How Did The Europeans Conquer The World?

[Heilige]

If you want to generically break down the world's ethnic groups into "people of color" and "white", white people are the overwhelming minority.

"People of color" includes Latinos, Blacks, Asians, etc I believe.


White people make up maybe 9-13 % of the world's population and that number is either a few points higher or lower depending on who you ask. That means that "people of color" make up about 87% of the world.


How did Europeans conquer a world being the minority? How do they continue to stay in power when their numbers have decreased significantly from about 35% in 1900 to below 15% today.

Just something I was thinking about today. Why were they able to conquer the world and maintain power while other ethnic groups were not able to?

[warriorfan]

In the game of war, the most evil always wins

[TheWinningFam]

One word: Guns
http://www-tc.pbs.org/opb/historydetectives/static/media/cache/30/1d/301d3a8d71e1425a1f2535d2cb79cc75.jpg

Europeans developed guns with help from china allowing them to take over continents while lying, deceiving to and killing those indigenous people.

Also europeans had no morale or mercy, think about it, they used to have sex with their own sisters and dogs and looked as any person that didn't look like them as animals., If you pair a cold soul with advanced weaponry, the results will be devestating

They were also masters of lying, deflecting, and stealing people's works and claiming it as their own. Lets take the Early united states for example, did you know that until 1861 slaves weren't allowed to file pattens and in alot of cases, they would hand over their ideas for freedom, Alot of today's inventions were those of slaves that had their inventions taken from them. http://atlantablackstar.com/2014/02/11/5-inventions-by-enslaved-black-men-blocked-by-us-patent-office/

And it still stands true today, think about it would the united states or europe or any country for that matter be as powerful if they didn't have the access to the type of weaponry they have?

[dude77]

One word: Guns
http://www-tc.pbs.org/opb/historydetectives/static/media/cache/30/1d/301d3a8d71e1425a1f2535d2cb79cc75.jpg

Europeans developed guns with help from china allowing them to take over continents while lying, deceiving to and killing those indigenous people.

Also europeans had no morale or mercy, think about it, they used to have sex with their own sisters and dogs and looked as any person that didn't look like them as animals., If you pair a cold soul with advanced weaponry, the results will be devestating

They were also masters of lying, deflecting, and stealing people's works and claiming it as their own. Lets take the Early united states for example, did you know that until 1861 slaves weren't allowed to file pattens and in alot of cases, they would hand over their ideas for freedom, Alot of today's inventions were those of slaves that had their inventions taken from them. http://atlantablackstar.com/2014/02/11/5-inventions-by-enslaved-black-men-blocked-by-us-patent-office/

And it still stands true today, think about it would the united states or europe or any country for that matter be as powerful if they didn't have the access to the type of weaponry they have?



^lol .. I feel sorry for black people sometimes

[TheWinningFam]

^lol .. I feel sorry for black people sometimes
Same, assuming im black because i call it like it is, Typical suspected white supremacist :sleeping

[TheWinningFam]

people with the lowest iqs don't have anything intellectual stolen from them .. I mean .. lay off the crack .. blacks can't compete with whites/jews/asians when it comes to brain power and innovation .. if you wanna 'call it like it is'
Again denying and deflecting to shit that white people came up with.

Think about it, white people had to come up with their own test to show how smart they are :lol

Iq tests have been proven to not reflect intellegience, I mean really its just showing what you've been taught, if you haven't been taught something how tf are you supposed to know it for a test? :roll: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/9755929/IQ-tests-do-not-reflect-intelligence.html

If black people cant compete why did slave owners choose not to educate their slaves?

If black people weren't good for anything why didn't they allow them to file patents? surely if no good blacks patent something who cares? noone will buy it cuz its no good right?

