2:13 Berlin Conference, not the Berlin Congress. The Congress of Berlin divided the Balkans. The Berlin Conference divided Africa. Just a pedantic comment for those who want to know more.
That’s literally what I commented too! This is such a shit video. Literally just wasted 8 minutes with redundant, commonly known information. I came to hear why it WASNT technology and it just said how bout I waste your time instead lmao
One can dispute if it was technology itself (yes, the physical enabler was technology for sure), or certain subseqent offshoots of the Platonic philosophy (i.e. Descartes and so on) that enabled to detach humans from the rest of the world (i.e. detach from nature, and declare inherent dominance above everything - plus dehumanize other humans so they can be dominated too). As the philosophical framework was one of the biggest enablers of the emeregence of the particular technologies that then enabled Europe to do what it did.
@T.K.P. Add to that xenophobia to non Europeans, extreme cruelty and strong bloodlust. However, the Creator sees and knows everything, and no evil of man shall go unpunished. Job 9:24 says it plainly what happened to the earth.
3:58 I think what people forget is that the exploitation thing was also against their own people. Children were working on vessels or in coal mines for 70 hours a week, petty criminals were shackled then shipped off to Australia as essentially slaves and forced to work for their freedom. I can see how descendants of non-europeans would feel insulted that their people were conquered and humiliated for centuries, but it was universal and europeans themselves were victims of draconian rulers and oligarchs of that time.
And that is the real key. Without these exploited starving masses to draw massive armies and settlers from, without the propaganda that their rules have divine rights to exploit internally and externally, without the encouragement of racism and exceptionalism, colonization would not have been possible. And they still do it today.
@@florinadrian5174 Colonisation of Africa by democratic France and Great Britain has put an end to the exploitation of africans slaves by africans and ottomans
@tobiasrekker5376 The european countries put an end to slavery in the world and educated people leaving in the stone age. Thanks to the european, these people can live more than 30 years.
No it was their low IQ. The “empire they lived in was not constructed by their kin, but by the empire of Tartaria. Tartarians built the wall with defenses facing inwards towards china. So once Tartary was abandoned, the Chinese assimilated the architecture and technology these godlike men of Tartaria.
Good remark ikengaspirit. I was to say it about the Persian Empires but they were descent of Indo-European nomads, Medes and Achaemenids who settled in the region
Although there was a clear technological superiority of Europe over China, I would say that it was the fragility of the chinese state and the divided population (the chinese were divided and dominated by the manchu runling class) that allowed Europe to dominate China.
You didn't quite answer the question posed at the beginning. How did we survive our weak starting point where the Umayyads had invaded frankia and Constantinople. What let us survive this lowpoint?
@Indo-Aryan9644 Thanks, but what about the crusades? Didn't they help this process allong? Frankia alone without foreign support doesn't seem to have had the strength all on its own, neither does Byzantium at the time?
This was exactly my comment. This video was a weird rambling of commonly known information and didn’t at all answer the question of its title or thumbnail. I hate bogus videos like these
@@SkyHighMelody By the time of the crusades happened, the Caliphate was fractured and their power had long waned. The caliphs were an existential threat in 650 - 850 which is before the Crusades. When Charles the Hammer checked their advance at the Battle of Tours in 732, the Frankish realm was as large as France and Germany put together.
I took a short course in technology this year and learned that technology doesn’t just refer to devices, but any form of planning that enhances human capability. Crop rotation is a technology.
"This supremacy, however has come at the cost of brutal oppression and exploitation of millions of non-European people." My question would be would conquest be any less brutal or exploitative to mankind if the globe had been conquered by Arabs or Chinese? Probably not.
@D0N-Kaiser blud he asked a theoretical question that hasnt happened. Saying they “were” worse is not simply true because we dont have an answer to the theoretical question if it had been different if it was conquered by any other people.
@D0N-KaiserWho abolished slavery while the other was still castrating their slaves? Who was instituting taxes for those that didn't follow their faith while the others were secularizing their governments? Don't give me that BS
The situation in Gaza tells us everything we need to know about oppression & Europe. The current environmental crisis & threat of nuclear war also point to the limitations of the current socio-economic system.
The Aztec and All the native tribes of America were so evil and ruthless to outsiders and so we had to retaliate. Now they all live in small patches of land that typically hold no beneficial resources or useful hunting grounds. We all know they never would have given us Europeans friendship. Even though all of us left Europe and arrived in the Americas as migrants seeking a better sustainable future for their offspring. no matter how many times we try to come to a settlement with a tribe local to wherever we wanted to build our Homestead we would eventually be attacked in our houses brutally killed scalped and worst of all they would even kill infants. There’s a freaking reason why they live in such miserable conditions like they do to this day. It was justified.
*agreed!* *The Aztec and All the native tribes of America were so evil and ruthless to outsiders and so we had to retaliate.* *Now they all live in small patches of land that typically hold no beneficial resources or useful hunting grounds. We all know they never would have given us Europeans friendship. Even though all of us left Europe and arrived in the Americas as migrants seeking a better sustainable future for their offspring. no matter how many times we try to come to a settlement with a tribe local to wherever we wanted to build our Homestead we would eventually be attacked in our houses brutally killed scalped and worst of all they would even kill infants. There’s a freaking reason why they live in such miserable conditions like they do to this day. It was justified.*
@@mr.nobody4529 Quit with your prejudice, they weren't making pyramids of skulls like the Mongols, sacrifying over 500000 people of other tribes per year to a sun god like the Mayans... they weren't fighting nude with spears in 1900 like some tribes... You don't destroy China and conquer almost all of the globe by being lowly barbarians.
@@mr.nobody4529 Don't know if you have seen how African tribes act when they conquer each other. Rwanda is a good example of how brutal Africans can be towards each other.
Short answer is Europe moved on to capitalism faster than other world regions. The more effective your socio-economic formation is, the more chances you have to expand.
Without the Americas, there is nothing. Give you a new earth, and your country will suddenly become stronger. There is no single country in the Eastern Hemisphere that can fight against the entire Western Hemisphere. The Western Hemisphere is almost one, and the Eastern Hemisphere is separated from each other. This is very unfavorable. Catholicism is lifted The threat of Islam has been eliminated, and the Orthodox Church has also eliminated the threat of Tengger. It has nothing to do with the technology and economy you mentioned. If these were true, they would not be threatened with destruction and would have jumped into the sea to survive.
It was absolutely because of better cultural organization, technology and organization. Europe was destined to dominate the world after they industrialized. The rest of the world was still in the agricultural era when Europe was mass producing goods and organizing society. Christianity played a huge role in Europe eventually dominating the world.
...si chiama anche "selezione naturale"...del resto noi europei nel corso dei secoli ci siamo dovuti difendere più volte da molte invasioni...e siamo geneticamente il crogiolo di molte razze e società...Se non fossimo stati noi a invadere altri continenti, sicuramente sarebbero stati altri a farlo...potendolo fare ovviamente!
If it was Christianity, the middle east would've conquered the world from where it originated, if it was cultural supremacy why did most of Europe didn't colonise or got conquered by non Europeans and why is Europe losing its relevance today?
The single reason Europeans conquered 84% of the world is they used the printing press and moveable type to provide books for the widespread growth of literacy. This enabled them to record and share information for advancements in technology, science and corporate enterprise with greater rapidity than other civilizations. Columbus sailed to America 40 years after Gutenberg published a paper bible around 1450.
Europe already had the best standards mf living in the world alsready before the renaissanec and was very rich, if i rember i saw a 50 minute video that it was actually european mzrchant guiltes or guiltes athta made europe roch therfore powerful I think it was a czech guy that did the vid
Yea right Europe was striving with poverty,fifth, maniacs Europe had hardly nothing to trade with the people of other nations other than rum,guns, disease, trickery, thus they took over the world
Ordinary Europeans only got literate 170 years ago. Reading and writing was a privilege for kings and clergy only, look it up. North Africa has always had literacy, first symbol alphabet, (Ge'ez from which Aramaic developed) they had learning centres and the first university in the world is there, at the same time as Europeans were stuck in the dark ages. Muslims kept learning alive in Europe during the dark ages. India has some of the oldest architecture and civilizations in the world, along with China and other Asian countries, not to mention the civilizations of the Americas. 200 years ago Europeans were still getting around on animal transport which pooped on sand streets, this juxtaposed against glorious ancient buildings which they couldn't possible have had the technology for. Who really built that is a good question.
@chrisalex82 Lol Medieval Europe, nothing quite like throwing ones poop out the window into the street every morning. That's why it was so unhygienic and diseases spread whilst the people thought it must be the night air. Right.
@@ashton1952 How twisted your perception of history is, it's astonishing. So the Greeks and Romans were not Europeans? Why are there so many illiterates in North Africa today, when they "always had literacy"? Even the ordinary people? Muslims live in the dark age nowadays after they had their golden age end centuries ago. For the same reason India and the indigenous Americas (whatever for you brought them in?) did not add single enhancement to human development for centuries. Europeans conquered the world because of overpopulation, religion and obviously advanced weaponry. Their opponents were too weak to withstand, plain and simple
But seeing oneself as the best is something every civilization does (until now). That is not going to give you the high self confidence level to project power outward from your native geographical range.
Yes, and then finally War. Lots of it. As plants fight for the light and soar into the sky, or the ant colonies that wage wars for resources and their own continuation, or the birds that dance competing against one another so they may too have continuation. Life itself has but one end - growth, expansion, greatness, and one means, War. It is no surprise then, when we look at Europe that has done so much civilizational "progress", that looking at it's earliest history after the Roman Empire, or if one really wishes even, the entire Roman Republic's history and The Greek city states beforehand, War was a constant and primary actor behind everything.
It's not a dichotomy. Doing life well, is about balance. There's a reason every empire that thought itself noble and united and great......ended up in the dust. Greatness is constant evolution and freedom constant responsability.
1:54 - There were two separate meetings held in Berlin under Bismarck- a “Congress” (1878) and a “Conférence” (1884-85): at the Congress of Berlin (June 13 -July 13, 1878), the European Powers regulated spheres of influence in the Balkans following the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-78; the Berlin Conference (November 15, 1884 - February 26, 1885) divided Africa among the European Great Powers.
One reason not mentioned in this video is the death of the Mongol Great Khan in 1241. Per their custom, all the Mongol armies around the world then had to return to their capital to choose a successor. At that time the Mongols who had entered Europe were wintering in the Hungarian plains, preparing for their push Westward. There was no European army to their West that was strong enough to stand in their way. Had the Great Khan not died, there's no telling how much farther West the Mongols would've conquered, thus changing European history for at least two centuries before their power finally faded.
Outstanding comment! The Mongol armies also “cleared the board” for Europe because they decimated the Persian cultures and armies. Thus ending the golden age of middle eastern enlightenment and virtually ending their threats to Western Europe.
As the Mongols got to Hungary/Croatia, they found that the castles were something they did not understand how to deal with. This was also a big reason why they didn't push further. Throwing arrows from horses doesn't beat castles.
