What is it about the West that makes it objectively superior to other cultures?
Literally everything is better when made by Westerners. Other than vidya, Western creative content and innovation is light years ahead of other cultures (and even that is changing, not that Japan is emulating Western RPG themes and formats).
How did we become so much better than everyone else?
Other urls found in this thread:
Our greco-roman roots. The both great civilizations in BC ages.
Indeed, the root of our legal system is the Roman law.
Middle East and East Asia both have comparable civilizations to greco-romans, so stop meming. Europe used the feudal system for most of the period between Rome and modern times. Anyone that starts a sentence with "Indeed" is an autist trying to sound intelligent, so don't do that.
The West was technologically behind for most of history until roughly the 18th century when it rapidly launched ahead. There were a number of factors that contributed.
1) Asia and the Middle East was largely depopulated and burned to the ground by successive waves of Turko-Mongol invasions several hundred years ago
2) Europeans discovered a direct sea road to the East, which bypassed the Silk Road and sent it into terminal decline. The economies of Central Asia and the Middle East collapsed within a generation while Europe's began to rapidly surge.
3) Europe went through the Thirty Years War, which kickstarted the Age of Enlightenment. Europe went on to diverge away from feudalism towards market economies and capitalism while the East held onto their old archaic systems
The East is still adopting market economies but as they do they're growing. You'd be an idiot if you think Western hegemony is permanent, because it's only been really the last 300 years or so.
Western people evolved in a steppe tundra full of huge dangerous animals, sub-0 winters/falls/springs and fucking dwarves (neanderthals). Europeans had to survive in that cold, dry wasteland for tens of thousands of years.
middle east had nothing even remotely comparable. greece had sewers and aqueducts in 3000 B FUCKING C, something the middle east never had even at its peak.
asia was indeed comparable, the proof is in the pudding, seen by historical record, modern accomplishments, AND genetic iq.
some estimates put renaissance europe at around 115 average iq points, which had declined steadily. we were probably great because of intensive involuntary eugenics. we declined commensurate to our lost iq
>American education
why is it always the Americans?
Persia had a far more complicated aqueducts built into the fucking mountains, you can still visit them today. Greece as a civilization didn't exist in 3000BC, the Archaic period begins roughly 800BC. The Golden Age and most of what people respect of Greek achievements began after they had brief submission to the Archaemenid Empire and adopted their system of administration. And trade was opened so the Greeks were being exposed to philosophy and mathematics that began in Mesopotamia. Babylonians pioneered some of the stuff we credit to the Greeks thousands of years earlier. People underestimate how much the ancient world was interlinked. But Ancient Greece was a relative backwater compared to what existed in Mesopotamia and Persia. Xenophon wrote about discovering ancient ruins of the Assyrians that dwarfed anything he had seen before and these were civilizations that predated anything greek by thousands of years.
Maths
Philosophy
Logos over Mythos
Democracy
State cities.
Monarchy, Republic and Empire states in the same Roman civilization; I mean, evolution.
Both greek and Roman citizens had Rights, while eastern population were mostly slaves of the tyrant on power.
I'm still mentally recovering from you talking about Greeks with aqueducts and sewerage (which is actually Roman, not the Greeks), let alone in 3000BC.
It really is Americans always posting dumb shit, what the fuck is wrong with you people?
since when is northwestern persia defined as the middle east?
after the arab herders ran roughshod through the area and replaced their haplotype with j3 via rape and genocide, they failed to accomplish anything at all
I thought it was generally accepted that turkey was the sick man of europe, or a border area before the ME. either way, almost everything you mentioned was built within 100 miles of the greek border, so unless you want to define the "core" of the middle eastern civilization as 100 miles from the bronze age core of europe, or you want to say that the "middle east" with a geographic and genetic core in saudi arabia, stretching all the way to eastern india, is less relevant than the "core" of the middle east, situated 2k miles west of what is generally accepted to be the real middle east...
you're artificially saying the core of the ME is where the accomplishments happen to be. ignoring that all of that is within a weeks boat ride of europe.
the rest of the genetic middle east never even had bureaucracy
are you seriously surprised that clapistani shits don't know history at all?
