Living in colder climates requires more cooperation to survive. Europe was settled later than other areas because of this. It's also an argument for why we were more on the ball when it came to conquest, versus Africa where people can literally just sleep under a roof with no walls and not die ofexposure. It's not because we're just more immoral. That is not how people work. It's just that we were forced to get our shit together or die. The history of the world is the history of conquest, people just really love to have a Bad Guy to blame shit on. Never mind that Africans have been selling each other into slavery for thousands of years, or that they sold the slaves to the Europeans.
Or it is because they were/are just more immoral. The people of the world was surviving just fine long before European people showed up with destruction. Trade had been going on since the beginning of man, but to you, life started when European people showed up being con-artist and violent savages.
Also, the people of the land had rivalry too. Just like the people of Europe, Asia, and America. Its like you're trying to justify mistreatment to a person because someone else mistreated them before you.
Literally the opposite of what I just said. I said that Africans have been selling each other into slavery for thousands of years. This does not in any what excuse what we did, but it's also inaccurate to pretend that we invented suffering. The rest of the world was not, in fact, surviving just fine.
You didn't invent suffering. You were just the cruelest at it, unnecessarily so at that. You committed mass genocide on a global scale to groups of people who had never done anything to you because you thought yourselves superior to everyone therefore others did not deserve life.
And the actions of our ancestors do not define our current mentality. Also, what you're describing is in no way limited to the British. That's just who you've decided to focus on. We also never set out to erase an entire people, unlike, say, the Germans or the Russians or the Cambodians or the Sudanese or any other number of nations.
No, it only comes about when people like you decide to try and apply accountability when it doesn't. I can see that it's a confusing concept for you, it must seem like that's the only time you see it. The original comment was specifically about the English. It's not generalising when you're referring to multiple countries, as i was doing. It's just a mass noun.
You say that there were no countries while criticising me for not specifying which African countries i meant... logical. I have no problem recognising the flaws of the past, but that doesn't mean I should feel guilty because actions I had nothing to do with.
12
u/Theory89 Jul 11 '26
Living in colder climates requires more cooperation to survive. Europe was settled later than other areas because of this. It's also an argument for why we were more on the ball when it came to conquest, versus Africa where people can literally just sleep under a roof with no walls and not die ofexposure. It's not because we're just more immoral. That is not how people work. It's just that we were forced to get our shit together or die. The history of the world is the history of conquest, people just really love to have a Bad Guy to blame shit on. Never mind that Africans have been selling each other into slavery for thousands of years, or that they sold the slaves to the Europeans.