Why does Sup Forums keep pretending that the aztecs, mayas, incas...

Why does Sup Forums keep pretending that the aztecs, mayas, incas, chibchas and other native american civilizations were not as advanced or even more advanced than europeans?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=inR02pEesCQ
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Because in many ways they weren't. They lacked as detailed a knowledge of metalworking as the Euros. Along with a severe shortcoming in what we would know as Scientific knowledge, though modern science as we know it did not exist. They weren't ignorant savages though they were savage in their own right.
The mayas were also destroyed by the time Euros came to bleach the natives.

Those proto gooks were well advanced in ugliness and cultural extinction

It doesn’t matter how advanced they were they were fanatic cannibalistic zelots. They had to be conquered for the good of all humanity.

>They lacked as detailed a knowledge of metalworking as the Euros.
KEK

big words for a virgin

More advanced than europeans
No domesticated animals

>offers bible to Incas emperor
>throws it on the ground
>him and his people get slaughtered

No lol, they’re smart af

Where are those civilizations now?

Their weaponry couldn't even penetrate European armor. Spanish knights on horseback were pretty much invincible

There were no animals suited for use the way europeans used them. The closest thing they had to any beast of burden was llamas and alpacas.

So advanced now dead . Maybe not so advanced .

So your argument is just >muh feelings and >muh human rights? All the other civilizations did stuff we consider bad today, get over it

Europeans are just savages who only outdid natives in weapons, all the other types of technology natives had was more advanced than europe's

youtube.com/watch?v=inR02pEesCQ

There was one battle where the only impediment for the Spanish was that they didn't have time to slaughter everybody for nightfall.

They were advanced for what they were, but nothing compared to Europeans, Arabs, or Asians. Still better than niggers though.

>Europeans are just savages who only outdid natives in weapons, all the other types of technology natives had was more advanced than europe's
Prove it .

>They were advanced for what they were, but nothing compared to Europeans, Arabs, or Asians. Still better than niggers though.

They didn’t have much iron to process, and their way of warfare was to capture their enemies alive to sacrifice, killing them was the mark of a poor warrior. Because of that they never really had any need/desire to make anything better than their obsidian razor weapons, which were effective against their light armor and less lethal than other kinds of weapons.
So metalworking was mostly just for arts.

Wrong. Any African army would BTFO Native Americans. Africans had a basic mastery of metallurgy and could produce iron weapons/armor. Natives were fighting with sticks and rocks still

where are your pyramids? literally every people except whites have built them

Yes every civilization does do bad but letting a religion that institutionalized ritual murder and cannibalism to exist is unthinkable.

It is literally true, you fucking Aztecboo.

>When you get btfo by Sup Forums and run out of arguments

Well OP lumped Aztecs in with the North American natives which he shouldnt have. I was referring to Central American natives. You know, the ones who built large cities with irrigation and shit.

fuck off nigger. natives adapt. niggers regress

No way Nigger you bitches still live in mud huts and use sticks for weapons

brits created a good way to keep big societies from falling apart

The only reason the spanish won is because of disease, tactics, and political maneuvering. The weaponry was an advantage but against millions of natives it would be nothing.

Its actually inaccurate because African armies would definitely have defeated Central American armies on the battlefield. It wouldn't have been quite as OP as Spaniards vs Aztecs but it still would have been a blood bath. African militaries were actually fairly competent--for example, the British had to fight three separate wars to defeat the Ashanti kingdom in modern day Ghana during the 19th (NINETEENTH) century, whereas Spaniards completely BTFO Natives with vastly inferior tech/tactics

quality weapons to kill a european there
cause we killed them xd

Did they even have boats ? And the navigation equipment to use them ? Or maps ? I dont know , Im just asking so you can educate me .

...

>"And this class, this is the perfect example of how not to make an argument"

Their cities where better structured and they had a better knowledge of astrology, they also had a more advanced and complicated mathematical system and their farming system was more efficient than any european one

>that was a btfo by Sup Forums standards
KEK

The spanish beat the aztecs because the aztecs were filthy savages that everyone hated and they were happy to ally with the spanish to beat them. You really are a dumb ape if you think africans would have beat the indians in their own jungle.

OP !!!! WHERE DID YOU GO ????

