← Home ← Back to /his/

Thread 17820834

65 posts 22 images /his/
Anonymous No.17820834 [Report] >>17822076 >>17822112 >>17822420 >>17822491 >>17822508 >>17822512 >>17822662 >>17822974 >>17825088 >>17825486 >>17825857 >>17826098 >>17827271 >>17827442
>when people make the argument of bad geography/environment for Africa not being as developed as the rest of the world
IT'S BULLSHIT! NIGGERS ARE JUST GENETICALLY INFERIOR!
>when asked to explain why North Europe was a mudhut shithole and less civilized than Ethiopia during ancient times
BAD GEOGRAPHY OF COURSE! IT WAS TOO COLD 'N SHIET
Anonymous No.17820837 [Report] >>17822111
who are you quoting kurpreet
Anonymous No.17820850 [Report]
“Why Nations Fail” already addressed this but most people are too retarded for Econ beyond the High School level
Anonymous No.17822076 [Report] >>17822431
>>17820834 (OP)
Imagine being so disconnected from reality the only time you speak facts is when you try to be sarcastic
Anonymous No.17822111 [Report]
>>17820837
Probably the guy who spams nigger lip plates?
Anonymous No.17822112 [Report]
>>17820834 (OP)
it was population density and geography (which are external factors) paired with low vs high-time preferences (of which individuals are genetically predisposed toward one or the other)
for example :
North America - particularly the east coast and Mississipi valley - was quite frankly a shithole before thousands of generations of injuns migrated all over the place and practiced slash-and-burn agriculture. Eventually the disgustingly dense woodlands and marshes were transformed over the generations into barely arable lands by the time the European came here. Give it a few centuries and I'd recon we could have had large confederations, federations and tribal kingdoms formed there eventually.
Of course, those are the middle of the Venn diagram injuns. There were top-tier low-time preference injuns called the Mound-Builders culture, for example. Not only did their forefathers start considering concentrating their population into urban centers, developping small towns and a notable city in Cahokia; but this attitude survived their calamitous collapse and persisted into the Muskogee/Mississipian people right back until Europeans showed up. Theyw ere still fucked over by poor geography and their abysmal population following their collapse, so the low-time pref mound-builders could not recuperate from their unlucky circumstances.
Another example or a low-time pref precursor civilization, this one blessed by terrain, is the Andean-Chacha culture complex of the Andes. They suffered multiple culture collapses - including a major one as Tiwanaku and the Wari confederation waned, probably due to local autonomous polities undermining either's influences, but were able to easily recuperate as petty kingdoms due to the frankly isolating nature of the Andean mountain range, leaving everyone to recuperate on their own time. The same thing happened in the transition from Mycenean to Archaic Greece.
Anonymous No.17822115 [Report] >>17822512 >>17826170
>BAD GEOGRAPHY OF COURSE! IT WAS TOO COLD 'N SHIET
That implies that whitoids have the decency to admit they were savages that lived in mudhuts and had no written language, but instead they claim every civilization wuz white n shieet
Anonymous No.17822420 [Report] >>17822429 >>17822429 >>17826772
>>17820834 (OP)
> bad geography/environment for Africa
lol
lmao even
Anonymous No.17822429 [Report] >>17822475
>>17822420
>>17822420
savannah is inarguably even worse than desert for permanent habitations, what are you even smoking?
It's in the same category as steppes in how shit it is.
Add to that the fact that the climate shifted fucking fast in a mere 9000 years and you got a recipe for no civilization to develop in that shithole, ever.
Anonymous No.17822431 [Report] >>17824568
>>17822076
So environment has an effect on development but only when you're intelligent?
Anonymous No.17822475 [Report] >>17822526
>>17822429
> savannah is inarguably even worse than desert
> because IT JUST IS OK!?
also it still has Woodland that is larger in size than the whole of Western- and Northern Europe combined
Anonymous No.17822491 [Report]
>>17820834 (OP)
White people civilizations around the med sea (all of them were) got brownified by race mixing until they collapsed. That's why the center of civilization shifted north, following where whites are still white.
Anonymous No.17822508 [Report] >>17826730
>>17820834 (OP)
A capable population can be hindered an unfavourable environment, but having an unfavourable environment doesn't mean that that's the only reason for not becoming/staying civilised.
Anonymous No.17822512 [Report] >>17826470
>>17820834 (OP)
>>17822115
> we wuz Saar
so?
blacks and browns are like this guy who peaked in pre-school