Also assuming every black person is stupid and cant be intellectually stolen from because of a test made by white people said so :roll: :roll:

[dude77]

Same, assuming im black because i call it like it is, Typical suspected white supremacist :sleeping

people with the lowest iqs don't have anything intellectual stolen from them .. blacks can't compete with whites/jews/asians when it comes to brain power and innovation .. if you wanna 'call it like it is'

[dude77]

I know we want everyone to feel good about themselves and make everyone believe they can do anything the next guy can do .. but the reality is that's just not the case and never will be .. we're not all equal .. and there's nothing wrong with that

there's a reason that european minority dominated .. same reason the jew minority dominates in certain aspects today

[TheWinningFam]

I know we want everyone to feel good about themselves and make everyone believe they can do anything the next guy can do .. but the reality is that's just not the case and never will be .. we're not all equal .. and there's nothing wrong with that

there's a reason that european minority dominated .. same reason the jew minority dominates in certain aspects today
Exactly, Because of guns and money.

Do you think jews would be as powerful if they didn't have money?
Do you amerika would be as powerful without the mass weaponry it has today?Why do you think suspected white supremacist are so against black people getting reparations, cuz they know what happens next. :lol

[Nick Young]

Exactly, Because of guns and money.

Do you think jews would be as powerful if they didn't have money?
Do you amerika would be as powerful without the mass weaponry it has today?Why do you think suspected white supremacist are so against black people getting reparations, cuz they know what happens next. :lol
Is money the reason they win so many Nobel prizes for physics?:confusedshrug:

How deep does your little Jewluminati conspiracy go?

Thank you for revealing your true colors. :cheers:

[TheWinningFam]

Is money the reason they win so many Nobel prizes for physics?:confusedshrug: Yes because without money they wouldn't have access to the things needed to achieve these prizes, think about it, how tf are you gonna find cures for things or discover these scientific things with no money for research. or how are you gonna help people struggling when you're struggling yourself. :lol


How deep does your little Jewluminati conspiracy go? I have no hate for jews, im specifically stating that they would not be as powerful without the acesses to the funds they have, think about it, would the u.s be as powerful if it wasn't worth over 10 trillion?


Thank you for revealing your true colors. :cheers:That makes 2 of us :cheers: :oldlol:

[Nick Young]

Yes because without money they wouldn't have access to the things needed to achieve these prizes, think about it, how tf are you gonna find cures for things or discover these scientific things with no money for research. or how are you gonna help people struggling when you're struggling yourself. :lol

I have no hate for jews, im specifically stating that they would not be as powerful without the acesses to the funds they have, think about it, would the u.s be as powerful if it wasn't worth over 10 trillion?

That makes 2 of us :cheers: :oldlol:
How have Jews succeeded throughout history against persecution, before they had money?

:confusedshrug:

[TheWinningFam]

How have Jews succeeded throughout history against persecution, before they had money?

:confusedshrug:
Because of faith, You can discredit it all you want but its scientifically proven that those who believe live happier more successful lives than those who dont, crumble when they have nothing to fall on, It's not hard tbh.

[fiddy]

Because of faith, You can discredit it all you want but its scientifically proven that those who believe live happier more successful lives than those who dont, crumble when they have nothing to fall on, It's not hard tbh.
:roll:

[TheWinningFam]

:roll:
Keep laughing, It's probably the only thing you'll be happy about today. :confusedshrug: Religious people are reported to have more robust immune systems, lower blood pressure, and better recovery times from operations,
Such benefits could explain why religious people live longer
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/8044586/Having-faith-helps-patients-live-longer-study-suggests.html

[fiddy]

Keep laughing, It's probably the only thing you'll be happy about today. :confusedshrug: Religious people are reported to have more robust immune systems, lower blood pressure, and better recovery times from operations,
Such benefits could explain why religious people live longer
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/8044586/Having-faith-helps-patients-live-longer-study-suggests.html


In their study, researchers selected 179 patients who had received a liver transplant between January 2004 and December 2007.

http://i.imgur.com/seh6p.gif

[TheWinningFam]

http://i.imgur.com/seh6p.gif
Still dont know how to post a picture mr 2007 :hammerhead:

And i can pull up 100 other articles saying the same thing :lol

[fiddy]

Still dont know how to post a picture mr 2007 :hammerhead:

:biggums:


And i can pull up 100 other articles saying the same thing :lol
Please do.

