Was it wrong for whites to stamp out slavery, cannibalism and human sacrifice amongst the browns?
>>16892318Because they wouldn't be grateful for that and hate you anyway. Granting civilization to 3rd world was the greatest mistake.
>>16892331They liked living under the stable governments we created and ran for 200 years and accepted white rule as a matter of fact. Until the Soviets pushed "anti-colonialism", an evil ideology that killed tens of millions of people. What if the world could drop the "equality" bullshit and go back to the realistic view that white people are better at running things than brown people?
this turned into a /pol/nigger emotional support thread quickly
>>16892318NOTHING whitoids ever did was out of empathy, not a single thing. Not a single action was ever done to benefit anyone but themselves.>we built these railways with your money to extract your resources more efficiently and built a bunch of schools and hospitals for colonizers. now love us goyim!kys
>>16892318It was wrong because white people said it was wrong and everyone else is just following their lead. If Russians apologized for conquering central Asia I doubt the global south will trust them. Instead they doubled down on what they did and everyone except the west respects and loves them for it
>>16892367>and go back to the realistic view that white people are better at running things than brown people?That's greatest mistake of "running things" for 3rdies. Look at British Empire. Where is it? Dust, simple British people left in poverty, squalor and invasive hordes of browns.Build your home, build your homeland, build your nation .This is what matters, this legacy that would be left in the future.
>>16892411Nah. "Bringing light of civilisation" to 3rd world (at the expense of your people) was very important game for elites, that was their self-actualization. They had every their needs covered it was time to play games of pride.
>>16892411>NOTHING whitoids ever did was out of empathySo they stamped out slavery, cannibalism, human sacrifice and built stable, prosperous societies for self-interested reasons? Who cares. Quick question; Do you think browns rule out of empathy?
>>16892486They didn’t stamp out any of it, they fostered it to divide native tribes and put them against one another then act as a neutral third party to justify their own rule
>>16892486>stamped out slaveryOnly when it had become less profitable and useful>cannibalism, human sacrificeNeither was ever common anywhere, its just propaganda>built stable, prosperous societieson the back of others
>>16892445There's hordes of browns because they were allowed to govern themselves and everything went to shit. They're now clamoring to live in a society governed by whites. So we should govern them over there so we don't have to govern them here.
>>16892486>slavery Whites were fine with slavery for centuries. It was only Anglos who began abolishing it, and that's because it was cutting into their bottom line once they moved towards wage labor. Nobody gave a shit about dignity or suffering of slaves themselves. Americans only abolished it as a safety measure to prevent another uprising and handicap their former enemy in a civil war.>cannibalism>human sacrificeAgain, they only did this for religious reasons. They didn't care about the natives themselves. Just like how Cortes had no issue with his Tlaxcallan allies partaking in savagery they preached against centuries later just to make sure they ousted the Aztecs.>built stable, prosperous societiesFor White settlers. There was never a colony set up by Europeans where the law didn't favor them or establish a caste system in some capacity. The idea that they just showed up and built infrastructure at their own expense to be used indiscriminately by all subjects is fanciful horse shit.
>>16892502We are simply taking back what is ours. Its better this way, because we can take it violently too
>>16892506So do you think whites should or shouldn't have prevented browns from practicing slavery, cannibalism and human sacrifice? I'm just seeing imputation of motives which you can't possibly know.
>>16892498Slavery is never unprofitable. Whigish nonsense.Effectively the wage of a worker has to cover his necessities plus a little bit extra. Slave can just be provided with just the necessities and he'll have to live with it. Having slave run company means having more vertically integrated company, past some size it's pure profit and efficiency.There is an actual empirical evidence for that, in pre-civil war American south numerous factories employed slaves either wholly or partially, some were even turned from unprofitable to profitable by switching to slave labour.
>>16892528I think they should've stayed in Europe and our of everyone's business. I thought their land was the greatest ever? Just stay there if that's the case lmao
>>16892498Cannibalism was quite common in Africahttps://inquisitivebird.substack.com/p/historical-accounts-of-african-cannibalismThough i agree that whites didn't consciously end the practice (how would you even do that realistically?) it was mostly a side effect of bringing civilization to them.
>>16892510This 45 trillion shit has been debunked long ago. India never even had that much money to extract to begin with.https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2021/09/british-india-and-the-45-trillion-lie/The fact that you people believe such absurd lies only confirms that Richard Lynn was right.
>>16892563so the answer is no? You would rather be eaten by your fellow ethnic just so you could stick it to the white devils?