90% of history threads here are just wanking over the romans and greeks, two civilizations that mostly stole shit from the arab world. I mean atleast the greeks did come up with plenty of things, but romans didn't. I really don't know why right leaning people really fucking like the romans
inb4 libcuck etc, please look at my flag
This comment is hardly worth replying to, you're seriously just naming topics you've read about ancient Europe but not bothered to look up in the East. some of the stuff you've listed is actually inherited from the East, not native to the West at all.
Babylonians, Persians, Indians and Chinese were all very advanced in maths far ahead of Europeans. A lot of what we credit to the Greeks we are finding was already known by the Babylonians thousands of years earlier. Persia and China both had major contributions to philosophy during the time of Classical Greece . Our modern western values are far closer to Confucianism than anything the Greek philosophers discussed.
I mean you really get deep into bullshit. Claiming Monarchy as Western and saying Greek and Roman citizens had rights but the Easterners were mostly slaves of a tyrant in power. Holy fuck dude. The Archaemenid's were forbidding slavery and giving autonomy of rule to religious minorities when the Greek city state economies were basically run by slaves. Read some books
>itt turkish and arab diaspora trying to play the "muhhh history" card
I'm talking about the present. From the Enlightenment on, the West has been far beyond any other civilization.
You faggots keep arguing about who dug the deepest holes in Sumerian times.
I'm talking about NOW and the recent past.
In the education system I went through, we barely touched on any achievements of Mesopotamia or the Persians. The most that was taught to me was that Mesopotamia was the first, or at least one of the first, civilizations, and that later on, the Persians fought with the Greeks. My guess is that most of that stuff was cut in order to fit the Holocaust (not WWII, just the Holocaust) and the American civil rights movement of the 60s, each of which took a fucking month.
As for the dates and the idea that Greeks had massive aqueducts, I have no idea where my (unfortunately) fellow countryman got those ideas, as aqueducts are more associated with the Romans through my school system. Quite honestly, I do not recall the correct dates but know it was not 3000 BC. Apologies to everyone who is properly schooled on the history of the world.
As for OP's topic, my guess is simply that Europeans went through many great wars over the years (Punic wars, crusades, British vs. French, etc.), which essentially forced them to develop more tactics and weaponry to better wage war.
Degeneracy
Honestly. It's the ability to have the freedom to do new things (things that prudes consider degenerate) that moves us forward.
I don't give a shit what the cuckservative Trump supporters are going to respond with. Look at all the tribal stone age villagers and backward ass peoples of the world, tradition and cultural adherence keeps them cucked.
>J3 haplogroup
did you mean J1? in which case it has 10-20% contribution outside of the Peninsula.
Mesopotamia, Iran, Turkmenistan and Afghanistan is the area I'm talking about, I don't know why you discuss Turkey coming into this because it doesnt. Xenophon's discovery of Assyrian ruins was in Northern Iraq.
>the rest of the genetic middle east never even had bureaucracy
I'm not even sure what this sentence is supposed to mean? I'm going to guess though. In any case, the Archaemenid Empire in 500BC was building road networks, setting up Satrap system, developed the first postal network across an empire, Darius the Great was huge on this sort of big picture stuff and the successors to him tried to continue this legacy even under other dynasties. He's just a major example, but bureucracy existed long before the Archamenids. Assyrians and Babylonians were massive on this too and predate Greek civilization. You really have no idea what you're talking about. Literally every sentence you've said is bullshit
Fine, I'll bite. Let's follow nips as examples.
First off your picture is shit that shows that you have no fucking idea what you're talking about. You're comparing a woodblock print ot oil painting. Also, the japanese never really tried to go for a realistic look. It doesn't mean that they couldn't. If you're trying to imply superiour genes=superior culture, you're retarded, there are tons of japanese artists in the past who succesfully adapted western painting techniques.
As for your actual statement
>objectively superior
stop using objectively as a buzzword. Objectively to what? The enlightment era had mostly absolutist monarch, or constitutional monarchies, but the power was still held by the same cliques
>everything western is better
kys. Following Japan's post war economic boom, japanese electronics were number one. Durning the war, atleast in the early days, japanese airplanes were the best. Also stop trying to compare creative content to an absolute standard.