maybe yuros were less developed
but they adapted and improved

meanwhile blacks sat around for hundreds of years just watching as others outskilled them
chinks managed to get back into the game, why didn't africa?
Anonymous No.17822526 [Report]
>>17822475
>> because IT JUST IS OK!?
no, not because "it just is", because savannah is just awful for human settlement. The area is semi-arid a good chunk of the year, dissuading batch crops like the traditional barley, wheat and rye from being planted, and momentarily flooded in the rain season, but not enough for long-term rice cultivation. If you don't live next to a river, agriculture is not only unadvisable, in certain tropical savannahs it is outright impossible. The dryness is notoriously bad enough that wildfires are not only common, but statistically inevitable on a yearly basis. The flatlands gives invaders and marauders ample leeway in dissuading permanent settlements, and the forests in savannahs are, just like in the steppes, very sparse and lack the underbushes necessary to make them adequate obstacles like in more humid climates.
Anonymous No.17822540 [Report] >>17822596
>17822526
no one tell this dude about Brazil
Anonymous No.17822596 [Report] >>17822791
>>17822540
>90% of the country lives next to a river in the savannahs or in of the rare humid-sub-tropical zones to this day despite technological and agricultural advancements
you sure showed me...
Anonymous No.17822662 [Report] >>17822762 >>17824737
>>17820834 (OP)
>bad geography even though it's incredibly fertile and full of resources
>Somehow this does not apply to Scandinavia which is a literal frozen wasteland
>said frozen wasteland was literally thousands of years ahead of niggers since entering the Bronze Age
>100k Nordics were developing hillforts and living in wooden houses while 10 million Africans were still figuring out pointy sticks
Anonymous No.17822702 [Report]
don't forget about the flies
Anonymous No.17822762 [Report] >>17822783 >>17822790 >>17823033 >>17824457 >>17824461
>>17822662
>Timmy education
The majority of Africa is not fertile. Europe is much more fertile on average. Savannas, rainforests and deserts are bad environments for agriculture.
Anonymous No.17822783 [Report] >>17822790 >>17822888
>>17822762
> . Savannas and rainforests are bad environments for agriculture.
not my fault africans didn't tech the "Slash-and-burn agriculture"-tree
Anonymous No.17822790 [Report]
>>17822762
>>17822783
Anonymous No.17822791 [Report] >>17822798
>>17822596
oh sorry
didn't know africa had no rivers
Anonymous No.17822798 [Report] >>17822839
>>17822791
Never said it didn't, but the sahel and ancient Sahara isn't and wasn,t exactly filled with them, respectively
Anonymous No.17822839 [Report] >>17822924
>>17822798
> sahel and ancient Sahara
take them away and you are still left with an area the size of more than 2 Brazils
als the very pic you posted shows the Sahel having Multiple rivers
Anonymous No.17822888 [Report]
>>17822783
t. erosion shill
Anonymous No.17822924 [Report] >>17822962
>>17822839
>als the very pic you posted shows the Sahel having Multiple rivers
my brother in Christ, there are several hundreds of miles between those rivers with no water sources whatsoever beyond the rainy season's precipitations. They are almost devoid of human life, and most of it is semi-permanent or nomadic tribes of Fulanis
contrast with Brazil's hydrographic map and it is evident why that part of the world is empty.
Anonymous No.17822962 [Report] >>17822990
>>17822924
> there are several hundreds of miles between those rivers
as opposed to brazil?