[NumberSix]

If black people cant compete why did slave owners choose not to educate their slaves?
The same reason why Democrats keep their voters uneducated. To keep them dependant.

[TheWinningFam]

The same reason why Democrats keep their voters uneducated. To keep them dependant.

[I]Since college students are overwhelmingly liberal (60 percent of 18- to 29-year olds supported Obama in 2012, compared to Romney

[Nick Young]

[QUOTE=TheWinningFam][I]Since college students are overwhelmingly liberal (60 percent of 18- to 29-year olds supported Obama in 2012, compared to Romney

[TheWinningFam]

http://www.therightplanet.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/democrats-democrats-kkk-racist-political-poster.jpg
:facepalm It's a widely known fact that the democrats of those days where the conservatives, called dixiecrats of the south, while the republicans were the northern liberals of today... IDK if you know this or are just being ignorant.

The republicans were a new party in Lincoln's day. They were a conglomeration of various northern former Whig constituencies and people that wanted to develop the west that coalesced due to issues surrounding slavery. Generally speaking, they retained a lot of the older Whig economic views that the government should be involved in the economy. It should promote policies that promote growth, they thought. That meant financing infrastructure, education, protecting native industries, policies that promoted commerce and rapid job growth. They did believe in more federal involvement in all these things, and it cost money. They were the forward looking, innovative party, and also vaguely speaking they were the "big government" party and had policies that promoted big banks, big industry, big business.

The democrats were the more tradition-minded party. They were also the party focused on keeping taxes low and when it came to promoting commerce, etc... wanted to leave it to the states. Generally speaking, they were the "states' rights" party.

The shift started after the Civil War and continued for over 135 years. After the civil war, the republicans started to split into factions generally divided between how deep "in bed" you got with big business, so they developed a conservative business wing often at odds with with the more progressive wing. The democrats pretty much stayed the states rights party and were marginalized at the national level for several decades.

http://factmyth.com/factoids/democrats-and-republicans-switched-platforms/

Hold this L.

[TheWinningFam]

Every white supremacist rhetoric has been shot down in this thread, I think this topic can be closed now. :lol

[Nick Young]

Tell me again how any of this is "white supremacist rhetoric". Please explain your accusation.

:facepalm It's a widely known fact that the democrats of those days where the conservatives, called dixiecrats of the south, while the republicans were the northern liberals of today... IDK if you know this or are just being ignorant.

The republicans were a new party in Lincoln's day. They were a conglomeration of various northern former Whig constituencies and people that wanted to develop the west that coalesced due to issues surrounding slavery. Generally speaking, they retained a lot of the older Whig economic views that the government should be involved in the economy. It should promote policies that promote growth, they thought. That meant financing infrastructure, education, protecting native industries, policies that promoted commerce and rapid job growth. They did believe in more federal involvement in all these things, and it cost money. They were the forward looking, innovative party, and also vaguely speaking they were the "big government" party and had policies that promoted big banks, big industry, big business.

The democrats were the more tradition-minded party. They were also the party focused on keeping taxes low and when it came to promoting commerce, etc... wanted to leave it to the states. Generally speaking, they were the "states' rights" party.

The shift started after the Civil War and continued for over 135 years. After the civil war, the republicans started to split into factions generally divided between how deep "in bed" you got with big business, so they developed a conservative business wing often at odds with with the more progressive wing. The democrats pretty much stayed the states rights party and were marginalized at the national level for several decades.

http://factmyth.com/factoids/democrats-and-republicans-switched-platforms/

Hold this L.


That actually never happened.

It is called revisionist history.

The Democrats also are responsible for interning Japanese Americans in concentration camps.

They are also responsible for racist and pro-segregationist identity politics that are currently helping to divide the country.

BLM are the modern day KKK.


The Democrats are the party of racism.

