Civilisations

Now that the dust has settled, is this accurate?

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    NO.
    /thread

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      why

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >orthodox christendom is meaningfully different enough from western christendom to be considered a separate civilization entirely
        >latin america is meaningfully different enough from the rest of western christendom to be considered a separate civilization entirely
        >"sub-saharan africa"
        >japan is meaningfully different enough from the rest of the sinosphere to be considered a separate civilization entirely
        This is a skin color chart with a couple of exceptions made for fluke countries (Ethiopia) and "honorary whites" (Japan).

        also
        >>note: Huntington considers Turkey to be a separate civilization
        Big r*ddit energy

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          There has always been a divide between western and Eastern Europe, literally always.
          Latin America IS unlike any other contient
          Japan is the lone wolf of Asia

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Latin America IS unlike any other contient
            It really really isn't. Angola is basically Latin America to an extreme level.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              Then we sould include the definitio to angola and the philipines.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Can you explain why disassociate Ethiopia and even other Black countries above ghana from Sub Saharan Africa you must be high if you think Niger ain't sub saharan.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Ethiopia
          The core of Ethiopian civilisation and culture has been centered in the highlands in the north-west of the country and differs from the rest of Africa due to following predominant Orthodox Christianity, and having much of it's culture being derived from south Arabia - due to this it has a unique language, alphabet, architecture, and religion from the rest of the continent. Also, following the rise of Islam, Ethiopia had been for the most part culturally and diplomatically isolated from the rest of world, and contact/cultural exchange being pretty much non-existent with the rest of Africa who were pagan or Muslim at the time. Geography played a role in this.

          >other Black countries above ghana
          "sub saharan" is just a generic grouping. Black regions in the Islamic sphere have their culture largely derived from the trans-saharan trade and contact with North Africans, Berbers and the rest of the Muslim world. Other than race and skin colour they don't have that much in common. Especially in the case of Nigeria the Muslims in the north tend of be herders and the Christians are farmers. Likewise historically there were African Muslim dynasties like the Songhai and Mali which developed independently from the rest of the Africans in the south.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Black regions in the Islamic sphere have their culture largely derived from the trans-saharan trade and contact with North Africans

            This is painfully wrong. Without even getting into the EXTENSIVE pagan substrate of the Sahel, their material cultures have little in common with the rest of MENA or Central Asia or Indonesia.

            >there were African Muslim dynasties like the Songhai and Mali which developed independently from the rest of the Africans in the south

            What are you talking about? Mali was founded by Mandingo pagans in Niani. Songhai was founded by Songhai pagans of Gao.

            Islam alone is not enough to split the Sahel from the rest of black africa culturally. A Mandinka Muslim has more in common with a Bambara pagan than with a Turkish guy from Istanbul.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >hey don't have that much in common.
            And you think the nigs below Muslim green do?!

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >having much of it's culture being derived from south Arabia
            Such as what?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      You can't /thread your own post but it really was /thread

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    A friend of mine told me that his gf's mom said something like this
    "WHOA, who could have imagined that Ukrainian girls get their nails done just like us...they are just like us..."
    She probably had never heard of Ukraine before the war
    (Western Europe btw)

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I'd expect that from an american, but someone on the continent?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >I'd expect that from an american
        Rent free

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          well I do fucking live here

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        I don't know what to say, I don't that girl's parents
        In fact, the actual stereotype about Ukraine here is, well, poor country with nice sluts, and lots of women in elderly care. So, at least for the "nice sluts" part they could've imagined they do get their nails done.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          *don't know

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >flips
    >sinic, not la creatura de las americas
    >dios mio

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Also
      >Japan isn't Sinic, but Mongolia is
      lmao what a retard

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Japan somehow isn’t Sinitic despite ripping literally everything in their culture from the Tang Dynasty
    >Taiwan is still somehow Sinitic despite modeling their culture on special-snowflake-Japan
    >Philippines having anything to do with China
    >Indonesia isn’t part of Greater India cuz Islam
    >But Bangladesh is part of Greater India despite Islam
    >Mandingo people are the same as Albanians and Kazakhs because Islam
    >But Christian Africans aren’t part of western christendom somehow
    >Latin America isn’t Western despite being the most Catholic region on earth and literally being named LATIN America

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Latin America isn’t Western despite being the most Catholic region on earth and literally being named LATIN America
      Agree with most of your points but I heavily disagree with this. If anythibg latin america is the bastard child of the west (the philipines should be included too. But kick out guyana and suriname, those are full of asians and not even latin)

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Explain what makes LATAM culture so outlandishly different from the rest of the Catholic world then

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >He actually needs a lesson on why Latin America is Latin America to depict it as distinctly different from Best America

          Have you ever been to LATAM? The difference between it and any decent town in the USA is night and day. There are many, many reasons why people are fleeing from the south northward and not the other way around. Primarily because any part of LATAM can be primarily described, within reason, I'd wager - as an absolute shithole devoid of human life.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Insularity and syncretism.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >All of North and South America made up of the same people

          You are aware that Latin America is mostly of Spanish or native descent and that North America is primarily German and Anglo immigrants, right?