@adamknight5089 Interesting. Can you provide a source? As far as I know the Mongol armies included Chinese engineers who handled their siege craft. I just don't know if this was already true when they were pushing into Europe. I know they would go around areas they could not defeat. Apparently having a potential enemy at their rear did not bother them.
Religious societies all end up looking backwards, their orientation is old is better and this new modern stuff is evil and decadent. That reason they always get outpaced.
It would not be possible for 19th C Europeans to "oppress billions" given that there were only 1.5 billion people in the world in 1900, up from just 1 billion in 1800.
None of those billion alive in 1800 would have been included in the 1.5B a century later. At least a couple of billion people lived and died during that century 🤷🏻♂️ So it might be possible (probably still a bit of an exaggeration)
@chrisalex82 Yes, for a short period of history. But their misdeeds were similar to their predecessors since the neolithic. On the other hand, accidentally or otherwise, they spread the scientific, industrial and democratic revolutions that mean we all now look back in horror at how hard and amoral life used to be.
Well, the europeans were born on some of the best lands, and their constant fighting with each other drove for innovation. You can sustain a much larger population from farmlands than from sand and tundra and jungles Edit: key words Localised Warfare Climate Stability Fewer foreign invasions
lucky in timing. just when the rest were declining after hundreds or thousand year reign, europe ascended, beat everybody else. now after 500 years, europe is declining as others are rising. com back 500 years if we survive and history could be very very different.
Guns in practical are you kidding me like the whole point of guns would have been to use them to protect cities and stuff the reason why the Chinese limited gun technology was because they were more obsessed with controlling their own people than fighting foreigners. This just sounds like a video to try to make it seem like Europeans warranty advanced it was just dumb luck, when the fact is they outcompeted those societies. It's like the whole Congress of Berlin in the partition of Africa literally had to wait until technology was advanced enough for them to be able to firmly colonize Africa because they were so many people there and so many diseases wiping out the Europeans that tried to settle
No, the chinese used the gunpowder first to become immortals, then for fireworks, also to some military usage (remember gunpowder was invented in 9th century china and still were conquered by foreigners, the mongols, british and qing , who are a manchu people) You have to know how to use the technology.
@saguntum-iberian-greekkons7014 that's because the Mongols also use guns and explosives 🙄 and the Chinese were the first to invent the guns. The Mongols captured many Chinese engineers and Smith's and made them make guns and stuff for them the Mongols literally used explosive weapons while attacking Japan centuries later. No the reason China got Concord like that is because they were more concerned about controlling their own population than conquering other people because they suffer from the issue of being a super-powered surrounded by weak powers. China only ever got Concord whenever basically they fell apart and were killing each other all the time leaving open huge rooms for foreigners to conquer them like the Mongols and the manchurians. They were not a United empire whenever they got Concord by somebody like that. They isolated themselves for centuries and that caused them to fall behind technologically.
The new world plant that produces quinine had to come first before Europeans could survive and go to Africa, so that means Africa has be after the Americas.
Muskets are surprisingly poor weapon against nomadic horse people, who were considered the main security threat by the QIng. Then it turned out the "foreign barbarians" would arrive using ships. The maritime technology was even more severely neglected, as ships only needed to travel the long Chinese coastline. In contrast to all the inland seas, straits, etc. that European continent features.
It had a lot to do with dumb luck. Only survived Mongol invasions due to dumb luck, and then accidentally ran into a bunch of free real estate in the Americas with 90% of the population dying to old world disease. Even the plague from Asia that wiped out 50% of Europe helped them conquer the new world lol
There are many reasons for this, but the two key drivers were military competition and the reformation. If the romans had unified Europe in the same way as China we may not have had a European expansion into the world.
Don't forget the advent of mercantilism and later capitalism, which incentivised both private companies and states to seek out wealth far afield and allowed them to raise capital and grow their economies faster than their rivals.
I agree with you about mercantilism and with the video, but there is a subtext that is not mentioned here. The Dutch fought for independence from the Hapsburgs for 100 years. It was a very brutal struggle. During that time, the Dutch improved weaponry, transformed the way that battles were fought, adopted a new form of government (during the struggle for independence), and generally advanced science. So that part of the story is apart from European conquest of non-European lands, but that internal story is central to the larger story. The Dutch were "incentivized" by a desire to relieve themselves of monarchy, i.e. the rule of a king who did not speak their language.
@@nightvvisher7713 "harsher less fruitful lands" sure bro, the Mediterranean climate of the south and Oceanic-continental climate of the north are totally harsher than the literal deserts that made up North Africa to Central Asia.
@@ikengaspirit3063 north africa was famous for it grain shipments, and during the middle ages the muslims governed from eastern anatolia to almost the top of spain. the Mediterranean climate was mostly muslim
.... why is 90% of the comment section either supremacists that say Europeans are somehow inherently superior, or cultural relativists that say Europeans are inherently evil? People complain about twitter and tiktok etc. but youtube sometimes really takes the cake
@@wersab5960 The fact that basically all humans across the globe alive today (with few exceptions) view genocide, slavery, cannibalism and human sacrifice as something bad is only because of European influence. That doesn't mean, Europeans always behave-d morally superior or did never violate their own moral ideals, we share all the vices other cultures and civiliations also have. But at least we developed those higher standards which even most other people agree upon. Even when they condemn and hate us for not being perfect role models ourselves.
But came up with a stupid narrative of history. Europen conquest spree only started when industrial revolution was in full swing. How Europe got to industrial revolution? Looting of Americas is how. That's whst made them rich; the riches reinvested to industrialisation. Also, cos all of Asian powers were in decline. But bro didn't read history, did he? Only dreamed up European supremacy.
Long story short:Because European Cultures(Mostly Western Cathlolic-Protestant)are adaptive,strong and advanced.They take the best from others,like from Romans,Middle and Far east and reincorporate it in itself.
European countries had organization, cooperation, technology, documented history and constant wars with countries also possessing their advanced technologies, fueling the need for furthered technological advancement.
Absolutely none of these has any role in these. Europe conquered so much cos rest of the world's empire was in serious decline. Also, cos they became rich by deleting (E. Clensing) native Americans and exploiting their land.
@@saguntum-iberian-greekkons7014 uh some african countries were once richer than the european continent. Mansa Musa was the richest man who ever lived.
@@villiamfangy6205 having access to gold mines doesnt mean you are able to develop yourself an economy, compare it to to the 3/4 of the arab gulf countries, they litteraly sit on oil. Without gold mines or oil these states wouldnt survive long. FYI the mali empire got absorbed by other african empires,. The thing is too know how develop when you have so abundan riches
@@saguntum-iberian-greekkons7014 Doesn't matter the Europeans got their wealth by extracting resources from other countries. It's still going on today, that's why neo-colonialism is a thing.
Not enough of an explanation. Why did Europeans discover the rest of the world? How did they establish hegemony almost immediately? How did they finance all that enterprises?
@@ChadreiOlaño rest are quite sophisticated and colossal in size that they aren't that easy to identify unlike European ones! still, I did caught Canada and India at times...
In the early modern era, (17th and 18th centuries) you’re correct in that technology wasn’t what enabled European colonialism. It was diseases that native people weren’t familiar with. That’s why in this period, only the New World was colonized. Europeans didn’t have a meaningful technology advantage over anyone else on the planet, but they did have diseases that Indigenous peoples of the Americas had no resistance to. It’s estimated that 90% of Native Americans lost their lives to European diseases, not to conflict with Europeans. However, after the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, it was indeed technology that allowed them to be successful, so you’re wrong on that point. Europeans were now able to colonize Africa, West and South Asia, and China because of superior technology.
europes ability for the industrial revolution was due to their success and wealth from the americas, which they got for almost free. They can then build more industries, more weaponry, more ships. The spiral started in the Americas..
LMAO, not whole of these mentioned parts were ever colonised by Europeans. BTW, it is Indian Subcontinent not South Asia. The armies of Indian states and empires were in no way technologically inferior than those of Europe. In fact, were even superior in some cases and Maratha Empire of India even defeated all the major European powers in various ware before finally losing to the British EIC in 1803-43. Nepal and Bhutan somehow remained independent of British influence and rule. Rest is history.
This is the reason the French run a shadow network of informal empires that control the banking, military, politics and trade of their colonies to date. They still hold the reserves for their currencies and print them at a premium cost. They also pay the rebel troops to cause instability in these countries. This has all been exposed since the formation of the SAHEL regional unity between Burkino Faso, Niger and Mali, who have expelled the French troops that were enabling the rebels. These countries are an example of what Afrika is capable of without western interference, they thrive despite the challenges of facing sanctions and having their neighboring countries turned against them for refusing to be fellow slaves of the west.
I think Muslims had a very similar mindset and determination, but they failed. I suppose technologies may have been the factor that set the Europeans apart from the Muslims.
After millennia of fighting high IQ adversaries amongst themselves, the rest of the world didn’t stand a chance. Northern Europeans are also larger and stronger on average than most everyone else.
What a loud of rubbish during this time most European were shorter than 5'9 where as on average the sub saharan african had about an inch over their European counterpart nordic or not
We are gods according to the many other races we met. There’s something in their subconscious mind that tells us all humans had a connection ruled by these “aríans” or “annunaki” from the mountains of the Andes in South America to the aired climate of east Africa. Mzungu👌🏻
Boat evolution began in the Mediterranean where the water was much calmer. By the time they were ready to travel to America they were ready for rougher sea water.
It did probably begin there, but boats capable of intercontinental travel were developed by the portuguese around the 15th century and Portugal has a coastline that is only bathed almost exceptionally by the Atlantic ocean.
@@insxmniac7052 nope not at all ....... the first tranatlantic crossing was done by the norwegians and the portugese ships that inpired the age of exploration where a combination of north see hulls with West african sails
@@insxmniac7052 Yea I know especially with the help of the arabs with the sail. But prior to them it mainly evolved around the Mediterranean from phonecians, egyptians etc.
@@baronbrummbar8691 The type of boats the vikings used was nowhere near comparable to what left from Portugal and spain. The boats that left from Portugal and Spain evolved from the Mediterranean area , it's evolution evolving over time including additions from arabs.
The leap from the 8th century to 1884 leaves more than a thousand years of history unexplained. So it appears that the point of this video is to explain how European powers came together to further exploit what had already been achieved through hundreds of years of colonialism and slavery. Perhaps a better explanation of why Eurasians succeeded where others lagged behind is presented by Jarod Diamond’s book Guns, Germs and Steele: The Fates of Human Societies. The advantages provided by the domestication of available animals and plants and benefits of great geography and climate cannot be ignored.
Perhaps a better explanation, but one that's been criticized since it's publication by anthropologists and from what I recall, some of its main theses have been recently falsified in peer-reviewed literature.
Europeans are the reason Europe became great. Because once Europeans entered America it became relevant and more advanced immediately. Other Europeans even turned South Africa into a notable country until the early 1990s. Every place with Europeans is better than without Europeans. You can even observe that within the USA where places with non-White populations are catastrophic hellholes. What more proof do you need. Europe itself was the probably the hardest place to master, certainly harder than the eastern mediterranean. Some Asians did well and sometimes in history surpassed us. The Chinese come to mind. Japan as well. Europeans and East Asians are peak civilization builders. But we are losing that capability right now because we are distracted by hedonism and hostile ideologies like marxism. We have to go back to what was normal 120 years ago.
