LWDT VI: Kropotkin's Bread Dead Redemption.

[Valrifell]

Tenochtitlan was a metropolitan area with a canal system comparable to Venice's but with a population Paris.

And was somehow conquered by a few hundred Spaniards tens of thousands of miles away from their homeland. Clearly they were lacking in many areas.

Not everyone is geographically gifted to share a land border and trade route with the Chinese.

Not to mention the devastating plagues that preceded Cortés' arrival.

[Valrifell]

:lol2:

The Inca and Aztecs (as well as most Sub-Saharan African kingdoms and empires) were both on a near-equivalent technological footing to Europe, barring things such as guns or ships. They all understood metalworking, even if they didn't use it the same way Europeans did (in the case of the Inca and Aztecs, who mostly used it ceremonially for jewelry and the like), and they all built massive, sweeping cities, to the point where civilizations divided from Eurasiafrica have settlements equal in size, scope, and population to European ones such as Rome.

The Incans didn't even have a writing system, and the Aztecs were still far behind the Euopeans technologically.

And, "inferior cultures"? Lmao, what a fucking meme.

The Incans and Aztecs both had a culture built upon human sacrifice. So yes, I'd say it is was pretty inferior.

The Inca essentially had a writing system based on multi-colored ropes and knots.

[Conserative Morality]

No, I'm implying literally every action the Roman state undertook had religious undertones. Elections were considered sacred. Assemblies were held on the Field Of Mars. I don't know really what you expect from a society with a temple on every corner and twice as many gods.

That's true, the Empire and Republic were essentially like most classical civilizations in that the church was a bureaucratic arm of the government.

They still undertook human sacrifice.

Again, by the broad definition you're using, most religious states perform human sacrifice on a massive and regular scale.

[Washington Resistance Army]

You're drastically overstating this. While yes some human sacrifice did happen very sparingly in the Greco-Roman world it was almost always seen as a barbaric practice and if I'm not mistaken some Emperor or another outright banned it across the entire Empire.

It's not that drastic of an overstatement.

It really is. "also practiced human sacrifice on quite large scales" just isn't true. It happened with some scattered cults yeah but it was never a common or large scale thing in either Greece or Rome and was pretty much always looked down upon.

In terms of Europe the most prolific users of such practices were the Celts, who I'll have you know were decidedly not civilized

[Valrifell]

That's true, the Empire and Republic were essentially like most classical civilizations in that the church was a bureaucratic arm of the government.

They still undertook human sacrifice.

Again, by the broad definition you're using, most religious states perform human sacrifice on a massive and regular scale.

I think there's a bit of a difference with someone dressed up like Jupiter overseeing the smothering of POWs in front of a Temple than the Roman Empire just executing people.

But, hey, yes, a religiously themed mass execution is essentially the same thing as human sacrifice.

[Torrocca]

:lol2:

The Inca and Aztecs (as well as most Sub-Saharan African kingdoms and empires) were both on a near-equivalent technological footing to Europe, barring things such as guns or ships. They all understood metalworking, even if they didn't use it the same way Europeans did (in the case of the Inca and Aztecs, who mostly used it ceremonially for jewelry and the like), and they all built massive, sweeping cities, to the point where civilizations divided from Eurasiafrica have settlements equal in size, scope, and population to European ones such as Rome.

The Incans didn't even have a writing system, and the Aztecs were still far behind the Euopeans technologically.

>Doesn't know about the quipu system the Inca used for their language
>Thinks they have enough knowledge to try and accurately call Native American civilizations "inferior" despite this

Fucking top kek.

And, "inferior cultures"? Lmao, what a fucking meme.

The Incans and Aztecs both had a culture built upon human sacrifice. So yes, I'd say it is was pretty inferior.

Yeah, and Europeans frequently burnt people at the stake for heresy and shit during this time, which could basically be seen as a form of human sacrifice.

[Ostroeuropa]

It's not that drastic of an overstatement.

It really is. "also practiced human sacrifice on quite large scales" just isn't true. It happened with some scattered cults yeah but it was never a common or large scale thing in either Greece or Rome and was pretty much always looked down upon.

In terms of Europe the most prolific users of such practices were the Celts, who I'll have you know were decidedly not civilized

Uh oh, Asterix committed a crime. Time for everyone in the town to chase them down, grab them, put them inside a giant wooden person, light it on fire, and have a party.

Uh oh, the harvest failed. Time to kill the druid or a virgin I guess it depends on how we're feeling, maybe it's a "shotgun" kind of deal where if the druid shouts it first then we burn a virgin.

Uh oh, the king did something dumb, time to cut out their innards.

Uh oh, you didn't give me gifts on Halloween despite me dressing up as a monster and demanding some. Now I have to kill you.

Uh oh, ahh fuck it, just run at the bastards and stab em, who are we kidding.

[Hanafuridake]

Press F to pay respects on the anniversary of Karl Marx's death.

[Conserative Morality]

I think there's a bit of a difference with someone dressed up like Jupiter overseeing the smothering of POWs in front of a Temple than the Roman Empire just executing people.

