Why the white man always singled out?

Post Reply New Topic

You're right, except for the living in harmony part. They wanted to live with constant low level war, for the most part. White men brought large scale war to the world, and really perfected it.

yep the Chinese, Japanese, Mongols and Koreans never tire conquer the whole world via massive war, neither did the Persian or ottoman empires. at one point after Persia, a great Umayyad empire went all the way to Spain in its control. and let us not forget the Egyptian conquest of Africa, or how about the Aztec empire in south america.

really its humans. humans like to have war, because they like to build empires, like to force everyone to be like them and live under their power. whole NA tribes were wiped out by other tribes. this doesnt' even consider the lower africa stuff the Zulu Kingdom. I think it was called.

only difference is white people got technology advanced faster then the others. if one of them had done it then it'd ben their race(not a thing anymore I hear) that would have done wars. well the ottomans were in ww1. I asked my teach why the Aztecs were not as far as Europe. the idea he had was the use of strong animals. in which to pull wagons preform labor. so while white people in Europe had plenty of time to sit around and invent stuff the aztecs were busying using themselves sand slaves as labor. though given the aztecs did massive human sacrifice. I'm kinda glad they didn't end up the dominate world power. can you say you'd rather them be in charge or the Muslims with all the stoning and beheading. idk. I often think of going back in time and helping arm the tribes of NA, but then how to unite them and prevent them from killing each other. perhaps a strong dictatorship backed by robots would be better. some way to stop humans from hurting and killing each other, but then you lose freedom. why must we hurt each other. I have no desire to hurt another human.

The truth is that somehow many of us can't handle the truth of history without inserting some bigotry. The narrative has to be twisted some way in order that everything can easily be explained as some group's fault. White men didn't bring anything into the world that wasn't already there.

If not them, then some other group would have dropped the bomb. And let's not forget the staggering death toll the Japanese inflicted on China, Vietnam, Laos, Indonesia, and Korea before WWII even started. It is the wickedness and depravity of the species that ails us, not some bigot's pseudo intellectual narrative of history.

White men are always singled out because these international bankers/gangsters/parasites know we're the only ones who can stop them, if you don't why are Arab nations for Arabs, Asian nations for Asians, Black nations for Blacks, Hispanic nations for Hispanics, Jewish nations for Jews but White nations for everybody.

Black and Hispanic and Asian and Arab nations are often not Leftist of the American Progressive and European variety.

They have no need or want for a multicultural setting.

White nations, however, do need multiculturalism, from the point of view of Progressives, because for one, a nation who venerates minorities is one who likely won't harm any minority. Which is crucial when you centralize power, a power that can be abused, and when abused, will often target out social scapegoats who can't defend themselves. That's the theoretical basis of multiculturalism, and the practical reason they give is look... the secular don't reproduce, from Asia to Scandinavia, so immigrants are needed to continue the entitlement state that will pay for our safety nets when we're old. Some day, if the education system succeeds, the children of these immigrants will also be secular and not reproduce, but that'll be their problem to figure out, long after we've died off.