@@joaogabrielimperial7777 China is grate just because European American investment if was not that China will stay in the same place they used to be in hundreds years ago
It was the invention of double-entry bookkeeping and the subsequent development of Capitalism and Corporate structures. Way more important as a factor than a lot of people realize.
By extension, this is why the USA is unconquerable today because the American public has focused so heavily on military technologies and constant struggle thereby developing the leadership and capabilities of the services endlessly for hundreds of years.
@@GlobalMajority007 The oceans are big huge boost for sure as well as the terrain. Nonetheless, the population is focused on defense so the military does not need to be. believe me on this point. My immediate circle of coworkers have between them more than 300 weapons and half of us are prior military and many of the rest former police and fire. Just sayin'...
It was not the technology. It was the ideas. Bureaucracy and record-keeping allowed most empires to establish themselves by ingratiating themselves as administrators and educators of new and more efficient mechanisms of tax and trade securitization. Foreign rulers were often NOT conquered unless they tried to raid the colonial trade partners or the colonial trade. Most foreign rulers acceded to colonial control because it proved to be a massive benefit to them, both in terms of personal security and wealth. It also gave them access to European manufacturing, technologies and weapons, thus reinforcing their state's security over rival powers.
Great video and explanation, thank you! The graphics made me nostalgic for early 2000's PC game cinematics on Windows XP: Age of Empires, Conquest of the New World, Kingdom O' Magic, Voyage Century... ah, good times.
well if the Inca Empire was not in a civil war the Spanish wouldn't have had a chance to conquer Peru, that's a fact, at the time industrialization was not a thing and fire arms only shoot once each 5 minutes lol
You're looking back and see the cumbersome hand cannons. At the time, they were peak technology and the none of the natives were ready. The literally thought thunder and lighting were being tossed at them. They were 1,000s of years behind the curve. It was only ever going to end one way.
@michaelhowell2326 very few canons, very few fire guns, very few horses and basically no support from the crown most of the Spanish conquest in America was made by private means and with native support, and again the Inca empire was way bigger and powerful than aztecs and but it was in a civil when the spanish just arrived many tribes like the cañaris in Ecuador were massacred and their pregnant women killed by Atahualpa and they wanted to see him dead lol
@@michaelhowell2326 there was already an expedition of a Portuguese explorer called Alejo Garcia to conquer the Inca Empire, he failed, and the own Pizarro himself claim "if we would have arrived before the civil war (during Huaynacapac's rule) there would be no chance we could put a step in these lands"
The cultural traits that led to Western global domination long predated industrialization, and in fact were why the industrial (and scientific) revolution eventually happened to begin with. Some of these traits go back to classical Greece and Rome, who also dominated the known world, while others developed later or accompanied Christianization. The short version is European individuals were freer to innovate, compete, question leaders, and have a stake in their own societies as citizens than the rest of the world. Thucydides basically laid out the template while explaining why Greeks fought so much more effectively than their Eastern opponents.
You and many others forget that the Mongol and Turkic invasions affected the Middle East heavily. Much of the advancenents were destroyed by Mongols and the Turks. Before that Middle Eastern countries were mostly ahead of Europeans. After the Mongol Invasion what remained from the Middle Eastern knowledge stayed in Spain before it got conquered by Europeans. Many books and knowledge stayed in Europe and the Persians and Arabs had lost now everything. Also the Ottoman Empire afterwards halted much progress in the Middle East, Greece and Balkans. Greece that was always progressive for example couldn't keep with the Europeans up anymore after the Ottomans have ruled over them. All in all the Mongol invasion and Turkic invasion of West Asia contributed much to the end of Middle Eastern progress and the begin of European progress
We should add also that europeans weren't constrained by religious superstitions, technology's despise(as in China), were more pragmatical than their adversaries. Add to this print's invention, that allowed to spread and maintain knowledge.
I think you should summarize it in a different manner - you made some few interesting indications: The elementary question is WHY Europeans have been acting like that and what is their mentality (way before Francs, there have been also e.g. the Roman Empire, before that the Greeks and before that the Indo-Europeans etc. 1. Surving the harsh climate of Europe requires a planning mentality, otherwise people will starve, 2. The fertile lands generated a lot of overpopulation in "good years" who had to compete for everything - this mindset never allowed that 1 guy ruled Europe... looking at the world's map, indeed the location and the climate conditions of this region are unique. Planning and competition have been triggering innovation and permanently questioning whether one does things still right. This is in my view the very basic element that drives even today Europe and the West. Countries/civilizations with a different development path and a different "survival"-mentality have certainly to struggle with this type of overprogressive thinking. Some are adopting to it (or got the point what it is all about) in a successful way. Some others not. Note that especially countries in colder climate regions do it in a better way.
The conquest of America by the Spanish was not really facilitated by the spread of diseases, +95% of the armies that "conquered" it were composed by natives who allied the Spanish and joined them. Technology was simply not advanced enough and Spain population was too low to conquer it by force against all natives. Most of the natives joined the Spanish and that's why the conquest was so fast. Just speculation, but natives in America were still in the Stone Age (not meaning to be discriminatory it's just a historical fact), considering we are all humans same intelligent, if someone that has technology and knowledge +3000 years more advanced than you, wouldn't you join them? Also, for example in the case of the Aztecs, they were really opressor rulers, basically all their neighbours hated them, the Spanish arrival was just the last straw.
To over simplify. Asia had the spices and Europe didn’t. Europe was motivated to explore and develop their technology to get the spices. Asia didn’t need to do that nearly as much since the spices were near by.
For now but it won’t last trust me. European dominance is fairly new and guaranteed to die off. Celebrate now but your great grandchildren will see the fall happen before their very own eyes. Don’t worry though in fairness all of humanity will eventually parish not just Europeans. We are all going out like the dinosaurs.
The clip never truly stated why Europe was so successful. I believe Europe felt they were superior beings and so they were and as for the terrible situation Europe is in today… compared to the past it could be easily overcome with a great leader and a purge of its destructive forces, which must be done if it is to survive and thrive!!!
@ The European thought they were superior so they were. If they thought as you they would have been overrun so then probably most of human accomplishments wouldn’t have been achieved. I’m sure your political/social beliefs are as those of the progressive Western Leaders of today that will Spiral Europe back to the dark ages. If the Jews didn’t believe they were chosen and with all its enemies throughout history they wouldn’t exist today!!!
@ Yes, but those immigrants were invaders and those invaders weren’t supported by the aristocracy of the conquered country as it is happening today in the West. I in fact the European aristocracies eventually moved the invading forces out of Europe costing Europeans much of their young men. I don’t know of a civilization where the aristocracy encouraged their demised???
Face it. Its because they wanted to. No one else was traveling the world doing it. First step in doing a thing is to have a desire to do it in the first place.
"How did Europe transform from a land of decentralized kingdoms, to one of the most technologically advanced empires in human history?" This statement implies that over the 1800s, Europeans of various nations came closer to each other, to justify calling all Europe one empire. But they were just as fiercely competitive as ever. They built empires in part to compete with each other. Did they share commonalities as members of "Western Civilization"? Certainly. But so did everyone in Europe during Medieval Christendom.
In fact Western Europe was a fortress since the middle of 12th century. Since this time, no alien army non allied with Western Europeans has conquered a bit of Western Europe. Then all gain and loss in war were between western Europeans. And it was so competitive, that nobody get the upper hand over everyone at the point of making a big empire on all the western Europe , or at least not on the long time like Napoleon and hitler. Nor the Muslim who were repelled in Spain, nor the Ottoman empire who was stopped at Vienna , nor the Mongols who were not really deeper than eastern Europe, has succeed to conquer western Europe since that time.
Industrialization and commoners becoming more valuable after the plague and the ottoman heavy taxing which cause Europeans to go around Africa to go to china for Chinese goods and eventually try to go directly to china to get Chinese goods.
It was also institutions. China was a vast centralized empire. Europe was a mishmash of competing states which had to constantly shift their institutions
a simplified explanation but broadly true. china had a steel industrial revolution 500 years before europe. it made china more advanced then but did not hold out.
One word. Jesus. Christianity gave Europe a universal faith through which they could transmit their culture to other races, making the spreading of western culture far easier than it was when the Greeks conquered the Middle East but faced resistance from Persians and Jews who overthrew them by the time of the Romans. Christianity also gave Europe an intellectual and scientific base in the Church which wound up creating western science, which in turn created industrialism down the line.
@@viktorberta4953 China learned that the hard way when they lost to England during the Opium War. And before them, the Incas and Aztecs learned that the hard way when they lost to Spain in the 1500s.
For real Some say " gngn mongol empire bigger than roman Empire" EXEPT where the roman was exceptionnal too (like égyptian and greek empires) was they know how to have SOLIDES foundation to keep the civilisation to stand on his feet And Christianity is propice to this vision, even in the symbolisms, the wine and the bread is the spine of sedentarity, the spine of civilisation, the spine of stability ;) Thats why chrisianity alway was more propice to sedentarity peoples while islam nd judaïsm have a tribes and nomad visions of things and values Judaism and islam project to have a civilisation and to mimic sédentarity , they talk of " Kingdom of God" but with a totally nomadic visions it cant work! They just cant continue like this , Christ is King
In 2012, a team of psychiatrists, behavioral psychologists, neurologists and neuropsychiatrists from the Harvard Medical School published a research that suggested the development of a new diagnostic category of psychiatric disorders related to religious delusion and hyperreligiosity. According to the authors, in the case of Jesus, it could have been: paranoid schizophrenia, bipolar and schizoaffective disorders.[7] They hypothesized that Jesus may have sought death through "suicide-by-proxy" (indirect suicide). en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_health_of_Jesus
Historian Ian Morris compared the development of Western Europe vs China in his books, including "Why the West rules for now". overall China was more advanced vs Europe from 1 - 1400 Ad. Unlike China Europe didn't unify into one large kingdom. Europe remained a series of smaller kingdoms that competed with each other and were able to hone their military skills. Europe did take Chinese inventions like gunpowder (likely brought over by the Mongols) as well as the compass and improved them. The combination of guns, sails, the lateen sail (from Arabia) and navigation technology and the competition spurred by the desire to profit from trade led to constant improvements in technology especially by the western european maritime powers. Europe had one huge advantage over China in that the distance to North America was much shorter across the Atlantic and the prevailing trade winds that made travel easier in both directions were not as far apart as in the Pacific. The journey across the Pacific (as found by the Spanish was much more difficult and took far longer). If there are any major inventions to give credit to it would be the movable type printing press invented Gutenberg at around the same time 1450 as the fall of Constantinople to the Ottoman Turks. I know there are other instances of the printing press with movable type (Korea, CHina etc) the fact is Gutenbergs press was the real game changer. In only the first 50 years there were millions of books printed. The spread of knowledge was a major spur in innovation. The flight of many learned scholars from Constantinople also helped the bring the knowledge and books from the early Greeks to Western Europe. One could say 1450 was the major turning point as the Turks cut off the spice trade with the east thereby driving the Portuguese and other explorers to bypass the Turks. The one difference too is the mercantilism and the rise of the joint stock company in the west. So much of the trade and colonialism was the rise of large trading companies like the Dutch East India company, the British East India Company, the Hudson's bay company, even the Jamestown and early settlements in America were corporate ventures. A lot of this has roots in the trading cities like Venice and Genoa which were governed by patricians (rather than Kings or Sultans) and were all about making profits. The other most important invention is the steam engine. This led to further innovation in trade, kicked off the industrial revolution that was also helped by the scientific inquiry that had been practiced all over Europe. Once again the lack of a central power made it easier for scholars and scientists to move where there was more freedom of thought. Obviously western Europe led a bloody colonial war against the rest of the world which helped Europe get rich in the process. So while there is a lot of backlash at the concept of colonialism, this would have been true for any other empires that were happening over the last few thousand years. The Mongols subjugated and killed millions (probably 10% of the world population) the Turks and other Muslim empires had no problem conquering other lands (even parts of Europe), the Zulus etc. One can also add that the rise of democracy and the improved standard of living for everyone in the world was also a consequence of Europe's domination. There was no particular intention to spread democracy but it happened anyway. Ultimately it will come to everyone, including China, Russia etc.