          Spain is not the same as Northern Europe, and it never has been.

          If Latin America gets their own civilization then Spain and Portugal should be in it.

          Why does every South American on this fucking board insist in clinging to Spain and Portugal like this? Same language does not mean same culture much less same people. Iberia is more similar to other European countries like Italy and France than to South America.

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    No, I opened paint, wait for better map.

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    People who make these have no idea that Inner Asia exists

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    No, anything that isn't the Anglosphere is basically an irrelevant shithole.

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Wait just realized. The pacific is sinitic. Why the fuck.

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    No need to be so specific. I would represent the separate civilizations as pulses of culture relative to their historical and geographical location i.e. Western civilization is strongest in Western Europe while Islamic civilization is centered in Arabia. Under this model I would include Latin America as very weakly Western rather than a distinct entity.

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The state religion of the West is atheism, its "culture" is materialistic and hedonistic, there's absolutely nothing Christian about it.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Samuel is a cuck.

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous
    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Greece
      >Yugoslavia
      >Warsaw Pact
      at least make it believable

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        No need. It's just a cold war heat map filled in with the 5 color race chart from Family Guy.

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I'm trying to make my own civ map and i came to conclusion that some countries still aren't civilized at all, wtf?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Agreed, everything west of Turkey may as well be grayed out

  13. 2 months ago
    >°•,=,- Croc

    hb

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >>The Clash of Civilizations is a thesis that people's cultural and religious identities will be the primary source of conflict in the post–Cold War world. The American political scientist Samuel P. Huntington argued that future wars would be fought not between countries, but between cultures.
    He sounds retarded.
    political scientist
    Oh, right.

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    No. There are no types of civilizations. There are different cultures though.

    There is only human civilization. That's just 1 type. But some human societies have a more advanced civilization than others. This is because they have a more advanced technology or because their cities a more advanced. Civilization after all is city or cities ruling over a territory.

    This is why there is no such thing as western civilization. However there is such a thing as European culture or European cultures. However they are broadly defined. We can't really say that Spanish and Norwegian cultures are the same but we can say they are both from this broadly defined "European culture". European cultures in general were more similar to each other compared to the rest of the world (regardless of religious or linguistic differences). Because Europe is a sub-continent were the populations had to live side by side and influence each other for a long time. It's similar to the Indian sub-continent in that way. There is no such thing as Indian civilization but there is such thing as a broadly defined Indian culture or Indian cultures. You can apply that to most regions of the world. European colonies in general have European cultures or European derived cultures.

    Religion too can influence culture. But religion on it's own can never be a culture. There is no such thing as "Islamic culture". You have to be lying to yourself to believe that. I mean Malaysia and Bosnia absolute don't have similar cultures. Like wise Uzbekistan doesn't have a similar culture to Senegal. That would be like saying the Philippines and Russia have similar cultures because of Christianity. Likewise Bosnia is more similar to other christian Balkans state in terms of culture compared to Malaysia. and Malaysia is more similar to the Philippines culturally than it is similar to the Senegal.

    Stone age tribes are like the San tribes are outside of civilization of course.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >There is only human civilization. That's just 1 type
      This statement is as correct as "One race, human race" one.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        why? can you objectively study the molecular genetics of civilization the same way you can study the genetics of race? Of course you can't because Race is something that actually exists. Civilization too exists. But the idea of there being different types of civilizations is something people made up in their minds. That's why people debate what kind of civilizations exist and what don't exist. and that's why there are radically different groupings and ideas on mapping out those supposed different civilizations. I mean look at this thread.
        You can't objectively map out how many civilizations there are and you can't map out their extent. Since there are no types of civilization (but only human civ). You can however, objectively do that with race. While also recognizing race mixing and demographics change

        One day Poland can be an eastern civilization. and the next day it can be western. just make shit up bro until you feel comfortable haha. Meanwhile you can't be racially sub-saharan one day and then european the next day.