Anyway they were basically animals

>The weaponry was an advantage but against millions of natives it would be nothing.
That's factually incorrect. A Spanish knight with a full suit of armor on horseback was effectively INVINCIBLE. The Aztecs had NO weaponry that could pierce steel armor and did not have horses, nor where they even familiar with horses. The Spanish also had guns and cannons which inspired tremendous fear. The Spanish were literally invincible; there was one battle where a few hundred Spaniards slaughtered tens of thousands of Aztec warriors. The only impediment was that they didnt have time/energy to chase everybody down before night fall

>No way Nigger you bitches still live in mud huts and use sticks for weapons
Lmao no. Africans routinely used iron weaponry. Do some reading retard.

Yes this was shown in Deadliest Warrior.

I am of Mayan decent. My people had electricity, flying machines and even space machines. Most mayans went into space around 1000 years ago when they realized that soon invaders bringing disease would come.

>Their cities where better structured and they had a better knowledge of astrology, they also had a more advanced and complicated mathematical system and their farming system was more efficient than any european one
ahhhh There you are - Thought you ran off . Any way , as I said before - PROVE IT . Proof . The proofs . Gimmie

They obviously had boats, they did not have maps but they didn't have the need of having them anyways

So you're saying that the best way to measure a civilization potential is by their fighting skills?

they were in the stone age dude...

>keep pretending
The Aztecs, Mayas, Incas and Chibchas were pretending when they got genocided by superior European warfare? Where are they then? Chilling with Hitler in Antarctica?

No, but its worthy of consideration. The whole argument about inferior/superior cultures is redudant anyway because it changes. In one thousand years, historians might look back and think modern Europeans were retarded faggots

>Europeans are just savages who only outdid natives in weapons, all the other types of technology natives had was more advanced than europe's
WE WUZ INVENTORS.

>let me just post a comment out of my ass

The Spanish actually had better results with crossbows than guns because they could reliably fix and make ammo for those while ammunition and powder were scarce.
Armor doesn’t make you invincible. Yes it made them nearly untouchable but it’s naieve to think that there was no danger at all to them. Their alliances with the natives and their diseases crippling the indians went much farther in their conquest than their technolocal superiority. Remember with the aztecs that the spanish only had 600 soldiers.

You are very stupid. Why don't you think for once in your life? The Spanish were able to send a tiny army all the way across the Atlantic ocean and conquer one of the most densely populated places in the world. YET, if Africans were so martially incompetent, why did it take 200 years for Europeans to start establishing colonies in Africa?

It was impossible for Europeans to successfully invade Africa at that time, but it was astoundingly easy for them to conquer all of North and South America. It took several centuries of tech/tactic advancements until Europeans were capable of colonizing Africa

south american savages btfo

>superior European warfare
Do you really think that spanish won by themselves with just their guns armor?

LOLin hard - Thats some nigger tier shit - THESE are the boats the Spanish shoved up the "natives" asses .

What batlte was that?

working gold is easy - yes they made pretty figurines with gold , but they didnt have the creation of good alloys down, which is the most difficult thing if you want to make usefull tools/weapons

Europeans had set up small outposts along the coast of Africa before that but disease and hostile tribals (who didn’t have the same weakness to disease the indians did) prevented them from going further inland. the invention of quinine and the first machine guns is what allowed them to conquer africa.

They would've soon or later if not for their superior European genes, hygiene and medicine allowing them to not die like dogs from a silly bacteria.

Overall the south americans were on a level as the ancient sumerians or other high cultures of mesopothamia - that's pretty impressive, but nothing compared to late medival europe or china

>Because they didnt have the wheel

I don't remember enough about the incas and I have no clue who the chibchas were, so I can't speak on that at this time. The Mayans left because they were better than the others. The rest probably died. Why are you pretending that they didn't engage in human sacrifice of their best gene stock(which is part of why they are so stunted as a people), cannibalism and other dark arts?
Also, I find it bizarre and interesting how you left out the Olmecs from your list of mentions.

Wow your people built a pointy house.

They had pottery wheels.