The Chinese were not more advanced than Ancient Greece and Rome from 300 BC to 500 AD. Have you been to Rome??? And Ian Morris does not say that in his book.
This analysis is flawed on many levels. The GDP of India and China was 75% of the world in 1750. The industrial revolution in the West would reverse this to where by 1875 the Western nations would be 75% of GDP. However it was not just technology and military domination that this transition occurred. In 15th century China had larger ships, maps, compasses, sails and rudders that would dominate European ships. However the routes to Asia from Europe required larger ocean navigation. The Dutch had windmills to power sawmills. The British had rivers that permitted ease to the ocean. These two small nations would dominate the seas. China would turn inward to protect against enemies from the north. Japan would also become insular politically. Meanwhile the Dutch and English would develop rule of law democracy, as well as a capitalist system of finance. Even the greatest technology needs development or seed capital. This is why European nations took domination of world GDP. While most nations were ruled by monarchs and autocrats the Western nations became democracies and capitalist governed by the rule of law.
@@timber750, JQ? Jewish Qingdao? Jelly Queen? Jesus Quaestor? What is JQ? He ignored geography and the factor of Europe becoming capitalist faster than other regions. That's key mistakes of the video.
You forget one thing, WW1 and WW2 were destructives for the countries, with millions of deads. The old wars were at far more lower scale, but sufficient to win experience, knowledge, new technologies, etc... Weapons were far less destructives on soldiers ad surrounding, and the armies were smaller. Since the 12th century Western Europe was not invaded by enemies countries from outside.
@ It’s surely not that simple; in fact, it’s quite complicated…but Greece is more than an origin: it is also the route and the destination (and I’d say the same thing if I were - G-D forbid! - a Turk).
I’m not ashamed to say that I am proud of my history! Our ancestors went through hell and back and through it all were able to turn around and conquer the world! What powerful stuff. Thank God for Western Civilization.
No one is saying you should be ashamed for it but one can not turn a blind eye to the evil acts they did to get their wealth. But I need not worry for what goes around surely comes back around
@davidalily6 by all means be critical of the west. However, understand it's philosophy read its history, turn a critical eye to your own history and what they believed amd behaved see if you want to take revenge then Are you gonna build a better future or burn down the world for past grievances
@@jbone9900not really, European technology was rising through the roman times and collapsed after fall of Rome for 1000 years before rising again, doing it twice isn’t just luck 😉
I was always under the assumption that climate and geography in Europe also played a big role in that. The mild climate and little harsh geography in most parts of Europe made it possible to accommodate many people within a relatively small area. With a big population you have a) bigger numbers and b) the chance for specializing of professions and and research. That leading to many big players within a small area and taking a step further to those big players widening their boarders at other fronts.
In this 1884 conference in Berlin, not only the subdivision of Africa was defined, but also of Asia, I don't know why they have now "forgotten" that Asia was also subdivided, colonized and had its independence at the same time as Africa, it will be Why does talking only about Africa bring more audiences? It can only be, since they conveniently forget that the entire Indian subcontinent, the Middle East, Southeast Asia, the Indo-Pacific region and all of North and Central Asia were also under European rule.
@@baronbrummbar8691 The allotment of Asia was also at the Berlin conference in 1884, now there is this very strange and selective forgetfulness, especially because the countries of Asia put their feet on the ground, looked up and walked forward instead of practicing victimism and poverty. , while Africa preferred to stagnate, delve into social communism and outsource blame, which is a dream come true for fundamentalists, jihadists of the global far left to embrace as a noble cause without any nobility
2:13 Berlin Conference, not the Berlin Congress. The Congress of Berlin divided the Balkans. The Berlin Conference divided Africa. Just a pedantic comment for those who want to know more.
I mean, why would anyone choose to merely _confer_ in Berlin, if they had the option to _congregate_ the whole time, anyway?
@@mydogbullwinkle😂
Thank you from a “teacher’s pet” who very much enjoys learning things he didn’t know before.
The West, the whites invented the concentration camps, the atomic bombs and bombed two non whites cities.
Quite Ironic I made that mistake considering the Berlin Congress literally carved up the country where I am from.
Ah yes. Instead of technology... technologies!
That’s literally what I commented too! This is such a shit video. Literally just wasted 8 minutes with redundant, commonly known information. I came to hear why it WASNT technology and it just said how bout I waste your time instead lmao
@@NeedSomeNuanceshit pointless video but pretty well made tbh
@@NeedSomeNuance Very poor indeed. I made it through half, but I knew it was dung well before half.
One can dispute if it was technology itself (yes, the physical enabler was technology for sure), or certain subseqent offshoots of the Platonic philosophy (i.e. Descartes and so on) that enabled to detach humans from the rest of the world (i.e. detach from nature, and declare inherent dominance above everything - plus dehumanize other humans so they can be dominated too). As the philosophical framework was one of the biggest enablers of the emeregence of the particular technologies that then enabled Europe to do what it did.
@@NeedSomeNuanceAlso.. am I the only one that noticed the absence of the largest empire ever, the Mongols
"The Single Reason Europe Conquered 84% of The World"
Video then goes on to provide over 50 reasons...
None of which was exclusive to Europe.
And end up on conclusion that it was technology and superior knowledge.
👍
@T.K.P. Add to that xenophobia to non Europeans, extreme cruelty and strong bloodlust. However, the Creator sees and knows everything, and no evil of man shall go unpunished. Job 9:24 says it plainly what happened to the earth.
@@T.K.P. And yet ordinary Europeans were illiterate until 170 yrs ago
3:58
I think what people forget is that the exploitation thing was also against their own people.
Children were working on vessels or in coal mines for 70 hours a week, petty criminals were shackled then shipped off to Australia as essentially slaves and forced to work for their freedom.
I can see how descendants of non-europeans would feel insulted that their people were conquered and humiliated for centuries, but it was universal and europeans themselves were victims of draconian rulers and oligarchs of that time.
And that is the real key. Without these exploited starving masses to draw massive armies and settlers from, without the propaganda that their rules have divine rights to exploit internally and externally, without the encouragement of racism and exceptionalism, colonization would not have been possible.
And they still do it today.
@@florinadrian5174 Colonisation of Africa by democratic France and Great Britain has put an end to the exploitation of africans slaves by africans and ottomans
The Europeans countries did terrible misdeeds.
@@tobiasrekker5376 So did literally every other country that's ever existed.
@tobiasrekker5376 The european countries put an end to slavery in the world and educated people leaving in the stone age. Thanks to the european, these people can live more than 30 years.
Yeah, when it comes to China, it was mostly their cultural ego that would eventually allow Europe to dominate
No it was their low IQ. The “empire they lived in was not constructed by their kin, but by the empire of Tartaria. Tartarians built the wall with defenses facing inwards towards china. So once Tartary was abandoned, the Chinese assimilated the architecture and technology these godlike men of Tartaria.
@@BARBARYAN. Were the Tartarians Golden and Bloody Haired Fair Men?.
Good remark ikengaspirit.
I was to say it about the Persian Empires but they were descent of Indo-European nomads, Medes and Achaemenids who settled in the region
Although there was a clear technological superiority of Europe over China, I would say that it was the fragility of the chinese state and the divided population (the chinese were divided and dominated by the manchu runling class) that allowed Europe to dominate China.
@@ikengaspirit3063 A man of culture I see.
You didn't quite answer the question posed at the beginning. How did we survive our weak starting point where the Umayyads had invaded frankia and Constantinople. What let us survive this lowpoint?
Eastern Roman Empire Checking the Advance in the East
while
Kingdom of Asturias/Francia checking the Advance in The West
@Indo-Aryan9644 Thanks, but what about the crusades? Didn't they help this process allong? Frankia alone without foreign support doesn't seem to have had the strength all on its own, neither does Byzantium at the time?
This was exactly my comment. This video was a weird rambling of commonly known information and didn’t at all answer the question of its title or thumbnail. I hate bogus videos like these
@@SkyHighMelody By the time of the crusades happened, the Caliphate was fractured and their power had long waned. The caliphs were an existential threat in 650 - 850 which is before the Crusades. When Charles the Hammer checked their advance at the Battle of Tours in 732, the Frankish realm was as large as France and Germany put together.
@@Indo-Aryan9644now the EU letting them in by millions 😂
I took a short course in technology this year and learned that technology doesn’t just refer to devices, but any form of planning that enhances human capability.
Crop rotation is a technology.
Crop rotation was a agricultural technology invented by the Roman’s
@@Oliver-rt8hv It's been around for 6 thousand years but it has had many iterations since, most notably the Norfolk four-course system.
It took you a course to learn that?
@@Aerostarm Yea. I thought that technology just referred to devices.
When was the last time you heard calendars or writing referred to as technology?
@ literally all the time.
"This supremacy, however has come at the cost of brutal oppression and exploitation of millions of non-European people." My question would be would conquest be any less brutal or exploitative to mankind if the globe had been conquered by Arabs or Chinese? Probably not.
When non whites conquer you get situation like the Mongol Empire, utter death and destruction and nothing else.
The Europeans were worse
@D0N-Kaiser blud he asked a theoretical question that hasnt happened. Saying they “were” worse is not simply true because we dont have an answer to the theoretical question if it had been different if it was conquered by any other people.
@D0N-KaiserWho abolished slavery while the other was still castrating their slaves? Who was instituting taxes for those that didn't follow their faith while the others were secularizing their governments? Don't give me that BS
The situation in Gaza tells us everything we need to know about oppression & Europe. The current environmental crisis & threat of nuclear war also point to the limitations of the current socio-economic system.