        Your comparison is terrible

        Civilization = City. There were no civilizations when there were no cities. But then cities popped up in Mesopotamia and Egypt. They had vastly different cultures but they were both civilizations. The more advanced civilization was the one with a more advanced technology or cities. things like having a more advanced sewage system or a more advanced metallurgy. They were both human civilizations that had the same basic wants and needs. When Egypt wanted copper, so did Mesopotamia. When Egyptian cities employed iron, so did Mesopotamian cities. and so did the cities in China and India. All of them were similar to each other in this regard. They were all human civilizations (1 type of civilization. different types of culture)

        I'm not saying different human cultures don't exist. European and Indic civilizations don't exist. But European and Indic cultures do exist. Civilization and Culture are not the same thing

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >>Race is something that actually exists

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Race is something that actually exists
            Ok, let's suppouse that your mom is asian, dad is black, what race are you?
            Pay attention, I didn't say that race is made up term.

            pay attention. I already said that race mixing is a thing:
            >While also recognizing race mixing and demographics change

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              Even your map proves that most people are mutts.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I never denied that?
                >"While also recognizing race mixing and demographics change"
                that's what I said. I couldn't say more because of character limit.
                keep in mind that I don't use the word race in the traditional colonial or american sense.

                and also keep in mind some mutts tend to be of very specific admixture which makes them unique and different from other mutts that carry different admixtures and genetic traits.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Ok, but as I sayd, I didn't say that race is made up term, races as real as civilizations.
                You said that there are no different types of civilizations, maybe your're right (i doubt it though) but it doesn't mean that there are only one civilization.
                I think it would be correct to count one hotbed of civilization for one civilization.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              Sooo... what you're saying is that trans people don't exist....
              riiiight...

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Race is something that actually exists
          Ok, let's suppouse that your mom is asian, dad is black, what race are you?
          Pay attention, I didn't say that race is made up term.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          No. There are no types of civilizations. There are different cultures though.

          There is only human civilization. That's just 1 type. But some human societies have a more advanced civilization than others. This is because they have a more advanced technology or because their cities a more advanced. Civilization after all is city or cities ruling over a territory.

          This is why there is no such thing as western civilization. However there is such a thing as European culture or European cultures. However they are broadly defined. We can't really say that Spanish and Norwegian cultures are the same but we can say they are both from this broadly defined "European culture". European cultures in general were more similar to each other compared to the rest of the world (regardless of religious or linguistic differences). Because Europe is a sub-continent were the populations had to live side by side and influence each other for a long time. It's similar to the Indian sub-continent in that way. There is no such thing as Indian civilization but there is such thing as a broadly defined Indian culture or Indian cultures. You can apply that to most regions of the world. European colonies in general have European cultures or European derived cultures.

          Religion too can influence culture. But religion on it's own can never be a culture. There is no such thing as "Islamic culture". You have to be lying to yourself to believe that. I mean Malaysia and Bosnia absolute don't have similar cultures. Like wise Uzbekistan doesn't have a similar culture to Senegal. That would be like saying the Philippines and Russia have similar cultures because of Christianity. Likewise Bosnia is more similar to other christian Balkans state in terms of culture compared to Malaysia. and Malaysia is more similar to the Philippines culturally than it is similar to the Senegal.

          Stone age tribes are like the San tribes are outside of civilization of course.

          https://i.imgur.com/0qUpaf0.png

          Now that the dust has settled, is this accurate?

          I've analized several dozen examples of the use of the word "civilization" and came to conclusion that:
          Civilization = continuum of human activity and achievement.
          This is why, I think, classification of civilizations of every period should be based on the heritage of significent empires/confederations (examples: Achaemenid Empire, Delian League).

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            think about it. your post proves these posts right:

            why? can you objectively study the molecular genetics of civilization the same way you can study the genetics of race? Of course you can't because Race is something that actually exists. Civilization too exists. But the idea of there being different types of civilizations is something people made up in their minds. That's why people debate what kind of civilizations exist and what don't exist. and that's why there are radically different groupings and ideas on mapping out those supposed different civilizations. I mean look at this thread.
            You can't objectively map out how many civilizations there are and you can't map out their extent. Since there are no types of civilization (but only human civ). You can however, objectively do that with race. While also recognizing race mixing and demographics change

            One day Poland can be an eastern civilization. and the next day it can be western. just make shit up bro until you feel comfortable haha. Meanwhile you can't be racially sub-saharan one day and then european the next day.