"Remember you are only a man." It would be odd if a man dressed up as Jupiter while making sacrifices to Jupiter.

Also, Roman prisoners were paraded in the triumph, not executed. Those marked for execution, typically war leaders, were killed after the triumph, not during.

But, hey, yes, a religiously themed mass execution is essentially the same thing as human sacrifice.

Then human sacrifice means very little as a point of condemnation. Congratulations.

[Proctopeo]

Press F to pay respects on the anniversary of Karl Marx's death.

Which key to pay disrespects?

[Yusseria]

:lol2:
The Incans didn't even have a writing system, and the Aztecs were still far behind the Euopeans technologically.

>Doesn't know about the quipu system the Inca used for their language
>Thinks they have enough knowledge to try and accurately call Native American civilizations "inferior" despite this

Fucking top kek.

I'm aware of that. It was still inferior to traditional writing systems that other civilizations had. And of course there was the simple fact that it took them quite a long while to figure out something as basic as the wheel.

The Incans and Aztecs both had a culture built upon human sacrifice. So yes, I'd say it is was pretty inferior.

Yeah, and Europeans frequently burnt people at the stake for heresy and shit during this time, which could basically be seen as a form of human sacrifice.

This wasn't done on the scale that it was in the Americas.

[Fahran]

When we talk about technological superiority, we should generally specify precisely which technologies we mean. The city-planning, sanitation systems, and masonry of places like Machu Pichu and Tenochtitlan might well have been more advanced compared to those of places like Madrid, London, or Paris at the time. Technology is adapted based on human needs and is limited by the availability of resources and geological factors that might impede technological diffusion. In terms of military technology and animal husbandry, the Europeans were undoubtedly superior, owing to the large number of domestic-able animals in the Old World, the large-scale availability of iron, and a geographical situation that allowed peoples, cultures, and technologies to spread with ease. That said, the Europeans knew next to nothing about growing potatoes or the three sisters and would have struggled to construct monuments like those at Teotihuacan. We need to qualify what we mean when we use words like barbaric and primitive.

[Yusseria]

Press F to pay respects on the anniversary of Karl Marx's death.

S

[Aellex]

My only shame is having missed this absolute shitfest of Ostro, self-proclaimed """leftist""", defending a far-right stooge and blatant racism at the same time.

I can't wait for him to continue to claim he's a leftist. It's so fun making up blatant lies that a pre-schooler could see through!

He's left economically speaking. That makes him a leftist no matter how salty you are about his social stance.

The Inca knew what wheels were, ffs; in fact, the Americas as a whole knew what wheels were, as demonstrated by this toy from Veracruz, Mexico, from 100-200 AD.

I know this is going to be a shocking revelation for you, but a mountain society that lacked beasts of burden probably had no use for wheeled tools.

They didn't. A wheel isn't just a disk you roll, it's something more complex than that.
Animals are irrelevant to the usefulness of the wheel, it's a prerequisite for actual large scale building and infrastructure i.e. the basis of civilization.

The Romans and numerous other places usually considered to be "civilized" in the Western sphere also practiced human sacrifice on quite large scales. Your point?

Again, you don't even have the excuse of ignorance for being this brazenly wrong because it was pointed out that that claim was retardedly stupid and false already.
Next.

And the Greeks and following Byzantines borrowed their cultures from all sorts of neighbors of theirs. Your point, again?

Can you stop being wrong any time soon? It's becoming just tiresome by now.

They were examples of civilization, and that's all that matters.

Lmao no

Also, >TFW Carthage and Egypt (and the multiple following iterations of Egypt, like the Ptolemy dynasty or the Islamic Egypt) "were nothing much"

I almost hoped you'd finish your post by making an actual argument but I suppose it was too much to expect and you rather chose to be wrong again, a shame.
Egypt is part of the Middle East and so was Carthage by virtue of being a Phoenician colony.

[Ostroeuropa]

He's left economically speaking. That makes him a leftist no matter how salty you are about his social stance.

There's also the fact I support social equality and just reject progressive notions of what that looks like and how to get there.

[Aellex]

It really is. "also practiced human sacrifice on quite large scales" just isn't true. It happened with some scattered cults yeah but it was never a common or large scale thing in either Greece or Rome and was pretty much always looked down upon.

In terms of Europe the most prolific users of such practices were the Celts, who I'll have you know were decidedly not civilized

Uh oh, Asterix committed a crime. Time for everyone in the town to chase them down, grab them, put them inside a giant wooden person, light it on fire, and have a party.

Uh oh, the harvest failed. Time to kill the druid or a virgin I guess it depends on how we're feeling, maybe it's a "shotgun" kind of deal where if the druid shouts it first then we burn a virgin.

Uh oh, the king did something dumb, time to cut out their innards.

Uh oh, you didn't give me gifts on Halloween despite me dressing up as a monster and demanding some. Now I have to kill you.

Uh oh, ahh fuck it, just run at the bastards and stab em, who are we kidding.