Europeans were the most successful conquerors, not the most violent, or most oppressive, or other woke imaginations.
The Aztec and All the native tribes of America were so evil and ruthless to outsiders and so we had to retaliate. Now they all live in small patches of land that typically hold no beneficial resources or useful hunting grounds. We all know they never would have given us Europeans friendship. Even though all of us left Europe and arrived in the Americas as migrants seeking a better sustainable future for their offspring. no matter how many times we try to come to a settlement with a tribe local to wherever we wanted to build our Homestead we would eventually be attacked in our houses brutally killed scalped and worst of all they would even kill infants. There’s a freaking reason why they live in such miserable conditions like they do to this day. It was justified.
*agreed!*
*The Aztec and All the native tribes of America were so evil and ruthless to outsiders and so we had to retaliate.*
*Now they all live in small patches of land that typically hold no beneficial resources or useful hunting grounds. We all know they never would have given us Europeans friendship. Even though all of us left Europe and arrived in the Americas as migrants seeking a better sustainable future for their offspring. no matter how many times we try to come to a settlement with a tribe local to wherever we wanted to build our Homestead we would eventually be attacked in our houses brutally killed scalped and worst of all they would even kill infants. There’s a freaking reason why they live in such miserable conditions like they do to this day. It was justified.*
@@mr.nobody4529 bruh
@@mr.nobody4529 Quit with your prejudice, they weren't making pyramids of skulls like the Mongols, sacrifying over 500000 people of other tribes per year to a sun god like the Mayans... they weren't fighting nude with spears in 1900 like some tribes...
You don't destroy China and conquer almost all of the globe by being lowly barbarians.
@@mr.nobody4529 Don't know if you have seen how African tribes act when they conquer each other. Rwanda is a good example of how brutal Africans can be towards each other.
Video starts at 5:00
Thenks
I saw that comment at 4:56 😂
Me too@@user-vb9vc1es3o
Right?
Short answer is Europe moved on to capitalism faster than other world regions. The more effective your socio-economic formation is, the more chances you have to expand.
Without the Americas, there is nothing. Give you a new earth, and your country will suddenly become stronger. There is no single country in the Eastern Hemisphere that can fight against the entire Western Hemisphere. The Western Hemisphere is almost one, and the Eastern Hemisphere is separated from each other. This is very unfavorable. Catholicism is lifted The threat of Islam has been eliminated, and the Orthodox Church has also eliminated the threat of Tengger. It has nothing to do with the technology and economy you mentioned. If these were true, they would not be threatened with destruction and would have jumped into the sea to survive.
Well said.
Imperialism is the highest stage of Capitalism.
@leko4420, facts
@leko4420
Well, Asia also had Empires too
It was absolutely because of better cultural organization, technology and organization. Europe was destined to dominate the world after they industrialized. The rest of the world was still in the agricultural era when Europe was mass producing goods and organizing society. Christianity played a huge role in Europe eventually dominating the world.
...si chiama anche "selezione naturale"...del resto noi europei nel corso dei secoli ci siamo dovuti difendere più volte da molte invasioni...e siamo geneticamente il crogiolo di molte razze e società...Se non fossimo stati noi a invadere altri continenti, sicuramente sarebbero stati altri a farlo...potendolo fare ovviamente!
If it was Christianity, the middle east would've conquered the world from where it originated, if it was cultural supremacy why did most of Europe didn't colonise or got conquered by non Europeans and why is Europe losing its relevance today?
Funny, I thought Christianity was peaceful?
@@richlisola1 More so than the religions of areas conquered. Unless you want to tell me about your favorite Aztec deity?
@@richlisola1 You were misinformed. Christianity isn't some hippie peaceful crap.
Oh boy. This comment section will be fun.
Proud of European dominion in history
@WDiCT9mW ok
Why when Europe conquer, it's bad
When asian or Arab does it, it's not bad
@@RealPower-r3e Reverse Racsim
You really need to feel bad, the blood drinking pagan culture has disappeared because Europe colonization
The single reason Europeans conquered 84% of the world is they used the printing press and moveable type to provide books for the widespread growth of literacy. This enabled them to record and share information for advancements in technology, science and corporate enterprise with greater rapidity than other civilizations. Columbus sailed to America 40 years after Gutenberg published a paper bible around 1450.
Europe already had the best standards mf living in the world alsready before the renaissanec and was very rich, if i rember i saw a 50 minute video that it was actually european mzrchant guiltes or guiltes athta made europe roch therfore powerful
I think it was a czech guy that did the vid
Yea right Europe was striving with poverty,fifth, maniacs Europe had hardly nothing to trade with the people of other nations other than rum,guns, disease, trickery, thus they took over the world
Ordinary Europeans only got literate 170 years ago. Reading and writing was a privilege for kings and clergy only, look it up. North Africa has always had literacy, first symbol alphabet, (Ge'ez from which Aramaic developed) they had learning centres and the first university in the world is there, at the same time as Europeans were stuck in the dark ages. Muslims kept learning alive in Europe during the dark ages. India has some of the oldest architecture and civilizations in the world, along with China and other Asian countries, not to mention the civilizations of the Americas. 200 years ago Europeans were still getting around on animal transport which pooped on sand streets, this juxtaposed against glorious ancient buildings which they couldn't possible have had the technology for. Who really built that is a good question.
@chrisalex82 Lol Medieval Europe, nothing quite like throwing ones poop out the window into the street every morning. That's why it was so unhygienic and diseases spread whilst the people thought it must be the night air. Right.
@@ashton1952 How twisted your perception of history is, it's astonishing. So the Greeks and Romans were not Europeans? Why are there so many illiterates in North Africa today, when they "always had literacy"? Even the ordinary people? Muslims live in the dark age nowadays after they had their golden age end centuries ago. For the same reason India and the indigenous Americas (whatever for you brought them in?) did not add single enhancement to human development for centuries. Europeans conquered the world because of overpopulation, religion and obviously advanced weaponry. Their opponents were too weak to withstand, plain and simple
Unity, nobility and exclusivity. Impossible to dominate when you don' t see yourself as the best.
weakness has never been a strenght.
But seeing oneself as the best is something every civilization does (until now). That is not going to give you the high self confidence level to project power outward from your native geographical range.
you are stupid and wrong on so many levels you didnt even watch the video lmao
Yes, and then finally War. Lots of it. As plants fight for the light and soar into the sky, or the ant colonies that wage wars for resources and their own continuation, or the birds that dance competing against one another so they may too have continuation. Life itself has but one end - growth, expansion, greatness, and one means, War. It is no surprise then, when we look at Europe that has done so much civilizational "progress", that looking at it's earliest history after the Roman Empire, or if one really wishes even, the entire Roman Republic's history and The Greek city states beforehand, War was a constant and primary actor behind everything.
Nor has spelling for that matter
It's not a dichotomy. Doing life well, is about balance. There's a reason every empire that thought itself noble and united and great......ended up in the dust. Greatness is constant evolution and freedom constant responsability.
1:54 - There were two separate meetings held in Berlin under Bismarck- a “Congress” (1878) and a “Conférence” (1884-85): at the Congress of Berlin (June 13 -July 13, 1878), the European Powers regulated spheres of influence in the Balkans following the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-78; the Berlin Conference (November 15, 1884 - February 26, 1885) divided Africa among the European Great Powers.
One reason not mentioned in this video is the death of the Mongol Great Khan in 1241. Per their custom, all the Mongol armies around the world then had to return to their capital to choose a successor. At that time the Mongols who had entered Europe were wintering in the Hungarian plains, preparing for their push Westward. There was no European army to their West that was strong enough to stand in their way. Had the Great Khan not died, there's no telling how much farther West the Mongols would've conquered, thus changing European history for at least two centuries before their power finally faded.
Outstanding comment! The Mongol armies also “cleared the board” for Europe because they decimated the Persian cultures and armies. Thus ending the golden age of middle eastern enlightenment and virtually ending their threats to Western Europe.
As the Mongols got to Hungary/Croatia, they found that the castles were something they did not understand how to deal with. This was also a big reason why they didn't push further. Throwing arrows from horses doesn't beat castles.
@adamknight5089 Interesting. Can you provide a source? As far as I know the Mongol armies included Chinese engineers who handled their siege craft. I just don't know if this was already true when they were pushing into Europe. I know they would go around areas they could not defeat. Apparently having a potential enemy at their rear did not bother them.
@@adamknight5089 after finishing off China, Persia, Russia, Muslim Empires they knew perfectly well how to deal with such resistance.
@@andreasreichwaldt3994Except for none of those places had the same kind of stone fortresses that European castles had become.
You didn’t really explain from the Muslim conquests to the renaissance, everything after that period is self explanatory
No one cares about the Muslim "conquests".
Religious societies all end up looking backwards, their orientation is old is better and this new modern stuff is evil and decadent. That reason they always get outpaced.
The Iberian Reconquista and its causes anwsers your question.
The lac of respect for the women under the calipha reins sparked a revolution from the Christiana.
Mary is a central figure on Christianity and part of sacred triangle believes and culture of Christiana.
Demographics are destiny.
Wait a minute
The vlack man on my pfp is flabbargasted
@chrisalex82 Genetics 🧬
Jarred Diamond's books.
It would not be possible for 19th C Europeans to "oppress billions" given that there were only 1.5 billion people in the world in 1900, up from just 1 billion in 1800.
Bravo..It's True you had write .
None of those billion alive in 1800 would have been included in the 1.5B a century later.
At least a couple of billion people lived and died during that century 🤷🏻♂️
So it might be possible (probably still a bit of an exaggeration)
They oppressed through multiple generations of people not just one lol billions for sure!
Big% of population would ne more accurate
@chrisalex82 Yes, for a short period of history. But their misdeeds were similar to their predecessors since the neolithic. On the other hand, accidentally or otherwise, they spread the scientific, industrial and democratic revolutions that mean we all now look back in horror at how hard and amoral life used to be.
Well, the europeans were born on some of the best lands, and their constant fighting with each other drove for innovation. You can sustain a much larger population from farmlands than from sand and tundra and jungles
Edit: key words
Localised Warfare
Climate Stability
Fewer foreign invasions
That doesn't explain why it was Europe and not India for example.
@@constantinethecataphract5949 Better genes ;)
Yet there are fewer europeans than arabs and has been so for a very long time.
china had good lands and was always fighting. many places people were norn on good lands and constantly fighting. europeans just did it better
@@MadMatTom7769 you do realize that any two people would be genetically 99,9% identical
Europe did what every other people on every other continent did. But like everything else they just did it best.
lucky in timing. just when the rest were declining after hundreds or thousand year reign, europe ascended, beat everybody else. now after 500 years, europe is declining as others are rising. com back 500 years if we survive and history could be very very different.
Until Now...and then there was nothing for 1,000 years, only poverty and nation collapse under the weight of its own Care Home.
