahoola you are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population
The population figures in the table below are in thousands.
Year     World     Africa    Asia     Europe     Latin-America     North America     Oceania
1750     791000    106000     502000     163000     16000         2000         2000

>>2

WHITEY SMART HE GOT UP AND CONQUERED WORLD CHINKY DUMB HES LIKE WOW IM DUMB LETS SIT AROUND NIGGER DUMBER HE RUNS IN GRASS AND STABS COWS

Oh wait, Asia includes India, China and the middle east. There must have been over 150 million people in China at around 1750. Europe was divided and had experienced near continuous bloody religious and territorial wars since the fall of the roman empire.

>>15
The people in Asia have always heavily outnumbered the people in Europe. Europeans used to be more desperate and that came out to their advantage. Now, they are a bunch of wusses. They can't even procreate right. Look at the projected figures, by 2050 white people will be outnumbered 10 to 1 by Asians. At least we could figure out 'insert here.'

White people ARE inferior. They can't even fuck right. At least they know how to *fap* *fap* *fap*. It's the small pleasures that count. Whitey be heading the way of the dinosaur. Not surprising.

>>18
truth. White people get so LAZY without war. The creation of the European Union was the beginning of the end. Now where am I gonna stick it in the pooper of hot busty blondes? =(
Hurry up with those sexbots Japan, I'd rather die than not have my blondes!

o no my culture is better than your culture lawl

there's no point in debating this unless 2 cultures actually fought face to face with equal force and advantages, which has fucking never happened anywhere so stop arguing bout it

>>20

seriously

nobody even clicked the link lol

>>18

http://www.exitmundi.nl/Sperm%20problem.htm

oh

then again what can i expect from world4ch a forum full of the greatest examples of humanity that one can look upon

i mean seriously screaming NIGGERS CHINKS SPICS CRACKERS WAMPUMS KIKES etc. at each other really proves how great you are

besides racial pseudo-science is really great imo i mean have you ever heard of this cool thing called melanin theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_supremacy#Melanin_and_melanin_theory its really great its about as logical as white people naturally having lower birth rates and salsa music being proof that mexicans arent human and none of these theories are completely retarded