Moore's Law you idiot
Of course the West was going to launch ahead the furthest when it's the first to industrialize, other countries have to play catch up before they can start pioneering in science and engineering
>Other than vidya
Being and adult and playing/discussing video games. Grow the fuck up.
1. persia was southern european in genetic makeup until the age of cavalry, when it was replaced with arabs
2. you defined me success with an example of
"persia's aqueducts" off of persian accomplishment was centered in northwestern turkey, aka europe
3. these other "legendary" accomplishments are just that, legends
4. the CENTER of bronze age civilization took place in roughly a triangle between greece, eastern italy, and northwestern persia. WHY?
because bronze is made from copper and tin, and the MAIN sources of tin were from germany and britain. we find gold mined from NORTHWESTERN persia in britain, and tin mined in britain in NORTHWESTERN PERSIA at the furthest extent.
it never traded further because the extent of the trade networks was from britain to persia. that was the END of trade. further beyond were lawless roads of murderers and rapists.
but you waz kangs n shiet
the existence of TRADE NETWROKS signals to me bureaucracy, police, and safety. the lack of it, but the theoretical IDEA that MAYBE trade might have existed in northern iraq, i nteh absence of actual trade networks in the absence of ACTUAL METALS traded in the area, signals to me you're an idiot who likes stories, not facts
What does Moore's law have to do with the industrial revolution?
>the muhh woodblock argument
Maybe they should have invented paper.
>computers are like people
>ausfailian education
1. that's a meme. see picture. Persian genetics is more mixed with Mesopotamian, Greek migrations following alexander, and Caucasus genetics from the millions of migrants that came during the Safavid and Afsharid Dynasty as the Shahs forced them to relocate after rebellions.
2. I'm talking about canats in the eastern part of Persia. Some were used well into 1200 but fell into disrepair after the Mongols butchered everyone.
3. what the fuck are you talking about?
4. we were never discussing the bronze age, dont try to shift topic. Regardless, this didn't begin in Europe either.
>signals to me you're an idiot who likes stories, not facts
lol after those other points
>1. persia was southern european in genetic makeup until the age of cavalry, when it was replaced with arabs
your entire post is so fucking retarded holy shit, when did they connect your hick KKK deep south woods to the internet?
>i have no argument so i nitpick about something I have no idea
Woodblock prints became popular because people started buying a ton of useless tat in the edo period. It was easy to mass produce. Europeans had woodblocks. Also, they had paper.
"""""""""we""""""""""""
>age of cavalry
even though that's not a thing. The Persians were using cavalry extensively during Archaemenid, Parthian and Sasssanid times. Thy blew the legions Crassus to pieces through cavalry.
This yank is the most illiterate motherfucker I have seen on pol for awhile
>other than vidya
Doom is still the best and most influential game ever made
what is the age of cavalry supposed to mean?
so please present to me your stunning thesis that population replacement isn't a thing? that's a pretty bold claim
>18th century
we were just not on the top before the greeks and romans and in the midterm between the Roman Empire and the 15th century (and even in the middle ages we weren't as bad as most people think)
1. you're just using am odern map to try and prove that population replacement isn't a thing. was europe ALWAYS r1 just because a modern map says so?
2. technology radiates. in order for the tech center to have been in eastern persia it would have needed to move WEST and only west, and NEVER east. we see that it radiated from greece. eastern persia was the extent of the spread
3. trade networks were teh FOUNDATION of what led into the bronze age. trade in europe was largely peaceful, thus the bronze age emerged because large bureaucracies could secure the existence of trade.
no such long distance trade emerged in the middle east. so what akes you think a bureaucracy existed? or trade?
I really don't know why mainstream western historians completly fucking ignore the persians,assyrians, babylonians etc.
I strictly remember that the closest to these was mentioning persians when we learned about the greeks, and spending way too much times on egypt. I only learned how cool, forward thinking and extremly well administered for its time were the persians, seriously those guys get no credit, everything is attributed to the greeks or romans.
what the hell are you even talking about at this point user? That persians didn't use cavalry? horsefucking steppe nomads used cavalry way before europeans. Or are you claiming that fucking persians were white blonde aryan europeans? The burden of proof is on you, asshole. I don't know how and where you pulled this shit from your ass, but this is just sad, read a fucking book
>The system I have been raised and indoctrinated in is better than every other option. Why is that Sup Forums?
