800 years ago Europe was clearly behind both the Middle East and Asia (and arguably other parts of the world too) in terms of innovation, technology and development. [...]
Words and their meaning are important. If you meant "Whites" should be proud of their technological achievements the last couple of centuries then say that, not that they dominated all of history.
I disagree. They were far ahead of anyone else during the renaissance period and it's noted to have some of civilizations most scientific and cultural achievements.
edit: I know you're swedish but try not to throw your race under the bus so quickly(I had to)
How did you contradict me?
We could go into the Renaissance and compare it to the golden eras of other civilizations but this skips one of the main points I made in my post, namely that you gradually shrink and move forward the time frame in which the white race was superior. The Renaissance is commonly thought to have occurred during the 15th and 16th centuries. That's 600 years ago. Not 800 years ago and definitely not "for most of history".
Most of history in that case is a casual exaggeration. There are no absolutes in anything, there are times where others have surpassed them of course. But to deny whites had biggest role in humanities innovation I can't agree with. As far as the Renaissance, I can't go off of commonly thought, it began in the 1300's.
I see you still went back to the original claim in later posts though:
Firstly, argument goes from whites leading through most of allotted history(true), whites being the dominant innovators for the last 800 years(true) and finally my own quote saying this only really changes getting closer to the BC era(true). Which is where all of the inventions Inq listed were made with the exception of gun powder. Inquirer also cites the military conquest of the mongols as if it equates out to innovation, by this metric even Shaka Zulu's strong arm of Africa would be considered innovative.
How can you argue Whites lead through most of allotted (?) history and then arbitrarily dismiss everything that happened before Christ? Do you also actually consider Europe to have been superior to the rest of the world during the Middle Ages?
I addressed the BC issue and yes.
I mentioned the Mongols not only for contrast since they were "basic" nomads but also because they loved to adopt and improve upon inventions, especially Chinese ones, and "share" them with the rest of Eurasia. Such as using gunpowder hand grenades against the Japanese. They expanded upon numerous other, more unquantifiable areas too, such as military organization, meritocracy and long-distance communication (they arguably set up the first real "pony express"). The difference between the Mongols and Zulu is the impact they had on the world, where the Mongols' absolutely dwarf Zulu's.
Impact doesn't equate necessarily out to innovation. Like my discussion with TC about Columbus, he really didnt do anything just was a marker for others. I'll give the mongols some innovation, but they're barely scraping into our 800 year timezone.
No one really denies the West slowly surpassed the rest of the world during the early modern era and absolutely dominated it since the industrial revolution. You've made a much larger claim however and seem surprised and annoyed when shown you're wrong. Again, the words you use are important and it's usually telling that whenever someone starts going on about race they also whitewash or misconstrue large parts of history to fit their narrative.
No I feel like my casual generalization is being taken literally. I've said even outside this post there are times europeans weren't on top, but they have accrued the most significant innovations to civilization throughout the course of history when compared to other demographics.
I am with you, even unto the end of the age