Guns in practical are you kidding me like the whole point of guns would have been to use them to protect cities and stuff the reason why the Chinese limited gun technology was because they were more obsessed with controlling their own people than fighting foreigners. This just sounds like a video to try to make it seem like Europeans warranty advanced it was just dumb luck, when the fact is they outcompeted those societies. It's like the whole Congress of Berlin in the partition of Africa literally had to wait until technology was advanced enough for them to be able to firmly colonize Africa because they were so many people there and so many diseases wiping out the Europeans that tried to settle
No, the chinese used the gunpowder first to become immortals, then for fireworks, also to some military usage (remember gunpowder was invented in 9th century china and still were conquered by foreigners, the mongols, british and qing , who are a manchu people)
You have to know how to use the technology.
@saguntum-iberian-greekkons7014 that's because the Mongols also use guns and explosives 🙄 and the Chinese were the first to invent the guns. The Mongols captured many Chinese engineers and Smith's and made them make guns and stuff for them the Mongols literally used explosive weapons while attacking Japan centuries later. No the reason China got Concord like that is because they were more concerned about controlling their own population than conquering other people because they suffer from the issue of being a super-powered surrounded by weak powers. China only ever got Concord whenever basically they fell apart and were killing each other all the time leaving open huge rooms for foreigners to conquer them like the Mongols and the manchurians. They were not a United empire whenever they got Concord by somebody like that. They isolated themselves for centuries and that caused them to fall behind technologically.
The new world plant that produces quinine had to come first before Europeans could survive and go to Africa, so that means Africa has be after the Americas.
Muskets are surprisingly poor weapon against nomadic horse people, who were considered the main security threat by the QIng. Then it turned out the "foreign barbarians" would arrive using ships. The maritime technology was even more severely neglected, as ships only needed to travel the long Chinese coastline. In contrast to all the inland seas, straits, etc. that European continent features.
It had a lot to do with dumb luck. Only survived Mongol invasions due to dumb luck, and then accidentally ran into a bunch of free real estate in the Americas with 90% of the population dying to old world disease. Even the plague from Asia that wiped out 50% of Europe helped them conquer the new world lol
There are many reasons for this, but the two key drivers were military competition and the reformation. If the romans had unified Europe in the same way as China we may not have had a European expansion into the world.
Don't forget the advent of mercantilism and later capitalism, which incentivised both private companies and states to seek out wealth far afield and allowed them to raise capital and grow their economies faster than their rivals.
I agree with you about mercantilism and with the video, but there is a subtext that is not mentioned here. The Dutch fought for independence from the Hapsburgs for 100 years. It was a very brutal struggle. During that time, the Dutch improved weaponry, transformed the way that battles were fought, adopted a new form of government (during the struggle for independence), and generally advanced science.
So that part of the story is apart from European conquest of non-European lands, but that internal story is central to the larger story. The Dutch were "incentivized" by a desire to relieve themselves of monarchy, i.e. the rule of a king who did not speak their language.
Yep. The birth of lobbying via economic strangleholds. Currently bringing back feudalism, one trump at a time.
So, it was technology. Plus disciplined armies. Plus a taste for far-off adventurism. Plus toughness. Plus intelligence.
"It wasn't technology"
I knew it! It was tricknology!
ALL HAIL YAKUB, FATHER OF THE WHITE RACE!
All hail Yakub, master of magnets!
@@Noperare All hail our glorious master and creator Yakub!!
Pillar Men theme plays
Because Europeans are awesome.
Because they got lucky
And beautiful❤
@@mr.nobody4529Luck? Under constant invasions in harsher less fruitful lands? Really lucky xD
@@nightvvisher7713 "harsher less fruitful lands" sure bro, the Mediterranean climate of the south and Oceanic-continental climate of the north are totally harsher than the literal deserts that made up North Africa to Central Asia.
@@ikengaspirit3063 north africa was famous for it grain shipments, and during the middle ages the muslims governed from eastern anatolia to almost the top of spain. the Mediterranean climate was mostly muslim
.... why is 90% of the comment section either supremacists that say Europeans are somehow inherently superior, or cultural relativists that say Europeans are inherently evil? People complain about twitter and tiktok etc. but youtube sometimes really takes the cake
Because Europe is very polarizing in general
@@umcaraqualquer3640internet is the one who is polarizing
I don't understand how is it hard to see that Europeans created civilization as we see it.
@@PanzerkampfwagenVITigerIAusfE Internet is only a mean of communication. If it is in there, it's because people think about it in the first place 🤷
@@wersab5960 The fact that basically all humans across the globe alive today (with few exceptions) view genocide, slavery, cannibalism and human sacrifice as something bad is only because of European influence.
That doesn't mean, Europeans always behave-d morally superior or did never violate their own moral ideals, we share all the vices other cultures and civiliations also have.
But at least we developed those higher standards which even most other people agree upon.
Even when they condemn and hate us for not being perfect role models ourselves.
Everyone was playing the same game back then, some were just way better at it than others.
bro remembered his password
Rose up from the dead
But came up with a stupid narrative of history. Europen conquest spree only started when industrial revolution was in full swing. How Europe got to industrial revolution? Looting of Americas is how. That's whst made them rich; the riches reinvested to industrialisation. Also, cos all of Asian powers were in decline.
But bro didn't read history, did he? Only dreamed up European supremacy.
@@historyrhymes1701I'm afraid you made a slight error it's actually 95% of the world, not 84% just pointing that out.
@@Anonymous-yy7urconquer not occupy
Long story short:Because European Cultures(Mostly Western Cathlolic-Protestant)are adaptive,strong and advanced.They take the best from others,like from Romans,Middle and Far east and reincorporate it in itself.
European countries had organization, cooperation, technology, documented history and constant wars with countries also possessing their advanced technologies, fueling the need for furthered technological advancement.
because of the mediterranean, Roman Empire and Christianity, also industrialization
Absolutely none of these has any role in these. Europe conquered so much cos rest of the world's empire was in serious decline. Also, cos they became rich by deleting (E. Clensing) native Americans and exploiting their land.
Also smarter.
@@edwardronquillo8043 Nada.
Not the roman empire but the papacy that transmitted such sciences along with the caliphate of cordoba and byzantine empire
@@edwardronquillo8043no, it was more incentive via competition
Correct. Et was not technology.
It was being European.
(They're just better at ruling)
And building societies, look the african continent between 1880s-1950s.
@@saguntum-iberian-greekkons7014 uh some african countries were once richer than the european continent. Mansa Musa was the richest man who ever lived.
From slaves,not anything revolutionary@@villiamfangy6205
@@villiamfangy6205 having access to gold mines doesnt mean you are able to develop yourself an economy, compare it to to the 3/4 of the arab gulf countries, they litteraly sit on oil. Without gold mines or oil these states wouldnt survive long.
FYI the mali empire got absorbed by other african empires,.
The thing is too know how develop when you have so abundan riches
@@saguntum-iberian-greekkons7014 Doesn't matter the Europeans got their wealth by extracting resources from other countries. It's still going on today, that's why neo-colonialism is a thing.
Great video, I love those animations, these surely took a long time for edit, and I appreciate it.
It was
1.Ego of China
2.Infighting in the subcontinent /Fall of Mughal Empire
3.Vast new resources in New World
That's Basically all of it
China was already stagnant. Not ego, it was hubris of the defeated. Not different than what seen in Europeans today.
Not enough of an explanation.
Why did Europeans discover the rest of the world? How did they establish hegemony almost immediately? How did they finance all that enterprises?
For number 2, I'd say the root cause is the Safavid sacking of Delhi
Hegemony wasn't immidteaetaly came, t was mostly in 19th century @@yalcnbey5834
So Europeans did it because no one else did it first?
Notice the "clouds" drifting across the sky, are the shapes of Countries ...
And one was Vatican
@@ChadreiOlaño rest are quite sophisticated and colossal in size that they aren't that easy to identify unlike European ones!
still, I did caught Canada and India at times...
@@ChadreiOlaño I'm glad that you guessed so right...
0:26 They did all that, in a 7-Eleven?!
Underated comment
😅😂
The simple answer is competition.
Necessity
The Aryans have flooded the comments
The fake Aryans.
Wanna be aryans.. I smell humbergers
@@ikengaspirit3063 who are the real aryans?
Arrianism
those heretics
In the early modern era, (17th and 18th centuries) you’re correct in that technology wasn’t what enabled European colonialism. It was diseases that native people weren’t familiar with. That’s why in this period, only the New World was colonized. Europeans didn’t have a meaningful technology advantage over anyone else on the planet, but they did have diseases that Indigenous peoples of the Americas had no resistance to. It’s estimated that 90% of Native Americans lost their lives to European diseases, not to conflict with Europeans.
However, after the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, it was indeed technology that allowed them to be successful, so you’re wrong on that point. Europeans were now able to colonize Africa, West and South Asia, and China because of superior technology.
europes ability for the industrial revolution was due to their success and wealth from the americas, which they got for almost free. They can then build more industries, more weaponry, more ships. The spiral started in the Americas..
LMAO, not whole of these mentioned parts were ever colonised by Europeans. BTW, it is Indian Subcontinent not South Asia. The armies of Indian states and empires were in no way technologically inferior than those of Europe. In fact, were even superior in some cases and Maratha Empire of India even defeated all the major European powers in various ware before finally losing to the British EIC in 1803-43. Nepal and Bhutan somehow remained independent of British influence and rule. Rest is history.
This is the reason the French run a shadow network of informal empires that control the banking, military, politics and trade of their colonies to date. They still hold the reserves for their currencies and print them at a premium cost. They also pay the rebel troops to cause instability in these countries. This has all been exposed since the formation of the SAHEL regional unity between Burkino Faso, Niger and Mali, who have expelled the French troops that were enabling the rebels. These countries are an example of what Afrika is capable of without western interference, they thrive despite the challenges of facing sanctions and having their neighboring countries turned against them for refusing to be fellow slaves of the west.
Impassible passes? Why call them passes at all then?
its a bit odd you flip over 1000 years in your video without a clear link.
1,000 years of embarassments as the middle east and east asia were much ahead then.
Correct. It was not technology. It was being European. It's the mindset and determination. And also, it was technologies, not technology. :)
I think Muslims had a very similar mindset and determination, but they failed. I suppose technologies may have been the factor that set the Europeans apart from the Muslims.
Man said mindset🤣🤣🤣
Oh yeah? So why didn't eastern europe colonize anything? Western Europe had the technology
Dang is the fucking technologies/modernity and new world resources that makes europe stronger, no need to deep dive in it
@@BAHLANsarrola222Because there was no powerful Eastern European naval force.
After millennia of fighting high IQ adversaries amongst themselves, the rest of the world didn’t stand a chance. Northern Europeans are also larger and stronger on average than most everyone else.
What a loud of rubbish during this time most European were shorter than 5'9 where as on average the sub saharan african had about an inch over their European counterpart nordic or not
We are gods according to the many other races we met. There’s something in their subconscious mind that tells us all humans had a connection ruled by these “aríans” or “annunaki” from the mountains of the Andes in South America to the aired climate of east Africa. Mzungu👌🏻
@@mr.nobody4529 That's not even close to true. West Africans were about 5'4" on average, as were most African groups.
