Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is no "white race," but I can answer the spirit of your question quite simply: IQ. IQ is a huge predictor of economic success, and whites have higher average IQ scores than most minority groups. That factor probably carries more explanatory power than any other.
And yes , the " Anglo-saxons " are a Germanic tribe. These are the people Hitler wouldn't stop talking about , what British and American " thinkers " professed as the " superior race " before WW II.
Yes, those semi clothed , dirty barbarian tribes wandering around Western Europe who didn't have a written language until about 2000 years ago and were in part responsible for the fall of the western roman empire and the Dark ages now have created awesome societies like Western Europe and it's offshoots. They are at the top of the food chain and the great propaganda machinery of Hollywood reinforces this everyday.
Why ?
I could write a short book explaining it but let me just say this - " things change ".
Every dog has it's day. This is their time. It will not last for long.
It is successful right now, in this snapshot of time we happen to live in.
Ask the same question in 1300 AD, and it is the Mongols who are successful. Ask in 500 AD and the question is "Why are the Chinese so successful" Before that, the Romans. 500 BC it was the Persians.
And the Indians, the Mali, the Egyptians, the Garamantes, etc.
True.
Don't forget the "cradle of civilization" - Mesopotamia (i.e. Babylonia, Sumeria, Assyria), 3000-4000 years ago.
Europe was pretty much like a violent, oppressive 3rd world country in the middle ages.
There is no "white race," but I can answer the spirit of your question quite simply: IQ. IQ is a huge predictor of economic success, and whites have higher average IQ scores than most minority groups. That factor probably carries more explanatory power than any other.
That is a myth. Do you really believe that your IQ (A western human measure) carries more capacity because of the ..... I cannot even postulate what would lead someone o believe that.
Every corner of the globe has people perfectly capable of understanding complex human thought. That you take Anglo-Saxon IQ (A normal distribution) as being above all the other humans in other parts of the globe is an oversimplification and a silly assumption.
The history and environment of Anglo Saxon society has more to do with it than a perceived greater IQ. The conditions were perfect for Newton to understand the physics of our Universe, up until then western culture really had no advantage. The other lottery the west won was the printing press.
That is a myth. Do you really believe that your IQ (A western human measure) carries more capacity because of the ..... I cannot even postulate what would lead someone o believe that.
Every corner of the globe has people perfectly capable of understanding complex human thought. That you take Anglo-Saxon IQ (A normal distribution) as being above all the other humans in other parts of the globe is an oversimplification and a silly assumption.
The history and environment of Anglo Saxon society has more to do with it than a perceived greater IQ. The conditions were perfect for Newton to understand the physics of our Universe, up until then western culture really had no advantage. The other lottery the west won was the printing press.
It actually isn't a myth. This is an empirical question that has been tested numerous times. In 1994, 52 leading university professors in relevant fields signed a statement called "Mainstream Science on Intelligence," and several of the points in the statement were directly about this issue, such as the following:
The bell curve for whites is centered roughly around IQ 100; the bell curve for American blacks roughly around 85; and those for different subgroups of Hispanics roughly midway between those for whites and blacks. The evidence is less definitive for exactly where above IQ 100 the bell curves for Jews and Asians are centered
That doesn't imply that every corner of the globe doesn't have people perfectly capable of understanding complex human thought. It is a statement about averages as the population level. Anglo-Saxon whites are not above all other humans, either -- that is not a claim I made.
IQ is a biological feature that is primarily hereditary in nature. There are all sorts of other biological features that vary based on race, and it would be strange if there was zero IQ variation between races.
This is a touchy topic. I am not white so don't blame me for not knowing about exactly which demography among whites achieved what it did in arts/science/infrastructure etc. For me its just the white civilization that created cities like Sydney and Toronto and NYC.
I created a similar topic a few years ago. There was a debate panel at my Uni and this question arose. The white guy sitting there(a very non PC pandering dude) stated simply this: Most whites have a individualist mindset. A desire to explore the unknown, a desire of creativity, a desire of self expression. Most other immigrants are simply collectivist in their approach. A Pakistani will favor Pakistani culture, an African American will usually side with his own ilk(OJ Simpson had support of 97% African Americans even though deep down they knew he was wrong). This is what made this civilization what it was especially the early 20th century generation who built these cities, lay a foundation, questioned irrationality.
He also said that this is why the world is dumbing down. Today's youngsters are self centered and clueless. Everyone is PC correct(except when it comes to issues relating to whites) and the minority model of tribalism will eventually destroy civilization. The forefathers who lived in the 20s-60s created a just society which is being slowly but surely eradicated.
What is your take on this debate. Be honest.
Your question sounds like a global one, but the response you quoted is about localized US conditions. If you intended your question to be global, the response given is irrelevant to your question. If I missed some later clarification you posted, I apologize.
Other cultures historically have been "the most successful" of their time. China explored the world for trade, and invented the clock, gunpowder, and other technologies revolutionary in their time. If you're looking for support for the idea that European-derived cultures are the most successful of the modern and late pre-modern eras, read Guns, Germs, and Steel.
I question how successful a culture that fouls its own nest will be in the long-term. I think our culture hasn't recognized the error of its economic system, and is on the path to its own destruction. The unfortunate thing is that it will take the rest of humankind down with it, along with many animal species.
There were desperate eras in Western European history where the West was embattled by what would have been considered the equivalent of today's race focused demarcation. Then it would be Religion or Culture or Regime. There was a period when Moslems were feared to be a threat to Western Civ as the Germanic tribes were prior to them, as the Celts were prior etc. etc. Obviously if you were an Etruscan the Romans were seen as savages. If a Persian then Macedonians.etc.
Military prowness on the battlefield due to a melding of technology via trade and conquest.
Geographically speaking the close quarters of cultures and the myriad geographic advantages and challenges led to inventions unique to the geography where where traded or taken and led to tecnological advances compared those on the periphery which then became objects of conquest. And if there were barriers to growth, technology led to means to circumvent those barriers. Examples being the deep water sailing vessel as an economical alternative to outright conquest of the ME and trade routes to Asia.Which were impossible. Which beget further exploration, then conquest,etc. Another example is the Conquest of the African interior could not have occurred without breechloading firearms as the military sophistication of Africans did not allow for more than coastal penetrations. The military conquest of China never occurred. That of India occurred over several life spans.
It comes down to time management. When a culture has reached a certain height where the basic essentials are met the people have more time to dream and reach out in their worlds.
I doubt the greats like Leonardo Davinci or Michelangelo would have been able to get anything done if they had to worry about being eaten by a lion or having a jerk sneak up behind them ot steal what they had.
The same goes for the founding fathers of america. They had time to talk and plan without having to worry about those pesky Indians.
In modern times if we look to the hoods where many minorities live there is not much in progress coming out of there because they need to worry about the day to day.
Give people enough time and comfort and they can do amazing things BUT there is also a level of lazy that gets in the way of progress.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