No surprise that all of the prominent Dems of ISH have exposed themselves as racists on multiple occasions.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-rfKQohQGNcU/Uc78XX54SII/AAAAAAAACsc/4PEFQ7VAM0g/s654/before-malcolm-x-died-94594832701.jpeg
http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/95/db/94/95db94d1f80c82728b30d3d317a5ccb0.jpg
https://pastorwardclinton.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/roberty-byrd.jpg
http://lybio.net/wp-content/uploads/Hillary-Rodham-Clinton-Comments-On-The-Passing-Of-Robert-Byrd.jpg
https://greenenvscithr.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/0003m_-blm-st-ny-hillary-clinton-and-senator-robert-byrd-kkk-leader-extoled-by-sos-on-you-tube.jpg

[Nick Young]

[QUOTE]Klan leader claims KKK has given $20K to Clinton campaign
Hillary Clinton

[NumberSix]

:facepalm It's a widely known fact that the democrats of those days where the conservatives, called dixiecrats of the south, while the republicans were the northern liberals of today... IDK if you know this or are just being ignorant.
1. The democrats were not conservatives. I'd bet you don't even know what the word "conservative" means.

2. The people you call "liberals" today are not liberals. For example, Ron Paul is a liberal. Bernie Sanders is an anti-liberal. The confederate democrats were not liberals and 2016 Democrats are not liberals.

[TheWinningFam]

Tell me again how any of this is "white supremacist rhetoric". Please explain your accusation.
You suspected white supremacist all act and say the same shit. :lol It's literally like talking to a robot, Every time someone brings up a decent point you always do 1 of the 3 things
Deny:''Most cops are good cops''
Deflect:''Black on black crime'' ''All lives matter''
Decieve: ''Blacks kill blacks at a higher rate than cops'' (Even tho whites kill whites at the same rate :roll: ) (''blacks commit all the crime'' (Even tho its statistically proven they don't, but keep up with the selection bias.)




That actually never happened.
Actually it did.

It is called revisionist history.
Ok. It still happened.

The Democrats also are responsible for interning Japanese Americans in concentration camps.
Democrats were still a conservative party in 1942.

They are also responsible for racist and pro-segregationist identity politics that are currently helping to divide the country.
Such as..

BLM are the modern day KKK.
Ok, The difference is we don't assume every white person that commits a crime is the kkk, otoh, EVERYTIME a black person either A. doesn't agree with conservative ideologies, or B. Is suspected of commiting a crime, is automatically a BLM member.



The Democrats are the party of racism.
Ok.


No surprise that all of the prominent Dems of ISH have exposed themselves as racists on multiple occasions.
Such as..


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-rfKQohQGNcU/Uc78XX54SII/AAAAAAAACsc/4PEFQ7VAM0g/s654/before-malcolm-x-died-94594832701.jpeg
Agreed.

[TheWinningFam]

1. The democrats were not conservatives. I'd bet you don't even know what the word "conservative" means.

2. The people you call "liberals" today are not liberals. For example, Ron Paul is a liberal. Bernie Sanders is an anti-liberal. The confederate democrats were not liberals and 2016 Democrats are not liberals.
Whatever the case may be, The fact still remains that the democrats of 1920s are not the democrats of today and the republicans of 1920s are not the same as today, don't even bring up that bullshit lol.

[NumberSix]

You suspected white supremacist all act and say the same shit. :lol It's literally like talking to a robot, Every time someone brings up a decent point you always do 1 of the 3 things
Deny:''Most cops are good cops''
Deflect:''Black on black crime'' ''All lives matter''
Decieve: ''Blacks kill blacks at a higher rate than cops'' (Even tho whites kill whites at the same rate :roll: ) (''blacks commit all the crime'' (Even tho its statistically proven they don't, but keep up with the selection bias.)
No they don't. The black on black murder rate is about 7x the white on white murder rate.