Nilotes & others are exceptions
Also the main group of expansionist Europeans (North Sea) were 5'8" for the Men on average, which is pretty tall for the time,
@@BARBARYAN. Jesus what a bunch a bullcrap
Boat evolution began in the Mediterranean where the water was much calmer. By the time they were ready to travel to America they were ready for rougher sea water.
that is not true at all
it was the atlantic coast and the north see where most advancements happend
........
It did probably begin there, but boats capable of intercontinental travel were developed by the portuguese around the 15th century and Portugal has a coastline that is only bathed almost exceptionally by the Atlantic ocean.
@@insxmniac7052 nope not at all ....... the first tranatlantic crossing was done by the norwegians
and the portugese ships that inpired the age of exploration
where a combination of north see hulls with West african sails
@@insxmniac7052
Yea I know especially with the help of the arabs with the sail. But prior to them it mainly evolved around the Mediterranean from phonecians, egyptians etc.
@@baronbrummbar8691 The type of boats the vikings used was nowhere near comparable to what left from Portugal and spain. The boats that left from Portugal and Spain evolved from the Mediterranean area , it's evolution evolving over time including additions from arabs.
_"The Single Reason Europe Conquered 84% of The World"_ - *ANSWER: ?!?!?*
When you look around your room, everything you can see was built by Europeans
*chinese
@@prussia77 Well yeah they made it in their factories but it was designed by europeans
Lol. "Made In China"
Made In China.. in many, many ways possibly the worst mistake the USA ever made.
Nope, everything that I own is from Asia.
The leap from the 8th century to 1884 leaves more than a thousand years of history unexplained. So it appears that the point of this video is to explain how European powers came together to further exploit what had already been achieved through hundreds of years of colonialism and slavery. Perhaps a better explanation of why Eurasians succeeded where others lagged behind is presented by Jarod Diamond’s book Guns, Germs and Steele: The Fates of Human Societies. The advantages provided by the domestication of available animals and plants and benefits of great geography and climate cannot be ignored.
Perhaps a better explanation, but one that's been criticized since it's publication by anthropologists and from what I recall, some of its main theses have been recently falsified in peer-reviewed literature.
@@laurilehtonen5723 you mean like everything published since snowdon...and I do mean everything.
Europeans are the reason Europe became great. Because once Europeans entered America it became relevant and more advanced immediately. Other Europeans even turned South Africa into a notable country until the early 1990s. Every place with Europeans is better than without Europeans. You can even observe that within the USA where places with non-White populations are catastrophic hellholes. What more proof do you need. Europe itself was the probably the hardest place to master, certainly harder than the eastern mediterranean. Some Asians did well and sometimes in history surpassed us. The Chinese come to mind. Japan as well. Europeans and East Asians are peak civilization builders. But we are losing that capability right now because we are distracted by hedonism and hostile ideologies like marxism. We have to go back to what was normal 120 years ago.
no, China is 1000 times superior, while some europeans lived in huts they had great cities
@@joaogabrielimperial7777
China is grate just because European American investment if was not that China will stay in the same place they used to be in hundreds years ago
@@joaogabrielimperial7777 and now the chinese live in huts, and you wont find one European villager living in huts
@@Paul-km9ox *Looks at homeless camps in US*
*Looks at stone and brick mansions in Asia*
Lol
@@psssshhh7730 you wanna look at how the homeless live in Asia ?
What is that music from @ 5:30
It was the invention of double-entry bookkeeping and the subsequent development of Capitalism and Corporate structures. Way more important as a factor than a lot of people realize.
By extension, this is why the USA is unconquerable today because the American public has focused so heavily on military technologies and constant struggle thereby developing the leadership and capabilities of the services endlessly for hundreds of years.
two largest oceans. nobody can bring enough armies. The advanced weaponry that US develops is for offensive, not defensive!
@@GlobalMajority007 The oceans are big huge boost for sure as well as the terrain. Nonetheless, the population is focused on defense so the military does not need to be. believe me on this point. My immediate circle of coworkers have between them more than 300 weapons and half of us are prior military and many of the rest former police and fire. Just sayin'...
@@WmJFaust if that’s true why is it falling apart 😂😂😂😂
It was not the technology. It was the ideas.
Bureaucracy and record-keeping allowed most empires to establish themselves by ingratiating themselves as administrators and educators of new and more efficient mechanisms of tax and trade securitization.
Foreign rulers were often NOT conquered unless they tried to raid the colonial trade partners or the colonial trade. Most foreign rulers acceded to colonial control because it proved to be a massive benefit to them, both in terms of personal security and wealth. It also gave them access to European manufacturing, technologies and weapons, thus reinforcing their state's security over rival powers.
Because we are amazing, intelligent, and beautiful people!
Great video and explanation, thank you! The graphics made me nostalgic for early 2000's PC game cinematics on Windows XP: Age of Empires, Conquest of the New World, Kingdom O' Magic, Voyage Century... ah, good times.
You missed the part where Europe was disconnected from the Silk Road, which forced them to find new trade routes making them discover new lands
well if the Inca Empire was not in a civil war the Spanish wouldn't have had a chance to conquer Peru, that's a fact, at the time industrialization was not a thing and fire arms only shoot once each 5 minutes lol
You're looking back and see the cumbersome hand cannons. At the time, they were peak technology and the none of the natives were ready. The literally thought thunder and lighting were being tossed at them. They were 1,000s of years behind the curve. It was only ever going to end one way.
@michaelhowell2326 very few canons, very few fire guns, very few horses and basically no support from the crown most of the Spanish conquest in America was made by private means and with native support, and again the Inca empire was way bigger and powerful than aztecs and but it was in a civil when the spanish just arrived many tribes like the cañaris in Ecuador were massacred and their pregnant women killed by Atahualpa and they wanted to see him dead lol
@@michaelhowell2326 there was already an expedition of a Portuguese explorer called Alejo Garcia to conquer the Inca Empire, he failed, and the own Pizarro himself claim "if we would have arrived before the civil war (during Huaynacapac's rule) there would be no chance we could put a step in these lands"
It’s probably easiest understood as simply the continued expansion of the Indo Europeans in what has been a nearly 6000 year continuous conquest
Ancient Iranians
east asians are changing that. after that africans.
The cultural traits that led to Western global domination long predated industrialization, and in fact were why the industrial (and scientific) revolution eventually happened to begin with. Some of these traits go back to classical Greece and Rome, who also dominated the known world, while others developed later or accompanied Christianization. The short version is European individuals were freer to innovate, compete, question leaders, and have a stake in their own societies as citizens than the rest of the world. Thucydides basically laid out the template while explaining why Greeks fought so much more effectively than their Eastern opponents.
Lots of work went into making this, and it was interesting. Thanks!
They were the best?
You and many others forget that the Mongol and Turkic invasions affected the Middle East heavily. Much of the advancenents were destroyed by Mongols and the Turks. Before that Middle Eastern countries were mostly ahead of Europeans. After the Mongol Invasion what remained from the Middle Eastern knowledge stayed in Spain before it got conquered by Europeans. Many books and knowledge stayed in Europe and the Persians and Arabs had lost now everything. Also the Ottoman Empire afterwards halted much progress in the Middle East, Greece and Balkans. Greece that was always progressive for example couldn't keep with the Europeans up anymore after the Ottomans have ruled over them. All in all the Mongol invasion and Turkic invasion of West Asia contributed much to the end of Middle Eastern progress and the begin of European progress
Very good! People should not oversee this, this is very true.
Genetics.
It was administration, logistics is king.
Answer starts at 6:30
welcome back thx for another awesome vid.
We should add also that europeans weren't constrained by religious superstitions, technology's despise(as in China), were more pragmatical than their adversaries. Add to this print's invention, that allowed to spread and maintain knowledge.
learn more about the rest of the world history n technology development.
Great message here. No need for NATO. Europe can handle their own business, which includes Ukraine.
You guys can't even defend yourselves from immigrants
NATO makes both europe and America stronger. Why should both fight for themselves if they can support eachother?
@ US pays far more than our fair share. If the goal is to make American stronger, we can spend the money here and directly make America stronger.
@@Omar-nd6lh What exactly do you mean with America spending so much?
europe includes russia too
I think you should summarize it in a different manner - you made some few interesting indications: The elementary question is WHY Europeans have been acting like that and what is their mentality (way before Francs, there have been also e.g. the Roman Empire, before that the Greeks and before that the Indo-Europeans etc.
1. Surving the harsh climate of Europe requires a planning mentality, otherwise people will starve,
2. The fertile lands generated a lot of overpopulation in "good years" who had to compete for everything - this mindset never allowed that 1 guy ruled Europe... looking at the world's map, indeed the location and the climate conditions of this region are unique.
Planning and competition have been triggering innovation and permanently questioning whether one does things still right. This is in my view the very basic element that drives even today Europe and the West. Countries/civilizations with a different development path and a different "survival"-mentality have certainly to struggle with this type of overprogressive thinking. Some are adopting to it (or got the point what it is all about) in a successful way. Some others not. Note that especially countries in colder climate regions do it in a better way.
The reply that is most succinct and to the core is this one.
The conquest of America by the Spanish was not really facilitated by the spread of diseases, +95% of the armies that "conquered" it were composed by natives who allied the Spanish and joined them. Technology was simply not advanced enough and Spain population was too low to conquer it by force against all natives. Most of the natives joined the Spanish and that's why the conquest was so fast.
Just speculation, but natives in America were still in the Stone Age (not meaning to be discriminatory it's just a historical fact), considering we are all humans same intelligent, if someone that has technology and knowledge +3000 years more advanced than you, wouldn't you join them?
Also, for example in the case of the Aztecs, they were really opressor rulers, basically all their neighbours hated them, the Spanish arrival was just the last straw.
Divide-and-rule.
@ralphbernhard1757 they were already divided
To over simplify. Asia had the spices and Europe didn’t. Europe was motivated to explore and develop their technology to get the spices. Asia didn’t need to do that nearly as much since the spices were near by.
The real answer is in the article "Why Europe Rose And Others Did Not" on the internet.
The West is the best
True
No
yet ran by jews
But now East Asia is becoming best
For now but it won’t last trust me. European dominance is fairly new and guaranteed to die off. Celebrate now but your great grandchildren will see the fall happen before their very own eyes. Don’t worry though in fairness all of humanity will eventually parish not just Europeans. We are all going out like the dinosaurs.
The clip never truly stated why Europe was so successful. I believe Europe felt they were superior beings and so they were and as for the terrible situation Europe is in today… compared to the past it could be easily overcome with a great leader and a purge of its destructive forces, which must be done if it is to survive and thrive!!!
everyone believed they were better yet other civilisations lost. This is an idiotic conclusion to come to
@ The European thought they were superior so they were. If they thought as you they would have been overrun so then probably most of human accomplishments wouldn’t have been achieved. I’m sure your political/social beliefs are as those of the progressive Western Leaders of today that will Spiral Europe back to the dark ages. If the Jews didn’t believe they were chosen and with all its enemies throughout history they wouldn’t exist today!!!