Gee I don't know.
Oh god - the refugees got you after all?
Posting the updated version
you're a retard. I never said anything like that. I said the persians were overwhelmed by the superior cavalry of the arabs, spreading j haplotypes. which is WHY the j haplotype finds its borders at the extent of their age of cavalry expansion, in the coast of spain to the western reaches of india. we can look at the timetables of molecular genetics and confirm that it occured at the same time.
j1 was a population replacement
>defending his people
it's extremely inferior, note their racial extermination and how they think it's good, muslims have no such policy and they enslaved euros and negroes, none think of ever getting a dime from muslims.
Ok sure, I'll tell you what the consensus is among most historians today. I'm saying that the population wasn't replaced by Arabs, that's just a meme.
Persian genetics has minimal contribution from the Arabs because it wasn't a conquest like the others. It was more like the Sassanian-Parthian Confederacy collapsed as many parts declared autonomy and the Arabs inherited control over the Empire. There was even talk of dissolution of the Empire when the Sassanian's lost their first major encounter with the Arabs in Iraq, so once the Arab army broke over the Zagros range the Empire had no chance of surviving. Relative to other conquests the Arab take over of Persia was quite uneventful and peaceful. They went through 200 years of stagnation and the country remained mostly Zoroastrian at this point, but after the Abbasid Revolution (supported by the Persians) the country became majority muslim through mass conversions over the next 300 years.
Rapebabies is mostly a myth and we know this through genetic testing, most populations around the world are still much the same genetically as they were in antiquity. Persia had major migrations from the Greeks following Alexander's Conquests. Then again from Anatolian Greeks because the Byzantium government was persecuted a certain Christian sect.
Persia was depopulated between 70-90% by the Mongols of 1200's and again by Tamerlane in 1400's. During the later Safavid Dynasty and Afsharid Dynasty they moved upwards of a million Georgians and Armenians into Central Iran for revolting and the empire's population wasn't even 10 million at this point. In between the Safavid and the Afsharid Dynasty the major cities of Persia were depopulated again by a brief conquest by the Afghans.
to be cont.
I don't even understand 1.
> technology radiates
debatable, chinks figured out gunpowder centuries before anyone, and it took a long ass time to spread to other cultures. And yes ,the chinks did use gunpowder weapons back then, look up fire lances. Gunpowder got introduced to the middle east in the 1200's in syria, or you could argue that the mongols brought it in to europe when they invaded, as they used makeshit bombs at sieges.
Why couldn't technology "radiate" (jesus christ use spread you fuck) to east? Because there were no civilizations east of persia? Like India, and China? You're making zero sense. What technology originated from Greece, or what are you trying to imply here?
3. what about the silk road tho? That was a pretty significant eastern road, that helped the spread of both islam, confucianism, buddhism, even fucking judaism and christianity.
>muh genes
yeah I'm done, go back to fucking your own cousin and talk about how you won vietnam or Korea
So the country today is mostly a mix of Iranic migrations from 4000BC with the Semitic populations indigenous to Iran - essentially, Iranians and Iraqis are closely related. But there's heavy mix with Greeks, Caucasians, Orientals. Arabs actually had the least mixing but the most linguistic influence on the Persian language because Arabic was the official language of the following few hundred years after the Islamic conquests.
current "culture" is not western, it is a Jewish slave culture for the cattle, with slave morality.
>he doesn't appreciate Japanese culture
refugees only came through hungary to get your cuck welfare monies
You have Jewish culture, the Japanese doesn't care for superior or inferior this is the mindset of the wanderer, the Japanese are not wanderers they are Japanese and have been for tens of thousands of years.
Historians say directly the opposite. Technology and ideas flowed mostly west a long the silk road into Europe. As I said before, the Greeks were a backwater compared to what existed in Mesopotamia, Persia, India and China.
What is it about the West that makes it objectively superior to other cultures?
I'm a westerner
>the root of our legal system is the Roman law.
Speak for yourself. Germanic common law rules all the countries that matter.
Japanese are honorary westerners and whites
German culture if it dominates would free the world, traditional German culture and thought is antithesis to the Jews power.