[TheWinningFam]

Tell me again how any of this is "white supremacist rhetoric". Please explain your accusation.


https://pastorwardclinton.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/roberty-byrd.jpg
http://lybio.net/wp-content/uploads/Hillary-Rodham-Clinton-Comments-On-The-Passing-Of-Robert-Byrd.jpg
https://greenenvscithr.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/0003m_-blm-st-ny-hillary-clinton-and-senator-robert-byrd-kkk-leader-extoled-by-sos-on-you-tube.jpg

Still at it with these photoshopped pictures and false propoganda

Typical race soldier

http://static1.gamespot.com/uploads/original/1338/13388005/3059687-1709690848-micha.gif

[Nick Young]

So you are denying the fact that Robert Byrd was a prominent KKK member and that Hillary Clinton is on record referring to him as a close friend and mentor?


I am somehow a white supremacist now according to you-for calling out Hillary for her KKK ties.

If I were a white supremacist, why am I not supporting the candidate backed by the KKK, Hillary Rodham Clinton?

If I were a white supremacist, why do I constantly demonize and speak out against white supremacy every time I talk about it?

[TheWinningFam]

No they don't. The black on black murder rate is about 7x the white on white murder rate.
a staggering 83 percent of white murder victims were killed by fellow Caucasians

http://atlantablackstar.com/2015/03/03/9-facts-white-white-crime-far-exceeds-black-black-crime-media-conceals/2/

Act like 5 percent is a huge distance brehs:lol

[bdreason]

We should probably give credit to sailing and navigation. After that maybe guns and disease?

It's the same reason the United States is considered the dominate World superpower today. We control the Oceans and have the biggest guns.

[NumberSix]

a staggering 83 percent of white murder victims were killed by fellow Caucasians

http://atlantablackstar.com/2015/03/03/9-facts-white-white-crime-far-exceeds-black-black-crime-media-conceals/2/

Act like 5 percent is a huge distance brehs:lol
If 100 whites are murdered and 83 of them are by fellow whites, that's 83%.

If 1000 blacks are murdered and 830 of them are by fellow blacks, that's 83%.


Do you think it makes sense to say "they're both 83%. black on black murder and white on white murder are the same"?

[TheWinningFam]

If 100 whites are murdered and 83 of them are by fellow whites, that's 83%.

If 1000 blacks are murdered and 830 of them are by fellow blacks, that's 83%.


Do you think it makes sense to say "they're both 83%. black on black murder and white on white murder are the same"?

In this case we're not talking about 1000 black people or white people. They are practically the same rates, yet suspected white supremacist make out likes it a huge issue, Also black on black crime is only brung up when someone attempts to challenge white supremacy, its textbook Divide and conquer tatics. :facepalm

[iamgine]

Well they have the technology, money, disciplined army and tactical prowess.

It's like one smart MMA fighter vs 20 dumb teenagers. Teenagers would win if they swarm him but they just don't do that. Heck the MMA fighter might turn some of them against each other just by talking.

[NumberSix]

In this case we're not talking about 1000 black people or white people. They are practically the same rates, yet suspected white supremacist make out likes it a huge issue, Also black on black crime is only brung up when someone attempts to challenge white supremacy, its textbook Divide and conquer tatics. :facepalm
They're not. Black Americans get murdered at a rate 6x higher than white Americans and black Americans commit murder at a rate 8x higher than white Americans. These facts are not "white supremacy". We can't pretend that these facts are not true.

[TheWinningFam]

They're not. Black Americans get murdered at a rate 6x higher than white Americans and black Americans commit murder at a rate 8x higher than white Americans. These facts are not "white supremacy". We can't pretend that these facts are not true.

These rates directly correlate with poverty levels, The fact remains, poor people commit more crime, no surprise, and in the economic system we have, there has to be broke people for the economy to thrive, unfortunately it just had to be black people because that same system is ran by white supremacist.

Black people are feeling the after effects of 100s of years of oppression and disenfranchisement, These things just don't go away over night, its a process that takes generations, things are moving in the right direction but there's more to be done.

[TheMan]

In b4 thread is deleted...

The reason European nations became the dominant people the last 500 years (let's not act like they've always been on top, aside from Greece and Rome thousands of years ago, people in Asia in Mesopotamia, Ancient Egypt, Ancient China etc, in other words, people of "color" were right there with "whitey").

Long story short, England, Spain, France, Portugal etc made like bandits after pillaging the riches of the New World. With riches comes military strength, education, enlightment etc etc.