> They are almost devoid of human life
Sudan has a population of 50.5 Million

> it is evident why that part of the world is empty
why are you still pretending that the other 70% of africa don't exist?
Anonymous No.17822974 [Report]
>>17820834 (OP)
thanks for affirming the superior and supremacy of GLORIVS ROMA INVICTA Anon
Anonymous No.17822990 [Report] >>17823060 >>17824584
>>17822962
as opposed to brazil?
the savannahs of the eastern sea coast of Brazil are covered with rivers almost every tens of miles, wtf are you saying?
>Sudan has a population of 50.5 Million
...which are all mostly squeezing next to the Nile. NOT the savannah occupying most of the country.
>why are you still pretending that the other 70% of africa don't exist?
I'm not pretending it doesn't exist, I'm not even saying it isn't populated. My point, from the beginning, was saying that savannah is an extremely shitty climate to try and build a civilization out of (which it is). Even with water import from a river or the coast, it is NOT optimal. The mediterranean coastlines of Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia, the very narrow flooding desert river valley of the Nile and the mountainous humid regions of Ethiopia are much better, and lo and behold, the oldest organized culture complexes of Africa are actually all located there.
Anonymous No.17823033 [Report] >>17824969
>>17822762
>posts a map showing Africa is far more fertile than Scandinavia
Anonymous No.17823060 [Report] >>17823126
>>17822990
> Sahel is devoid of human life
> gets BTFO
> no I was actually talking about the Savannah

> no, you can't just compare africa to brazil because Brazilians all live next to rivers
> poor Sudanese all live next to the Nile, no wonder they don't get anything done
Anonymous No.17823126 [Report]
>>17823060
>Sahel is devoid of human life
exaggeration, not what I said. I said that most of the savannah that wasn't in proximity to a river system was devoid of permanent human settlement, and I stand by this statement. Saying that access to water and a possible drainage for rainy season torrential rains somehow makes the savannah less shit than it is is not an achievement.
>no, you can't just compare africa to brazil because Brazilians all live next to rivers
yes, and not directly in the savannah, because the savannah is shit. Brazil's population in the Savanah are all clustered around the eastern coastlines where there is a high quantity of rivers on a territory. Go beyond Minas Gerais, and suddenly the Savannah is practically deserted. There are rivers that can still support high-density populations, but the further you get from the coast and the closer to the Amazon basin, the emptier you get, river or no river. That's a fact.
The same is true of most the savannahs in Africa, in Namibia for example about 45% of the country is covered in a riverless savannah that eventually turns into a desert near the coast. Wanna know where the people there are? Not in the savannah. They either live in the coastal desert, because the climate is at least consistent, or the strip of rainforest they have in the north, because at least it is always humid over there and there are little to no risk of wildfires.
Anonymous No.17824457 [Report]
>>17822762
Mercator projection claims another victim.
Anonymous No.17824461 [Report] >>17825084
>>17822762
Mercator projection claims another victim
Anonymous No.17824568 [Report]
>>17822431
Environment has an effect in a sense that some places developed faster than others due to higher concentration of arable land. First civilizations spawned around rivers in Middle East because that where arable land was. Place like France may have more arable land overall but it's dispersed across the country.