>we were just not on the top before the greeks and romans and in the midterm between the Roman Empire and the 15th century
jesus fucking christ
>you have Jewish culture
Don't try and turn the tables on me you fucking kike. I can see the matzo crumbs on your jewbeard
>the Greeks were a backwater compared to what existed in Mesopotamia, Persia, India and China.
Then how did 300 Greek Spartans kill millions of Persians at Thermopylae?
Christianity.
Think about the influence the buddhist and hindu religions have on a persons psyche. It was for the benefit our kind that we were given the Christian religion.
The Legend of Zelda (NES) is the best game ever
Is this inability to take a joke just chronic in the South or something? When you put in "inb4 libtard, look at flag", the next obvious thing is calling you a refugee. I am aware of what is going on in Europe, thanks.
Your interpretation of "Christianity" is not the same as the one of your ancestors.
>molecular genetics is not valid
kk
One is pixelated, the other is not. Japan > West
While I do agree that the dark ages weren't as dark as most people believe, the rest of your statement makes no sense. But even durning that time, almost all technological advancement came from arab sources. you of all people should know this my moor friend :^)
the silk road was established to facilitate westerners with a superior supply of money to buy chinese goods, because chiense produced better goods.
if ANY of the civilizations in the middle had better manufacturing or better currency, the road would have STOPPED. but it needed to stretch the entire way because they were to two prime markets
go back to fucking lebanon you queer
because it's not what happened.
The Greeks intended to hold off the Persian host at the narrow pass hoping for them to run out of supplies and force them to withdraw. The Persians found a narrow a route behind them, surrounded them and killed them. The Greeks didn't intend to lose there and once news broke out that their holding force collapsed they had to abandon Athens. The Persians marched on to take Athens and sacked it. It took the Greeks another 12 months to field another army large enough to take on the Persians at Plataea, but in this time the Persians held Attica and sacked Athens a second time for not capitulating.
After the end of the Greco-Persian Wars it still took 30 year for the Greeks to purge out Persian dominance from the region, and the Persians were still involved in Greek society and politics, they just didn't send another invasion force
Our genetics are simply better.
A civilization of crazed violent maniacs held back by the minimum amount of laws to keep them from raping each other.
A long timed and honours tradition of respect to authority and personal responsibility for the betterment of society.
First one starts off strong but peters off into degeneracy, happened with the Greeks, the Romans, the Eurocucks, the Burgers, it keeps on happening the same way. Barbarians get together, colonize, expand, build amazing things, then collapse into moral degeneracy and parasitic pederastic decline.
Second one survived unbroken for over 5000 years. It's called China.
Part of it is because many developed nations that have the oppurtunity to produce art are western nations, or at least heavily western influenced. The west has a long history of art to draw on, and it also wins through sheer number.
However, your view is a little narrow. Of course it's hard to appreciate great non-western literature when nuances and cultural terms get lost in translation. You will naturally gravitate to what your own culture produces because it's what you relate to.
how is anti whiteness, importing mass shitskins, having governments against it own people, western fraud medicine, cucky games/movies, degenerate hook up culture, feminism, lgbt and so on supperior to any other culture again?
>why didn't steppe sheepfuckers or mountain nomads just make a better industry?
christ, this thread is something, aussies are the ones repelling shitposting.
Thx bra.
I could believe your nice little fantasy, but I think i'll stick with objective history.
wrong again.
The Silk Road was totally decentralised, we just call a network of trade routes between thousands of towns "the Silk Road".
>superior supply of money to buy chinese goods, because chiense produced better goods
I don't know what this sentence means, it makes no sense. Regardless, everyone was buying everyone's shit. The Europeans were buying Chinese Silk, if that's what you mean about superior goods?
>if ANY of the civilizations in the middle had better manufacturing or better currency, the road would have STOPPED. but it needed to stretch the entire way because they were to two prime markets
again this goes back to what I was saying that the Silk Road is just a term to designate a large network of trade routes. Trades were going all directions. The Persians were deconstructing chinese silks into a finer thread and reselling it back to Chinese traders claiming it was Silk originating in Rome. The hungarian is now making jokes that you're inbred, do you understand why? please read a fucking book you clown
literally not what I even said. the silk road connected the two prime markets.