True story, there was a time when Christian Europe was a shithole full of poverty, filth, superstition, unending wars between Euro nations, reckless destruction of Europe's forrests for lumber while Granada in Al Andaluz, present day southern Spa run by Arab Muslims was the greatest city state in Europe, the center of knowledge, full of beautiful architecture, scientists, doctors, mathematicians etc etc.

When Colombus "discovered" America, it saved Europe (the Ottoman Turks along with the Moors before them were making inroads into Europe, the white man was shitting his pants just rying to keep those colored folks from invading them), but like I said, "discovering" the Americas gave the white man a boost because of all the wealth in gold, silver, new food and natural resources they pillaged and they haven't looked back since.

That was the key, bumbling their way into the New World.

No coincidence Britain, Spain, Portugal, France etc became world powers after 1492, before that, they were nothing but regional semi powers...

Whitey plundered the New World, made off like bandits and haven't looked back since.

https://youtu.be/PM8HnvuKbAo

[NumberSix]

These rates directly correlate with poverty levels, The fact remains, poor people commit more crime, no surprise, and in the economic system we have, there has to be broke people for the economy to thrive, unfortunately it just had to be black people because that same system is ran by white supremacist.

Black people are feeling the after effects of 100s of years of oppression and disenfranchisement, These things just don't go away over night, its a process that takes generations, things are moving in the right direction but there's more to be done.
They don't. There are more poor whites in America than poor blacks. Murder among poor blacks is drastically higher than murder among poor whites.

[TheWinningFam]

They don't. There are more poor whites in America than poor blacks.

Because whites are the majority in america :facepalm You're more likely to grow up poor if you're black than white folk.


Murder among poor blacks is drastically higher than murder among poor whites. Blacks are targeted more by race soldiers, so they are more likely to be found doing crimes.

[NumberSix]

In b4 thread is deleted...

The reason European nations became the dominant the last 500 years (let's not act like they've always been on top, aside from Greece and Rome thousands of years ago, people in Asia in Mesopotamia, Ancient Egypt, Ancient China etc, in other words, people of "color" were right there with "whitey").

Long story short, England, Spain, France, Portugal etc made like bandits after pillaging the riches of the New World. With riches comes military strength, education, enlightment etc etc.

True story, there was a time when Christian Europe was a shithole full of poverty, filth, superstition, unending wars between Euro nations, reckless destruction of Europe's forrests for lumber while Granada in Al Andaluz, present day southern Spa run by Arab Muslims was the greatest city state in Europe, the center of knowledge, full of beautiful architecture, scientists, doctors, mathematicians etc etc.

When Colombus "discovered" America, it saved Europe (the Ottoman Turks along with the Moors before them were making inroads into Europe, the white man was shitting his pants just rying to keep those colored folks from invading them), but like I said, "discovering" the Americas gave the white man a boost because of all the wealth in gold, silver, new food and natural resources they pillaged and they haven't looked back since.

That was the key, bumbling their way into the New World.

No coincidence Britain, Spain, Portugal, France etc became world powers after 1492, before that, they were nothing but regional semi powers...

Whitey plundered the New World, made off like bandits and haven't looked back since.

https://youtu.be/PM8HnvuKbAo
It's kinda odd that while bitching about the "white man" plundering and pillaging you also seem to have a strangely glowing view of the invaders who plundered, pillaged, occupied and enslaved your own ancestors in Spain.

How did the Spanish get rid of the Muslims again? I mean, according to you, they were super weak and the muslims were superior. Was it that the muslims let the Spanish go get some new world superpowers and then came back to defeat them? And if the muslims were so superior, why is it that it was the Spanish and not the muslims who were able to go conquer the new world?

Can you clear this up, because it's not exactly adding up.

[NumberSix]

Because whites are the majority in america :facepalm You're more likely to grow up poor if you're black than white folk.

Blacks are targeted more by race soldiers, so they are more likely to be found doing crimes.
So, I guess you're saying there a tons of murdered white people just laying around all over the place that just haven't been noticed by the police.