That's about as far as effects of geography go. The idea that Africa was a shithole for the entire human history because they don't have navigable rivers or smth is absurd. At some point you have to accept that people create their environments and that some people are better at it than others.
Anonymous No.17824584 [Report] >>17825188
>>17822990
Ethiopia is the poorest country in Africa dude
Anonymous No.17824737 [Report]
>>17822662
>Scandinavia which is a literal frozen wasteland
The southern parts where most people live have good climate. Gulf Stream makes it suitable for that.
Anonymous No.17824969 [Report]
>>17823033
Pretty sure Scandinavia is mostly barren
Anonymous No.17825084 [Report] >>17827476
>>17824461
That's not Mercator, that's Miller
Anonymous No.17825088 [Report] >>17825607
>>17820834 (OP)
>Ethiopia
Sure, when someone think Ethiopia they imagine something well feed and super advanced, in contrast to backward Sweden
Anonymous No.17825188 [Report] >>17825482
>>17824584
they weren't always though
Ethiopia was the seat of a culture complex capable of defeating Arab caliphate ghazi armies, reputed for being the richest and most advanced people of the Horn by far. They had their own writing system, a government with checks and balances and a good export economy
tbqh like most people that weren't Europe they just transitioned really fucking badly from subsistence/extraction economy to manufacturing economy, kind of like Russia and Austria. Otherwise historically they were probably the most solid culture complex in the entirety of the African continent after the Egyptians.
Anonymous No.17825482 [Report]
>>17825188
They've has been on a permanent decline when trade shifted from the Indian ocean to the Atlantic. Same with the neighboring Somali sultanates that all collapsed prior to the colonial era
Anonymous No.17825486 [Report] >>17827338
>>17820834 (OP)
>>>when asked to explain why North Europe was a mudhut shithole and less civilized than Ethiopia during ancient times
The shitskin can only go back to long bygone eras when White people were a new race and were still developing, they can never address why Blacks, allegedly the oldest race in the world, haven’t done shit in the history of forever and all their accomplishments come from Arabs.
Anonymous No.17825607 [Report]
>>17825088
they built a few buildings out of stone 2000 years ago i guess thats something
Anonymous No.17825857 [Report]
>>17820834 (OP)
Ignore the snownigger shit-flinging
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQzjzVxKk74&t=1219s&pp=0gcJCcEJAYcqIYzv
Anonymous No.17826098 [Report]
>>17820834 (OP)
Key word is "was"
Anonymous No.17826136 [Report] >>17826748
>white barbarians 4000 years ago: inventing the earliest known astrological artifacts like the nebra sky disc and the golden hat of berlin
>indians: today
Anonymous No.17826170 [Report] >>17826646 >>17827128 >>17827233 >>17827453
>>17822115
Exactly
The Greek and Roman civilizations were Indo-Aryan, they're descended from the Indo-Aryan nomads out of the Indian subcontinent
Indo-Aryans founded Troy in Anatolia, and the descendants of the Indo-Aryan Trojans founded Rome
But it all traces back to India
Anglo-Germans, Celts, Sami, all the indigenous White people were nothing but savages until Indo-Aryans showed up and civilized them
Anonymous No.17826470 [Report]
>>17822512
>chinks managed to get back into the game, why didn't africa?
extreme investment from europeans
Anonymous No.17826646 [Report]
>>17826170
now that's what I call fringe bullshit.
Anonymous No.17826730 [Report]
>>17822508
/thread
Anonymous No.17826748 [Report] >>17826760 >>17826773
>>17826136
Didn't Indians invent the 0?
Anonymous No.17826760 [Report]
>>17826748
wait a minute....are you telling me that jeets invented.....nothing???
Anonymous No.17826772 [Report]
>>17822420
Imagine how many infinite-Africans would cross the continent to get to Europe if left map were still true
Anonymous No.17826773 [Report]
>>17826748
Oh yeah? What are you going to do with that? Divide other numbers, perchance?
Anonymous No.17827128 [Report]
>>17826170
Nobody believes in this bullshit except poos
Anonymous No.17827233 [Report]
>>17826170
>oldest civilization on earth
>still haven't figured out toilets
Anonymous No.17827271 [Report] >>17827273 >>17827294
>>17820834 (OP)
None of that matters. Technological advancements were basically black swan events.

I think games like Civilization where you have to spend research points have fucked people's mind and now they think that's how history works normally, civilizations just advance on a tech tree by themselves. But in reality, technological breakthroughs are a 1 in a trillion chance, BUT when they happen, the technology is so useful that it spreads rapidly and becomes ubiquitous. Either because everyone has to adapt it to stay competitive or because the one group that adapts can conquer everyone because of that tech.

We take technological advancement as granted because technology spreads so quickly we think that it just comes naturally from people, but the natural state of people is being primitive cavemen. It should not be surpising that for example, the thousands of Subsaharan Africans didn't invent writing. Thousands of Eurasian cultures also never invented writing. Only like three of them did (no, even in those cultures, only a small group of individuals did), they became powerful and spread it everywhere else.
Anonymous No.17827273 [Report]
>>17827271
*thousands of Subsaharan African cultures
Anonymous No.17827294 [Report]
>>17827271
Skill issue
Anonymous No.17827338 [Report]
>>17825486
>silence
Loooooooool
Anonymous No.17827442 [Report]
>>17820834 (OP)
How can jeets spam this "timmy" meme when the average jeet is 5'5 and has the worst genes god could think of?
Anonymous No.17827453 [Report]
>>17826170
Indo-Aryans conquered jeets and are the upper castes of India today and are predominantly in the area of today's Kashmir region and parts of Pakistan, jeets are just slave cattle made to serve them after they were conquered
Anonymous No.17827476 [Report]
>>17825084
bodied that freak