>>514014460
It's more a question of broader population dynamics. Human masses tend to move with the currents of history, take the path of least resistance. In the period of 1500-1914 the dynamics were in favor of white expansion and the decline of other groups, or their subjugation. I think by 1900 whites were around a third of humanity, if I'm not mistaken, other groups were still behind enough technologically for their demographic growth to be capped by natural factors like disease and infant mortality, and groups such as blacks and aboriginals were largely effectively hunter gatherers with tiny populations.
What happened in the twentieth century was perhaps the worst possible combination of events - the white race was demographically exhausted by the world wars, to the extent that their ability to keep other populations under their thumb went away (decolonization was after all a process that started after WW2); another effect of the world wars was a cultural shock that destroyed the former self-image and, really, civilization that existed pre-WW1, which had as an effect postmodernism and racial nihilism. Both of these processes were started by demographic factors - the deaths of the youth and destruction of entire countries like Prussia (country is a bit dubious as a term, but whatever), and the death of entire classes within nations, like the Russian aristocracy and the junker class in Germany. The average age in European nations was around 20, now it's more like 45. To be fair, the slowdown had already begun in the 19th century, birthrates were declining, the industrial revolution had it's own destructive effects on culture, and ideologically a degradation was already visible.
All that to say - whites aren't pussies, really, but like a fighter who's fought for decades already and has some sort of debilitating disease, and is in his mid-40s, the race is exhausted and susceptible to pressures. Perhaps we're all just born after the end.