[StephHamann]

Protestant work ethic and capitalism

[Dresta]

Superior culture, superior leadership, active and vigorous aristocracies. 15th to 18th century Europe was one of the most impressive periods of human civilisation and brilliance ever seen.



If black people cant compete why did slave owners choose not to educate their slaves?

Most of them did until the Nat Turner rebellion, at least in Virginia.

[Dresta]

:facepalm It's a widely known fact that the democrats of those days where the conservatives, called dixiecrats of the south, while the republicans were the northern liberals of today... IDK if you know this or are just being ignorant.

The republicans were a new party in Lincoln's day. They were a conglomeration of various northern former Whig constituencies and people that wanted to develop the west that coalesced due to issues surrounding slavery. Generally speaking, they retained a lot of the older Whig economic views that the government should be involved in the economy. It should promote policies that promote growth, they thought. That meant financing infrastructure, education, protecting native industries, policies that promoted commerce and rapid job growth. They did believe in more federal involvement in all these things, and it cost money. They were the forward looking, innovative party, and also vaguely speaking they were the "big government" party and had policies that promoted big banks, big industry, big business.

The democrats were the more tradition-minded party. They were also the party focused on keeping taxes low and when it came to promoting commerce, etc... wanted to leave it to the states. Generally speaking, they were the "states' rights" party.

The shift started after the Civil War and continued for over 135 years. After the civil war, the republicans started to split into factions generally divided between how deep "in bed" you got with big business, so they developed a conservative business wing often at odds with with the more progressive wing. The democrats pretty much stayed the states rights party and were marginalized at the national level for several decades.

http://factmyth.com/factoids/democrats-and-republicans-switched-platforms/

Hold this L.
You need someone to take you under their wing and give you some education brudda.

And "a conservative business wing" is a contradiction in terms. Adherence to the interests of business and finance doesn't conserve anything: it rather destroys and ploughs through the things actual conservatives care about.

Both the Whig and Democrat Party were largely conservative parties before the war. The Republicans were the first radical party, and we saw how that ended.

[Dresta]

In b4 thread is deleted...

The reason European nations became the dominant people the last 500 years (let's not act like they've always been on top, aside from Greece and Rome thousands of years ago, people in Asia in Mesopotamia, Ancient Egypt, Ancient China etc, in other words, people of "color" were right there with "whitey").

Long story short, England, Spain, France, Portugal etc made like bandits after pillaging the riches of the New World. With riches comes military strength, education, enlightment etc etc.

True story, there was a time when Christian Europe was a shithole full of poverty, filth, superstition, unending wars between Euro nations, reckless destruction of Europe's forrests for lumber while Granada in Al Andaluz, present day southern Spa run by Arab Muslims was the greatest city state in Europe, the center of knowledge, full of beautiful architecture, scientists, doctors, mathematicians etc etc.

When Colombus "discovered" America, it saved Europe (the Ottoman Turks along with the Moors before them were making inroads into Europe, the white man was shitting his pants just rying to keep those colored folks from invading them), but like I said, "discovering" the Americas gave the white man a boost because of all the wealth in gold, silver, new food and natural resources they pillaged and they haven't looked back since.

That was the key, bumbling their way into the New World.

No coincidence Britain, Spain, Portugal, France etc became world powers after 1492, before that, they were nothing but regional semi powers...

Whitey plundered the New World, made off like bandits and haven't looked back since.

https://youtu.be/PM8HnvuKbAo
What a load of bullshit. Seriously, this is one of the stupidest and most ignorant posts i've ever seen on this site. Britain didn't exist in 1492, for a start, and actually, neither did Spain.

Not to mention that you didn't even answer the question, which was how they conquered the world. Your answer to this was: "they conquered the world because they conquered the world" :lol . You seem incapable of grasping that you have to have achieved significant success before colonizing around the world. Colonialism was a product of success, not its creator.

And your whole theory falls flat on its face when you consider that the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth was one of the greatest power in Europe and one point AFTER colonial expansion. Sweden and Austria were also major powers without colonial empires (as was Prussia at a point).