            Your comparison is terrible

            Civilization = City. There were no civilizations when there were no cities. But then cities popped up in Mesopotamia and Egypt. They had vastly different cultures but they were both civilizations. The more advanced civilization was the one with a more advanced technology or cities. things like having a more advanced sewage system or a more advanced metallurgy. They were both human civilizations that had the same basic wants and needs. When Egypt wanted copper, so did Mesopotamia. When Egyptian cities employed iron, so did Mesopotamian cities. and so did the cities in China and India. All of them were similar to each other in this regard. They were all human civilizations (1 type of civilization. different types of culture)

            I'm not saying different human cultures don't exist. European and Indic civilizations don't exist. But European and Indic cultures do exist. Civilization and Culture are not the same thing

            No. There are no types of civilizations. There are different cultures though.

            There is only human civilization. That's just 1 type. But some human societies have a more advanced civilization than others. This is because they have a more advanced technology or because their cities a more advanced. Civilization after all is city or cities ruling over a territory.

            This is why there is no such thing as western civilization. However there is such a thing as European culture or European cultures. However they are broadly defined. We can't really say that Spanish and Norwegian cultures are the same but we can say they are both from this broadly defined "European culture". European cultures in general were more similar to each other compared to the rest of the world (regardless of religious or linguistic differences). Because Europe is a sub-continent were the populations had to live side by side and influence each other for a long time. It's similar to the Indian sub-continent in that way. There is no such thing as Indian civilization but there is such thing as a broadly defined Indian culture or Indian cultures. You can apply that to most regions of the world. European colonies in general have European cultures or European derived cultures.

            Religion too can influence culture. But religion on it's own can never be a culture. There is no such thing as "Islamic culture". You have to be lying to yourself to believe that. I mean Malaysia and Bosnia absolute don't have similar cultures. Like wise Uzbekistan doesn't have a similar culture to Senegal. That would be like saying the Philippines and Russia have similar cultures because of Christianity. Likewise Bosnia is more similar to other christian Balkans state in terms of culture compared to Malaysia. and Malaysia is more similar to the Philippines culturally than it is similar to the Senegal.

            Stone age tribes are like the San tribes are outside of civilization of course.

            because you came up with your own definition of civilization or what kinds of civilizations exist. while others in this thread had different ideas. this just proves that "civilization types" don't subjectively exist. Only "human civilization" can subjectively exists.

            and again, I'm not equating civilization with culture. I'm only equating civilization with city/cities. Because that's what civilization is. including by definition and by the origins and roots of the word.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              "Civilization" is just a term, of course it's subjective if people can't even agree on definition of it.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      makes sense

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >japan seperate from sinic while SEA just gets split up between indic, muslim and sinic
    Not a fan.

  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    ehh could be worse could be better but i gotta say, congrats on makin the tough decisions and separating japan

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yeah, looks like shit, 100 years ago it was way easier to highlight particular civilizations.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Indonesia, China, Russia, and Armenia all in one civ
      Kek'd

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        There too shades of red actually.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          There are*

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Congratulations. You've somehow managed to create a worse map than the first one.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Atleast it makes sense.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Cuba should be gray too, my bad.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >All of North and South America made up of the same people

      You are aware that Latin America is mostly of Spanish or native descent and that North America is primarily German and Anglo immigrants, right?

      Spain is not the same as Northern Europe, and it never has been.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >North America is primarily German and Anglo immigrants
        should we tell him?

  19. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Japs are Sinic despite what weebs desperately want people to believe. Japan to this day still apes Tang Dynasty culture

  20. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why is Ethiopia separate

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      muh Bible

  21. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    test

  22. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    If Latin America gets their own civilization then Spain and Portugal should be in it.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      After the independence Spain and Portugal entered into the sphere of Western Europe and a lot of its cultural and political trajectories followed those countries. Latin America kept the semi-feudal aristocracy based culture it inherited from Iberia and even to this day, those old colonial era tendencies still hold sway. In a lot of places the elite classes are still the same planter families.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Have you ever been to Spain or Portugal?How do they in any way, shape or form resemble LATAM? The only thing in common is lenguage and religion, not culture nor the way society is structured.

  23. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    ossetians are wrong, they are 30% christian, 30% muslim, 30% uatsdin, 10% soviet atheism, though yes, the most successful and well known ossetians in russian culture are muslim

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >uatsdin
      ?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Ossetian pagans

Your email address will not be published.