IF the middle east was so advanced there would have been another comparable market somewhere along the silk road. but there wasn't. because no one in that region has EVER been advanced.
go take your unibrow back to syria you fucking subhuman
Still does not refute my argument.
> Do we then think it to be a great and marvelous thing, if the Creator of the universe shall bring about the resurrection of them that have served Him with holiness in the assurance of a good faith, seeing that He showeth to us even by a bird the magnificence of His promise? - Pope Clement I (died 99 AD)
That speak volumes about the hopes and desires of a society. When you walk into a town a thousand years ago even up to 100 years, what would you see? The church was the epicentre of life and informed every aspect of our being.
No that's literally what the historians are saying. the movie 300 is not history.
>deconstructing silk
nice try. silk quality is measured by unbroken filament length
> because no one in that region has EVER been advanced.
wew lad
Why would they spend all that money making historical revisionism, then?
>American education
uhhhhh the Khorasan was one of the richest districts in the world during this period, which is Middle East/ Central Asia.
jesus, how can one aussie alone undo years of shitposting is above me. is just brutal to watch him btfo every room temperature iq white pride burgerclap itt
Bypassing the broad generalizations in your question, I would say the great divergence happened ultimately because of competitive disparities arising out of geographical differences and a subsequently conservative disposition on the part of other civilizations.
Europe had many natural harbors that encouraged shipbuilding and maritime commerce, and they had a unique continental geography that favored the formation of smaller polities than the mega empires of Asia and the small pastoral ones in the Americas and Africa. Basically, more countries struggling to survive in a small area meant more competition, and if you know anything about economics then the consequences of that should be obvious.
Europeans were not very exceptional until they began exploring the world and establishing colonies in the 17th century. By the 18th, they were enjoying the benefits of the atlantic trading system, and setting the groundwork for future industrialization. In contrast with Europe, Asian land empires had little incentive to hazard exploring a new world when they had their hands full administering the current one. Conservative and inward-looking ideologies like Confucianism and Islam, themselves outgrowths of the geographic situation, reinforced the tendency towards governmental inertia and a lack of the development of the basics of modernization.
Under these circumstances, the west had to industrialize first, and the rest is history, hachacha
But one has to be careful when using the term "west" in reference to all of Europe because there huge disparities WITHIN Europe that I think get ignored too frequently.
Modern Europe came largely out of the efforts of a few colonial powers: France, Britain, and Holland; of those, the last two were the most important in the agricultural and industrial revolutions. Innovations from spread from those places across the continent, where they were accepted or neglected to varying degrees.
>a map of roads is proof of technological excellence
wew lad
the mongols specifically admonished your kind when he dragged the caliph out of baghdad and dragged him to death by horseback.
he said you horde all of your gold in a vault, spending none of it on the people, using none of it to better technology, and now, you will be dragged to death (in a rug) and your wives and daughters raped to death, and your entire city will crumble.
how dumb do you muslims have to be to think the amount of gold you have is the most important indicator of intellignece, wealth, societal good, or technology?
>because it's only been really the last 300 years or so.
HAHAHAHAH See Pic Related.
The Roman Empire Disagrees with you. Furthermore the Byzantine Empire which lasted for over a Millenia (over 1000 years) was one of the greatest empires the world has ever known. Both of these civilizations were kicked off by the Ancient Romans.
You argument is shit my friend. Stay butt-hurt though my chink friend.
There's a difference between 'popular history' and what actual historians are saying.
Persia had their own military strategy at the time. Basically half archers and half infantry, the front troops used large wicker shields while the archers shot from behind. This strategy was developed largely because of the types of armies they were used to facing in Mesopotamia. They were also pretty reliant on cavalry, which were neutralised at Marathon and Plataea where the Greeks won and at Thermopylae. The Greeks had numerous losses against the Persians beforehand which is how the Persians had control of half the Greek city states to begin with.
We don't really know that much about Thermopylae, but we know Herodotus spun certain things because the events just dont make sense. A big example is that historians believe the Greek intended to hold off the Persian host at Thermopylae because they didn't evacuate Athens beforehand and it took them 12 months to prepare another army. In reality, the Persians somehow overcame the holding force at Thermopylae, which Herodotus attributes to the Persians being shown another route around the blockade.