>>16892537so why was the south poorer and less developed than the north? I am not calling you a lier, I am just curious as to why wage labor out preformed slave labor in the long run if slaves were more profitable
>>16892411>NOTHING whitoids ever did was out of empathy, not a single thing.Who gives a shit?What matters is the end result
>>16892318they stamped out slavery by grossly encouraging it, taking Amerindians and Negroes and Chinese as slaves?
>>16892506>Whites were fine with slavery for centuries.Yeah and negroes were fine with it for millenniaIn the end it's still whitey who abolished it>Again, they only did this for religious reasons.Who cares?What matters is that this resulted in an improvement of quality of life>For White settlersThere were barely any white settlers in African colonies outside of Algeria, Rhodesia and South Africa.Still, whites built cities all over the continent.
>>16892610If you look at actual research and not alt right blogs, it's less clear, as you'd expect from a large continent. Cannibalism was endemic in the Congo area and parts of West Africa. It was also endemic in pockets all over the pre-modern world, like the Caribbean, some Amerindian societies, Central Asia, and (maybe most notoriously) the South Pacific. It's worth noting that today even amidst severe poverty and hunger in much of Africa, it looks like most instances of cannibalism are ritualistic and met with disgust, suggesting most Africans maintain the common taboo.
>>16892318Lmao.
>>16892318The audacity to include a Chinese in there.
>>16893100>In the end it's still whitey who abolished itNope. Only ine did and it was still pretty conditional and bailedbout slave owners in the UK.>What matters is that this resulted in an improvement of quality of lifeThat didn't change much when people stilldiedboff enmasse to bad conditions in the colonies.>There were barely any white settlers in African colonies outside of Algeria, Rhodesia and South Africa.And those ones extremely oppressed the locals.>Still, whites built cities all over the continentExtraction depots. They pretty much excluded as zoned out most locals and natives were barred from city politics and a lot of housing.
>>16893086The end result is those countries are still poor and their resources are still controlled by western companies
>>16893149This alt right cites "Actual research" if you bothered to open it
>>16893100>Still, whites built cities all over the continent.Using local labourers, assets and property lmao. The colonial system always hinged on that lol.
>>16893086>What matters is the end resultThat mentality only works in tech
>>16892610>Cannibalism was quite common in AfricaThat just mentioennd accounts in certain parts.
>>16892528>So do you think whites should or shouldn't have prevented browns from practicing slaveryThey just used forced labour and arbitrary taxation in many parts. Same effect and even broader becuase it applied to everyone
>>16893236>Nope. Only ine did and it was still pretty conditional and bailedbout slave owners in the UK.What are you even babbling about?European powers abolished the Atlantic Slave Trade decades before conquering Africa, and then proceeded to force Africans in Africa to stop enslaving each others after taking over the place.If you don't even have basic knowledge in African history, just fuk off.>That didn't change much when people stilldiedboff enmasse to bad conditions in the colonies.Africa has always been an awful shithole were people died en masse.Still, European medicine and technology, and the abolition of slavery and tribal wars during colonial rule made the mortality rate drop massively and allowed the population of the continent to increase by x10 in less than a century.>Extraction depotsWhere literal cities popped out of the ground>They pretty much excluded as zoned out most locals and natives were barred from city politics and a lot of housing.That's just your headcannonHere >>16893086 you can see local blacks in the hospital. You can also see a mosque that was certainly not built for white settlers.White settlers barely existed in these areas, so obviously the cities weren't built for them.
>>16893269Oh and the classic "steal land from subsidence farmers so they have no choice but to work for the guy you gave the land to" is extremely close.
>>16893252Like I said, it's recorded in some areas. The red flag is generalizing about a continent with over a billion people and hundreds of cultures. It's like the articles from AmRen talking about African morality and African languages.
>>16893253>Using local labourers, assets and property lmaoThose locals had never been able to build more than primitive neolithic mudhuts villages before whitey showed up.Now they have real cities, infrastructures, modern technology, knowledge of their natural resources...etc, and this only at the expense of having spent 80 years under the rule of a superior civilization.Sure getting conquered and civilized by another race from across the sea is humiliating, but if you look at the result it was more positive than negative.
>>16893296did cannibalism exist in Europe in some areas in this same time period? Are there account of some Europeans sharpening their teeth? Or some merchants who traveled to Eruption and then got eaten?
>>16892367>They liked living under the stable governments we created and ran for 200 years and accepted white rule as a matter of fact.Has a native african person ever told this to you?
>>16893086By your logic, the destruction of white europe is fine as long as high tech improves.
