• mayonesa@wolfballs.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 years ago

      No, we’re tired of the same old arguments full of obvious errors and fallacies.

      If we were all mixing all the time, specialized variants wouldn’t exist.

      Europe has been fighting itself internally over those very differences.

      etc.

      • iamtanmay@wolfballs.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 years ago

        You say errors, but don’t bother to explain.

        We already were mixing all the time. Did you never read a history book ?

        Europeans have been migrating all over the place, USA, South Africa, Australia, Argentina, Brazil. Why is that ok, but the reverse is not ?

        Europe has also invaded the whole world -> crusades, colonization of Americas, Africa, Asia.

        Somehow your White purity arguments conveniently forget all this ?

        • Masterofballs@wolfballs.comM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 years ago

          I’m not sure the crusades were really an invasion. It was more like “you must allow us to worship here occasionally” they actually improved and brought peace to the region for a time for Muslims Jews and Christians. I would say it was a net gain for everyone.

          I’ll let others debate the white purity stuff I don’t really care.

          • mayonesa@wolfballs.comOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 years ago

            Not to mention that they were preceded by Muslim invasions of Europe…

            In the same way colonization of the New World was preceded by Mongol invasions of Europe…

            And both influenced the treatment that those groups – Amerinds are Mongols – received afterwards.

            • Masterofballs@wolfballs.comM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 years ago

              In the same way colonization of the New World was preceded by Mongol invasions of Europe…

              Was it? I need to read up on that. Mongols were amazing at warfare. Could ride a horse for 10 days straight only stopping to drink the blood of the horse to stay alive.

              • iamtanmay@wolfballs.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 years ago

                Err… no… Mongols and New World had nothing to do with each other.

                New World came 100s of years after the Mongol Invasions. Mongols arrived in Europe in ca 1250

                New World came at the time of explorers such as Amerigo Vespucci, Vasco de Gama, Columbus, in ca 1500, from around end of 1400s.

                @mayonesa is an interesting guy, but unless I am misunderstanding, he is misinformed on basic facts

            • iamtanmay@wolfballs.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 years ago

              Amerinds

              What ?

              “Not to mention that they were preceded by Muslim invasions of Europe…”

              …er… no… The first Crusade was started to take JERUSALEM from the Muslims, nothing to do with Europe. Jerusalem is in Israel, which is Asia.

              The one who had started the first crusade, was the Byzantine Empire, what is today Turkey.

              The Byzantine empire, which was the Eastern half of the Roman empire, after the fall of Rome to the Germanics, had requested military aid from Western Europe

              Here is a brief overview of the first crusade: https://www.worldhistory.org/Crusades/

          • iamtanmay@wolfballs.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 years ago

            For everyday christians, it was way worse than that. A lot of the crusades were politicians trying to get rid of excess mouths to feed.

            If you read about the motivations of each crusade and the journey, not the military stuff… its really similar to the shit politicians do today

            Race baiting, elites controlling the poor masses, economic shenanigans, border games, political dick measuring, even brainwashing children’s education

            Saying it was muslim v christian is overly simplistic

            BTW, I don’t know as much about the reverse, i.e. the muslim takeback and the struggle for the common man living under the muslims. I think a lot would be similar, since economic circumstances were equally shit for everyone at the time, and political leaders are a total crapshot