>muh sewers
India literally had the first sanitation system in the world and look at them now
Objectively better? I don't know, but the west does have certain advantages. It will not remain this way however, as the values of the west are rapidly crumbling in the face of reality and the west still think the status quo will be the same and be dominant for the foreseeable future. The west is growing stagnant and many willfully ignore it
Are you sure? This is a pretty tough pill to swallow?
I'm German-British first of all.
Secondly, the Mongols raided a settled civilization. They had no concept of banks or marketplaces, neither do you apparently. The mongols actually preferred to depopulate cities and return them to grass pastures to feed horses, this made more sense to them than conquering a people and collecting tax revenue. It wasn't until they started listening to their Chinese advisors that conquered peoples can be a source of tax revenue and it's better than butchering everyone.
The Romans weren't technologically ahead of the East. They had a comparable civilization. But the Chinese were drilling natural gas wells and piping it. The Persians were building aqueducts into the mountains. Anything the Romans could do the East was already doing.
Why do you think there are roads to "insignificant" settlements?
Also, do you see that fucking thing in the middle between the arabian sea and the bay of bengal?
That's where 90% of your IT market is from, you should learn where them brownos come from.
Byzantine empire =! Roman empire
The Roman empire wasn't even the greatest empire at it's time. Roman culture is the collection of literally every other culture they encountered. Then they fucked it up later on and got their asses handed to them by a couple of goat fucking nomads and their inability to make a working administratie system, which previous great empires somehow figured out. Militarily though, the romans were them ost well organized at the time thouhg, I'll give them that. They still got rekt by horse nomads tho.
I agree with you, but it doesn't hcange anything
the middle eastern trders had large vaults of gold, and no technology, no bureaucracy, no safety. they were all tiny city states which could only secure trade within a very narrow band of land, just far enough to get the traders a little bit further.
they had NO TECHNOLOGY OR RULE OF LAW
>Byzantine empire =! Roman empire
They called themselves Romans though. Literally The bloodline of Constantine was tied to Romans. It was initially referred to as the East Roman Empire.
So did the germans with the holy roman empire. Which wasn't an empire, wasn't holy, and wasn't roman.
Yes this is how historians look at what happened at Thermopylae. Thermopylae is totally overrated, it was a strategic loss for the Greeks. It was Salamis and Plataea that won the war for the Greeks. Thermopylae was a loss
>Which wasn't an empire, wasn't holy, and wasn't roman.
Nice maymay.
The Roman Empire was on equal footing with the Chinese Han. And the byzantines, despite being really fascinating, were the proverbial one-eyed-man in the land of the blind that was Europe in the dark ages. They were not close to what the Song dynasty was doing in china, for example.
Because in the West you are allowed to be "wrong," that is, to innovate. Everywhere else doing things differently or disagreeing with the big man of the village or the celestial emperor or whatever is a death sentence for your whole village.
>they had NO TECHNOLOGY OR RULE OF LAW
Parthian and Kushan Empire user.
Aka Iranians and Indians.
are you disagreeing with Voltaire?
The Abbasid Empire and Khwarazmian Empire were two of the most advanced and prosperous nations of their era. Please read a fucking book.
Abbasid Empire was what we call the 400 year Islamic Golden Age. They adopted Sassanian administration systems and were building universities and schools. Vaults of gold are a normal thing for Empires to have. Rome had them too you retard. They didn't have electronic banking back then, they needed vaults to store tax revenue.
Stop trying to discuss history, you're an idiot
The East did not have meritocracy or rule of law. Chinese legal thinking is "I have power, I do what I want." If not for that, then they would be perfect.
>I have power, I do what I want.
Mandate of Heaven
in music too
Yes they did. During the Caliphates they used a millet system where each religion was seen as its own community so they were given autonomy in terms of their own laws. They had certain laws to abide by though, typically a tax and a levy of troops which the leader had to fulfill. But they always had legal codes of some sort. Before Islam came to the middle east it was more focused on 'classes' much like European medieval society. I don't know where you get this idea that the East had no Rule of Law.