>>16892626The south didn't enforce tariffs as religiously as the north did, the profile of these economies simply diverged into raw material export and manufactured goods import economies and it's more likely matter of preference among the elites of the respective regions - in the south they were mostly descendants of south-western cavaliers, in the north you've had townsmen of puritanshire if you catch my drift. Two completely different outlooks on life resulting in different type of economic activity. The problem was also not exactly with the worker mass but with the specialised workforce, the way it worked out the south only got negroes, border reavers and aristocrats(the random assortment of indentured servants mostly died childlessly) so if you needed a guy who could repair and maintain a machine you were going to be short of them.However by the 1850's you've had serious move towards industrialisation in the south, it was just few decades too late, but they were converging. One thing I haven't mentioned is that one of the prerequisites of industrialisation seems to be development of the credit markets and since the form of slavery present in the south requires these as well it's another argument for why slavery is a positive economic force rather than a drag.
>>16893997>Raymond of Aguilers, who seems to have been present at Ma'arra, likewise states that the cannibalism happened after the siege and "in the midst of famine", but adds that human flesh was consumed in public and "with gusto" rather than secretly and shamefully.
>>16894018The average guy in Hong Kong or Taiwan would rather live under British rule than CCP rule
>>16894059Yeah it would be fine if it improved the place.But instead it shit it up.I'd be totally fine with Europe getting dominated by a superior alien civilization that would massively improve medicine, technology and overall quality of life, with the only downfall being the humiliation of getting civilized by a foreign race.But that's obviously not comparable in any way to what is currently happening (getting swarmed by inferior people that bring inferior customs and shit up the place).
>>16892318Yes, they were not deserving and God would have been better served by their utter extermination from every corner of the earth.
>>16894099>I'd be totally fine with Europe getting dominated by a superior alien civilization that would massively improve medicine, technology and overall quality of life, with the only downfall being the humiliation of getting civilized by a foreign raceAnd loss of all the land you own. You think those aliens will let you own their land? Also you have to work for 3 months no pay for their projects. No, they don't take assets or direct payment. Also your priests and clearly arr gonna get killed becuase we view that their belief systems clash with our goals.
>>16894099>I'd be totally fine with Europe getting dominated by a superior alien civilization that would massively improve medicine, technology and overall quality of life, with the only downfall being the humiliation of getting civilized by a foreign race.Isn't that kind of cucked? What if they started forcing whites into reservations?
>>16894102>God would have been better served by their utter extermination from every corner of the earth.By the ex-empirea currently committing the very acts he hates? I don't think he is fond of gay pride parades.
>>16894110Nah he thinks he's so special that they'll spare him and let him somehow attain equal status with the insectoid overlords.
>>16894097What average Hong Kong/Taiwanese guy do you see begging for the British to come back? Show me.
>>16894083thanks anon for your answer.
>>16892367>Until the Soviets pushed "anti-colonialism", an evil ideology that killed tens of millions of people.Your fault for creating a dependent slave nigger caste retard. Did you actually expect it to last forever?
>>16892528>So do you think whites should or shouldn't have prevented browns from practicing slavery, cannibalism and human sacrifice?Definitely shouldn't have. All of these things are far preferable to the jewish industrial technological world complex retarded humanist moron. I hope you and your family dies violently in a crash tomorrow, stupid cunt.
>>16894083>development of the credit markets and since the form of slavery present in the south requires thesewhy does slavery requires a credit market?
>>16895584Ok let's think about what mechanisation is economically speaking. If you replace the human labour with a machine, you have to spend significant amounts of capital to first buy and setup that machine, but then you increase your profit margin as the labour costs are decreased. Since these are very expensive, a credit market is necessary for this gamble to pay off and that's reality of most industrial ventures forever, barely anyone actually has money to build a factory from 0, so they look for investors and get business loans.Well slavery what you're doing is making an expensive purchase to reduce labour costs, it may be a difficult thing to conceptualise for a person of conventional morality, but if you adapted the morality dictated by various ancient laws for which slaves were just talking objects the parallel becomes obvious. Chattel slavery typically was also too expensive to afford from the get go for most people so again an investment or business loan was an important instrument of starting this scheme.This is also a reason why slavery probably helped industrialisation. First it fostered this mentality of getting into debt to then make more money long term, secondly especially the Carribbean sugar plantations built up the capital in European banks that was later used to finance factories.The relative opposition to this take from banal popular economists is simply a case of modern economic thought being derived from writings of an ethics professor.
>>16892318They didn't and in fact only spread more death, misery, and pain to Africa on top of causing two world wars. >>16892367>They liked living under the stable governments we created and ran for 200 years1: Stable? Lol, imao. The governments they had before whites showed up were more stable than anything whites ever build. 2: Not 200 years. 3: Colonialism killed way more.
>>16894097>The average guy in Hong Kong or TaiwanAfricans.