That's God's house, tyvm.

the aztec civilization was possibly the most barbaric in the history of human civilization.
they performed so many human sacrifices that the streets were flowing rivers of human blood. they would genocide entire villages in a vain attempt to appease their god.
the brutality of the aztecs was such that no other civilizations could develop in the region because they were too busy fearing for their lives from aztec raids.
the spaniards took one look at this civilization and realized that genocide was the only option, there was no redeeming these savages.
the spaniards did the world a favor by erasing the abomination that was the aztec civilization.
let me be clear, even when the europeans made contact with the subsaharan africans, who at the time engaged in relentless tribal warfare and even slavery, their "civilization" was still not as barbaric and depraved as Aztec civilization. the blacks were content to just kill and enslave each other.
the aztecs took it one step further by practicing an industrialized form of human sacrifice unparalleled until WW2, and cannibalism was common. their level of sheer violence was roughly on par with the africans, however the levels of malicious cruelty have rarely been matched since

Working gold is shitskin level skill - WHERES SOME STEEL ??? nigger tier .

Their metalurgy was mostly for art/fashion, not weapons or armor.

Why the fuck would they need a ship like that, they lived in fucking jungles and mountains, are you stupid? The only reason europeans had it was because they needed it to move through the atlantic

They had the wheel but they never used, keep talking out of your ass

Okay i don't think i want to argue with a slavshit about "superior european genes"

In other words, they were naive savages who got destroyed by a higher society

because they weren't
they didn't have the wheel or metalworking (the inca used bronze but lacked written language, which the aztecs had)
"Muh 250,000 beaners in Tenochtitlan" and "muh super accurate mafematical astronomy calendar" don't trump that

Think about what you just said for a moment. You can't work gold with gold, so they must have had metalworking tools.

yes because they mainly had an abundance of gold, which is very easy to work - but they didnt have iron/steel or even good bronze to actually make something usefull out of it

>the invention of quinine and the first machine guns is what allowed them to conquer africa.
Exactly. But it would have been impossible for 16th century Europeans to invade Africa under any circumstances. The Portuguese had a few small trading outposts that they populated with PURCHASED slaves, not conquered peoples.

>they didn't have the wheel or metalworking

they had wheels but without any real use for them (they had no beasts of burden) it was mostly just like steam power was for the romans.

Literally talles and most complex buildings until skyscrapers came, shitskin.

March of the Titans told me it was founded by aryans. But they went extinct.

>according to the Spanish conquerors, who enslaved, pillaged and exploited Aztec lands for the next 300 years

>They had the wheel but they never used, keep talking out of your ass
pretty stupid of them, don't you think? it's not a positive if a culture has access to some potentially revolutionary technology and they use it as a child's toy without realizing that it could have better uses, it's a negative.
for all practical purposes, they lacked the wheel

You can work it with stone. Gold is soft as fuck. Moreso the more pure it is.

Having the 'concept of wheels' and actually applying it to get productive shit done - like traveling with goods, is two different things.
As far as I'm concerned, we have flying saucer toys our kids play with - doesnt mean we get to travel in one.

If they COULD make one THEY woulda crossed the Atlantic but they couldnt and you know it .

>all civilizations must work the same

that’s a pretty backwards and over-simplified way to view any conflict.

yeah, that's exactly what I said
you're totally arguing in good faith and not a troll

Awww, conceding already? And with an ad hominem no less. You mutts never fail to amuse me.

so you deny that the aztecs were the most prolific practitioners of human sacrifice in human history?

Why the fuck would they want to cross the atlantic when they had fertile lands and literally all they needed right next to them

Ok, so why didn't europeans have pyramids? They are so stupid they couldn't invent they pyramid for more practical buildings

True, they probably had stone tools then instead of iron or brass. I'm not sure because I've never really looked into it.

Fucking 200 Spanish soldiers conquered a fucking continent of these so called advanced people you speak of.

Because the Spanish destroyed the entire Aztec Empire with 300 men. And the Aztecs were so technologically behind that they believed the Conquistadors were gods due to their armor, horses, guns, etc.

>tfw

I believe this is older

>Stacking rocks, then cutting peoples hearts out on top of them, makes you an "advanced civilization"
Hahahahahahaha!

>native americans
chinamen are not native to the continent discovered by white men.
>advanced
ripping hearts out during an eclipse is not advanced.

Are you really arguing this?

ive always really liked helmets with face shaped masks. They remind me of samurai helmets.

>pyramids

They are just a pile of stacked rocks with some coridors in it.

Those are incan, these are mayan

And europeans couldn't invent it HAHAHA

>So you're saying...
Who let Cathy Newman in here?

>pyramid
>least practical building of all time
>changing the subject
>still hasn't shown one way that any pre-columbian civilization was more advanced than 1500s europe