Superior civilization gets conquered by Immigrants 😂
@ Yes, but those immigrants were invaders and those invaders weren’t supported by the aristocracy of the conquered country as it is happening today in the West. I in fact the European aristocracies eventually moved the invading forces out of Europe costing Europeans much of their young men. I don’t know of a civilization where the aristocracy encouraged their demised???
Face it. Its because they wanted to.
No one else was traveling the world doing it. First step in doing a thing is to have a desire to do it in the first place.
"How did Europe transform from a land of decentralized kingdoms, to one of the most technologically advanced empires in human history?" This statement implies that over the 1800s, Europeans of various nations came closer to each other, to justify calling all Europe one empire. But they were just as fiercely competitive as ever. They built empires in part to compete with each other. Did they share commonalities as members of "Western Civilization"? Certainly. But so did everyone in Europe during Medieval Christendom.
Every civilisation rises and falls that’s the basic rule so next will be some one else
1:50 …. Dude why did you skip 100 years and no transition !!? 😕
The answer is Rule of Law. There. Fixed it.
Fix Zionism, please.
@ what does that mean?
What an excellent video! Europe rules! 👍🏻💪🏻
Thanks and congrats!
In fact Western Europe was a fortress since the middle of 12th century.
Since this time, no alien army non allied with Western Europeans has conquered a bit of Western Europe.
Then all gain and loss in war were between western Europeans.
And it was so competitive, that nobody get the upper hand over everyone at the point of making a big empire on all the western Europe , or at least not on the long time like Napoleon and hitler.
Nor the Muslim who were repelled in Spain, nor the Ottoman empire who was stopped at Vienna , nor the Mongols who were not really deeper than eastern Europe, has succeed to conquer western Europe since that time.
Industrialization and commoners becoming more valuable after the plague and the ottoman heavy taxing which cause Europeans to go around Africa to go to china for Chinese goods and eventually try to go directly to china to get Chinese goods.
Oh but my college professor says it's just because China didn't have coal
😂😂😂
It was also institutions. China was a vast centralized empire. Europe was a mishmash of competing states which had to constantly shift their institutions
a simplified explanation but broadly true. china had a steel industrial revolution 500 years before europe. it made china more advanced then but did not hold out.
It was a combination of technology, determination, discipline, strategy, vision, great philosophical ideas, ability and skills!!!
⚖️⚖️⚖️⚖️👁️
I've not heard of the European Empire, but it was the most powerful region of the world, with the most powerful empires.
Sure, competition is what led to Europe's success. But what led to that competition?
kitty kat
we need to return to greatness
that greatness without imperialism. learn to live within its means, amongst others..
@ most crime , gun violence, and iq statistics per capita would to disagree
Genetics
One word. Jesus.
Christianity gave Europe a universal faith through which they could transmit their culture to other races, making the spreading of western culture far easier than it was when the Greeks conquered the Middle East but faced resistance from Persians and Jews who overthrew them by the time of the Romans. Christianity also gave Europe an intellectual and scientific base in the Church which wound up creating western science, which in turn created industrialism down the line.
🤡
Very true. Without any religious aspect Jesus is the ultimate innovation leading to prosperity & might.
@@viktorberta4953 China learned that the hard way when they lost to England during the Opium War. And before them, the Incas and Aztecs learned that the hard way when they lost to Spain in the 1500s.
For real
Some say " gngn mongol empire bigger than roman Empire" EXEPT where the roman was exceptionnal too (like égyptian and greek empires) was they know how to have SOLIDES foundation to keep the civilisation to stand on his feet
And Christianity is propice to this vision, even in the symbolisms, the wine and the bread is the spine of sedentarity, the spine of civilisation, the spine of stability ;)
Thats why chrisianity alway was more propice to sedentarity peoples while islam nd judaïsm have a tribes and nomad visions of things and values
Judaism and islam project to have a civilisation and to mimic sédentarity , they talk of " Kingdom of God" but with a totally nomadic visions it cant work!
They just cant continue like this , Christ is King
In 2012, a team of psychiatrists, behavioral psychologists, neurologists and neuropsychiatrists from the Harvard Medical School published a research that suggested the development of a new diagnostic category of psychiatric disorders related to religious delusion and hyperreligiosity.
According to the authors, in the case of Jesus, it could have been: paranoid schizophrenia, bipolar and schizoaffective disorders.[7] They hypothesized that Jesus may have sought death through "suicide-by-proxy" (indirect suicide).
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_health_of_Jesus
Historian Ian Morris compared the development of Western Europe vs China in his books, including "Why the West rules for now".
overall China was more advanced vs Europe from 1 - 1400 Ad. Unlike China Europe didn't unify into one large kingdom. Europe remained a series of smaller kingdoms that competed with each other and were able to hone their military skills.
Europe did take Chinese inventions like gunpowder (likely brought over by the Mongols) as well as the compass and improved them. The combination of guns, sails, the lateen sail (from Arabia) and navigation technology and the competition spurred by the desire to profit from trade led to constant improvements in technology especially by the western european maritime powers.
Europe had one huge advantage over China in that the distance to North America was much shorter across the Atlantic and the prevailing trade winds that made travel easier in both directions were not as far apart as in the Pacific. The journey across the Pacific (as found by the Spanish was much more difficult and took far longer).
If there are any major inventions to give credit to it would be the movable type printing press invented Gutenberg at around the same time 1450 as the fall of Constantinople to the Ottoman Turks. I know there are other instances of the printing press with movable type (Korea, CHina etc) the fact is Gutenbergs press was the real game changer. In only the first 50 years there were millions of books printed. The spread of knowledge was a major spur in innovation. The flight of many learned scholars from Constantinople also helped the bring the knowledge and books from the early Greeks to Western Europe.
One could say 1450 was the major turning point as the Turks cut off the spice trade with the east thereby driving the Portuguese and other explorers to bypass the Turks.
The one difference too is the mercantilism and the rise of the joint stock company in the west. So much of the trade and colonialism was the rise of large trading companies like the Dutch East India company, the British East India Company, the Hudson's bay company, even the Jamestown and early settlements in America were corporate ventures. A lot of this has roots in the trading cities like Venice and Genoa which were governed by patricians (rather than Kings or Sultans) and were all about making profits.
The other most important invention is the steam engine. This led to further innovation in trade, kicked off the industrial revolution that was also helped by the scientific inquiry that had been practiced all over Europe. Once again the lack of a central power made it easier for scholars and scientists to move where there was more freedom of thought.
Obviously western Europe led a bloody colonial war against the rest of the world which helped Europe get rich in the process. So while there is a lot of backlash at the concept of colonialism, this would have been true for any other empires that were happening over the last few thousand years. The Mongols subjugated and killed millions (probably 10% of the world population) the Turks and other Muslim empires had no problem conquering other lands (even parts of Europe), the Zulus etc.
One can also add that the rise of democracy and the improved standard of living for everyone in the world was also a consequence of Europe's domination. There was no particular intention to spread democracy but it happened anyway.
Ultimately it will come to everyone, including China, Russia etc.
The Chinese were not more advanced than Ancient Greece and Rome from 300 BC to 500 AD. Have you been to Rome??? And Ian Morris does not say that in his book.
This analysis is flawed on many levels. The GDP of India and China was 75% of the world in 1750. The industrial revolution in the West would reverse this to where by 1875 the Western nations would be 75% of GDP. However it was not just technology and military domination that this transition occurred. In 15th century China had larger ships, maps, compasses, sails and rudders that would dominate European ships. However the routes to Asia from Europe required larger ocean navigation. The Dutch had windmills to power sawmills. The British had rivers that permitted ease to the ocean. These two small nations would dominate the seas. China would turn inward to protect against enemies from the north. Japan would also become insular politically. Meanwhile the Dutch and English would develop rule of law democracy, as well as a capitalist system of finance. Even the greatest technology needs development or seed capital. This is why European nations took domination of world GDP. While most nations were ruled by monarchs and autocrats the Western nations became democracies and capitalist governed by the rule of law.
If Europe conquered the world because they had constant wars among themselves maybe you can explain why they lost the world because of WW1 and WW2.
He ignores the JQ, an omission that makes pointless any so-called "big picture" analysis.
JQ
@@timber750, JQ? Jewish Qingdao? Jelly Queen? Jesus Quaestor? What is JQ?
He ignored geography and the factor of Europe becoming capitalist faster than other regions. That's key mistakes of the video.
You forget one thing, WW1 and WW2 were destructives for the countries, with millions of deads.
The old wars were at far more lower scale, but sufficient to win experience, knowledge, new technologies, etc...
Weapons were far less destructives on soldiers ad surrounding, and the armies were smaller.
Since the 12th century Western Europe was not invaded by enemies countries from outside.
@@timber750
JQ? what is it?
C’est les Grecques, les Grecques, toujours les Grecques...sine Graecos, nihil.
Not that simple, but it is where it "started" yes
@ It’s surely not that simple; in fact, it’s quite complicated…but Greece is more than an origin: it is also the route and the destination (and I’d say the same thing if I were - G-D forbid! - a Turk).
I’m not ashamed to say that I am proud of my history! Our ancestors went through hell and back and through it all were able to turn around and conquer the world!
What powerful stuff.
Thank God for Western Civilization.
Really you just got lucky
No one is saying you should be ashamed for it but one can not turn a blind eye to the evil acts they did to get their wealth. But I need not worry for what goes around surely comes back around
@davidalily6 by all means be critical of the west. However, understand it's philosophy read its history, turn a critical eye to your own history and what they believed amd behaved see if you want to take revenge then
Are you gonna build a better future or burn down the world for past grievances
@@davidalily6mate, every race and country back in the day did stuff that we would today consider evil but was completely normal in the day
@@jbone9900not really, European technology was rising through the roman times and collapsed after fall of Rome for 1000 years before rising again, doing it twice isn’t just luck 😉
So basically the cost of conquering was conquering?
I was always under the assumption that climate and geography in Europe also played a big role in that. The mild climate and little harsh geography in most parts of Europe made it possible to accommodate many people within a relatively small area. With a big population you have a) bigger numbers and b) the chance for specializing of professions and and research. That leading to many big players within a small area and taking a step further to those big players widening their boarders at other fronts.
In this 1884 conference in Berlin, not only the subdivision of Africa was defined, but also of Asia, I don't know why they have now "forgotten" that Asia was also subdivided, colonized and had its independence at the same time as Africa, it will be Why does talking only about Africa bring more audiences? It can only be, since they conveniently forget that the entire Indian subcontinent, the Middle East, Southeast Asia, the Indo-Pacific region and all of North and Central Asia were also under European rule.
1. nobody forgot that
2. most of asia was already taken over before the Berlin Conference
@@baronbrummbar8691 The allotment of Asia was also at the Berlin conference in 1884, now there is this very strange and selective forgetfulness, especially because the countries of Asia put their feet on the ground, looked up and walked forward instead of practicing victimism and poverty. , while Africa preferred to stagnate, delve into social communism and outsource blame, which is a dream come true for fundamentalists, jihadists of the global far left to embrace as a noble cause without any nobility