Basically, what a ridiculous load of tosh you just wrote. Your racial hatred is coming through strong here.

[masonanddixon]

Again denying and deflecting to shit that white people came up with.

Think about it, white people had to come up with their own test to show how smart they are :lol

Iq tests have been proven to not reflect intellegience, I mean really its just showing what you've been taught, if you haven't been taught something how tf are you supposed to know it for a test? :roll: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/9755929/IQ-tests-do-not-reflect-intelligence.html

If black people cant compete why did slave owners choose not to educate their slaves?

If black people weren't good for anything why didn't they allow them to file patents? surely if no good blacks patent something who cares? noone will buy it cuz its no good right?

Also assuming every black person is stupid and cant be intellectually stolen from because of a test made by white people said so :roll: :roll:


Dude, you are retarded.

Hint: using rolley face emoticons doesn't bolster your argument, and makes you look like a moron to everyone.

[TheMan]

What a load of bullshit. Seriously, this is one of the stupidest and most ignorant posts i've ever seen on this site. Britain didn't exist in 1492, for a start, and actually, neither did Spain.

Not to mention that you didn't even answer the question, which was how they conquered the world. Your answer to this was: "they conquered the world because they conquered the world" :lol . You seem incapable of grasping that you have to have achieved significant success before colonizing around the world. Colonialism was a product of success, not its creator.

And your whole theory falls flat on its face when you consider that the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth was one of the greatest power in Europe and one point AFTER colonial expansion. Sweden and Austria were also major powers without colonial empires (as was Prussia at a point).

Basically, what a ridiculous load of tosh you just wrote. Your racial hatred is coming through strong here.
Are you trying to say that bumbling into America (which was as a result of Europeans looking for new routes to the Far East and India because the Ottoman Empire basically blocked Europe's traditional trading routes) had no effect on England, Spain, France, Portugal etc becoming super powers after 1492??? Okaaay :facepalm

[masonanddixon]

Are you trying to say that bumbling into America (which was as a result of Europeans looking for new routes to the Far East and India because the Ottoman Empire basically blocked Europe's traditional trading routes) had no effect on Britain, Spain, France, Portugal etc becoming super powers after 1492??? Okaaay :facepalm

There was no such concept then as super powers because only Europe existed at the time.

[Dresta]

Are you trying to say that bumbling into America (which was as a result of Europeans looking for new routes to the Far East and India because the Ottoman Empire basically blocked Europe's traditional trading routes) had no effect on England, Spain, France, Portugal etc becoming super powers after 1492??? Okaaay :facepalm
It's all there in my post: I suggest you read it. Germany had almost no colonies and yet would have trounced the shit out of France and Spain combined post unification. Earlier, Austria and Sweden were major powers, and so was Prussia. I would presume the Ottomans would've been knocked off their arses if expansion West weren't possible; Britain repeatedly supported the Ottomans to maintain the balance of power and prevent potential rivals from becoming too strong; if they had instead joined forces against it, that Empire would be dust.

And I never said it had "no effect" just not the effect you are claiming it to have. Stop putting words in my mouth; it's like you can't even read. You have an incredibly slanted (not to mention idiotic and poorly-informed) view of history and understanding of the histories of European nations. You really ought to shut up and leave the grown up talk to the grown ups.

edit: Portugal? :oldlol:

You can't be serious. There were probably at least 2-3 non-colonial powers more powerful than Portugal at any given time in history.

"super-power"


:yaohappy:

[GimmeThat]

if only the history books could teach us who were on which side during those world wars

[UK2K]

These rates directly correlate with poverty levels, The fact remains, poor people commit more crime, no surprise, and in the economic system we have, there has to be broke people for the economy to thrive, unfortunately it just had to be black people because that same system is ran by white supremacist.

Black people are feeling the after effects of 100s of years of oppression and disenfranchisement, These things just don't go away over night, its a process that takes generations, things are moving in the right direction but there's more to be done.

False. If it were true, Eastern KY would be the most dangerous place in the US.