While those are funny as jokes and all, kind reminder that it was tradition to kill the last young man to respond to the muster call during the war season and use his decapitated head as a battle standard for the rest of the campaign.
Gauls were the truest madlads, I can recommend you an handful of books that are truly captivating on that subject.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

Press F to pay respects on the anniversary of Karl Marx's death.

Marx was an abomination on humanity.

[Aellex]

The Inca and Aztecs (as well as most Sub-Saharan African kingdoms and empires) were both on a near-equivalent technological footing to Europe, barring things such as guns or ships. They all understood metalworking, even if they didn't use it the same way Europeans did (in the case of the Inca and Aztecs, who mostly used it ceremonially for jewelry and the like), and they all built massive, sweeping cities, to the point where civilizations divided from Eurasiafrica have settlements equal in size, scope, and population to European ones such as Rome.

And, "inferior cultures"? Lmao, what a fucking meme.

And yet again you're wrong, it's starting to become an habit.
They were literal centuries behind in metalworking and metallurgy, in architecture and building, in essentially everything.

That they had huge populations because they were spared from plagues and nomadic/tribal hordes isn't a testament to their merit, just on their easier living conditions from their environment.

Inferior is quite the fitting way to describe their bloodthirsty cultures, yes.

[Aellex]

It's not that drastic of an overstatement.

It really is. "also practiced human sacrifice on quite large scales" just isn't true. It happened with some scattered cults yeah but it was never a common or large scale thing in either Greece or Rome and was pretty much always looked down upon.

In terms of Europe the most prolific users of such practices were the Celts, who I'll have you know were decidedly not civilized

Those are the words of a man who fight on foot, wearing torsal metal slab with a puny knife rather than riding a glorious horse with the saddle, mailshirt and longsword he invented.

The Roman was rightfully afraid of the Eternal Gaul and ended up getting coopted by Him at the end!

[Liriena]

Their civilizations were inferior both technologically and culturally to European civilizations at that time.

I can tolerate the claim that they were "technologically" inferior, but I'm dying to hear more of this "cultural" inferiority. How do you measure that?

[Liriena]

Tenochtitlan was a metropolitan area with a canal system comparable to Venice's but with a population Paris.

And was somehow conquered by a few hundred Spaniards tens of thousands of miles away from their homeland. Clearly they were lacking in many areas.

And Haitian slaves killed the ever living shit out of white Frenchmen, but I don't use that as proof that French civilization is inferior.

[Liriena]

Press F to pay respects on the anniversary of Karl Marx's death.

Marx was an abomination on humanity.

He was one of the most important thinkers of the 19th century, whose work has contributed massively to several fields.

But sure, Stalin and Mao did bad things, so now Marx is Morgoth. Please, nobody pay attention to Voltaire's bastards or the unfortunate consequences of Adam Smith's work over the past three centuries. Also, nobody cancel Nietzche or Heidegger.

[Liriena]

When we talk about technological superiority, we should generally specify precisely which technologies we mean. The city-planning, sanitation systems, and masonry of places like Machu Pichu and Tenochtitlan might well have been more advanced compared to those of places like Madrid, London, or Paris at the time. Technology is adapted based on human needs and is limited by the availability of resources and geological factors that might impede technological diffusion. In terms of military technology and animal husbandry, the Europeans were undoubtedly superior, owing to the large number of domestic-able animals in the Old World, the large-scale availability of iron, and a geographical situation that allowed peoples, cultures, and technologies to spread with ease. That said, the Europeans knew next to nothing about growing potatoes or the three sisters and would have struggled to construct monuments like those at Teotihuacan. We need to qualify what we mean when we use words like barbaric and primitive.

By gawd, don't show such wanton nuance in here! This is a Christian thread!

[Liriena]

Press F to pay respects on the anniversary of Karl Marx's death.

He was the primordial hot couch guy o7

[Torrocca]

When we talk about technological superiority, we should generally specify precisely which technologies we mean. The city-planning, sanitation systems, and masonry of places like Machu Pichu and Tenochtitlan might well have been more advanced compared to those of places like Madrid, London, or Paris at the time. Technology is adapted based on human needs and is limited by the availability of resources and geological factors that might impede technological diffusion. In terms of military technology and animal husbandry, the Europeans were undoubtedly superior, owing to the large number of domestic-able animals in the Old World, the large-scale availability of iron, and a geographical situation that allowed peoples, cultures, and technologies to spread with ease. That said, the Europeans knew next to nothing about growing potatoes or the three sisters and would have struggled to construct monuments like those at Teotihuacan. We need to qualify what we mean when we use words like barbaric and primitive.

By gawd, don't show such wanton nuance in here! This is a Christian thread!

Lol, nuance? Nah, everyone knows the only proper way to do things is to ignore all the bad things of things you like, and ignore all the good things of things you dislike, and then you can call the stuff you dislike primitive or bad and all the stuff you like superior and godly, duh!

How else do you think some people on the internet who have absolutely no connection to the societies of five hundred years ago can claim them to be uber-civilizations?