Imagine a world without white people and Asian people - it's scary

Pretty much 90% of the world's technological, scientific, and legal progress has come from the minds of whites (Europeans, white Americans, Ashkenazi Jews) and Asians (Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and even a pinch of people from India in recent decades for internet and tech developments)

What would happen to the world if whites and Asians vanished ? The world population would drop by 2 billion and left over would be the Middle East, Africa, and South America.

Is it racist that I think these cultures wouldn't be able to advance back to the current level on their own ? Do you think they would be able to even keep things at the level it is going forward ?

I wonder, especially here in the US, what will happen when white people become the minority here in the US. With the population being majority black and Latino, I wonder if technology and cultural growth will continue to grow as it has in the past 100 years.

Your thoughts ?

 

You just touched on a very interesting, true and at the same time politically explosive topic. One would think you aren't a Democrat by even looking at this from this viewpoint. But I'm going to first start off by commending you for posting it, and asking others who will post here to discuss the merits of the conversation, not the poster. The poster didn't profess any ideas, just stated a political observation.


A world without Europeans/Asians(or to be more specific even, a world where European/Asian countries aren't empowered) would be a drastically different world. Imagine for example, the world prior to Christopher Columbus making his expeditions. That would be the world without European/Asian advances in a nut shell IMO.

The lands would still be colonized, diseases would probably be more frequent and obviously none of the technical advances. If there's one thing that we would be thankful for, is that the wars would largely remain tribal and the world wars likely never actually happen and/or are significantly mitigated with vastly lesser players involved.

 

I asked that very question and the standard response from the left is: you are racist, and OBVIOUSLY blacks and Hispanics will suddenly change their nature and become technical and economic leaders, so we are fine.

Sober grown ups know the reality, the decline has already begun.

 

i just don't have a lot of hope for the black American community.
i see a lot of excuses, but very little self discipline and a desire to grow.

the ONLY exception I see for the Middle East is Iran - Persians are very intelligent people, and possible even Paksitanis if they ditch radical Islam and focus in on their educational heritage steeped in their history

 

Good topic. My sense of this is related to a similar question as to what would the world be like sans Christianity. My conclusion? No net difference in technological advancement NOR incidents of cruelty in general or warfare, but that cultures would be much different.

As for the Hispanic/White issue; again it would make no difference because middle class values and work ethics are middle class values and work ethics despite incidental skin coloration. Across this nation second and third generation Hispanics are working their way into the middle class and embracing middle class value systems and perspectives (the good with the bad).

Anyway, that's my starter perspective. So let's see if that alters as others chime in . . . and I hope that they do chime in on this excellent OP topic (congratulations on that by the way) and do so WITHOUT dragging tired old racial issues into the topic.

 

What people have been for the last 500 years is likely what they will be for next 100. Black people have never been technical nor economic innovators, anywhere and anytime on this planet, they just have an excuse that they always use in the USA. Hispanics are only marginally better. Yet in their supreme arrogance, elite white liberals think that they can make everybody think and be like themselves. That's why they are 'inclusive'.

- - - Updated - - -

Brazil, all you have to do is look at Brazil, that's the USA demographics in 2050.

 

Persia changed it's name to Iran... which is the word for Aryan. At least they consider themselves to be white.

 

I disagree but only on the standpoint of climate and the results of migration. Let's remove the White gene (if there is such a thing) from humanity's gene pool and the -- what -- sallow or Olive gene skintone as well. Then push the time back about a million years and wait patiently as the altered gene pool gradually migrates around the globe due to population pressures, warfare, and ever changing climate patterns. So one day these dark brown-skinned folk inhabiting the northern European latitudes get freaking enough of living in areas not all that conducive to farming (and perhaps they have really made a serious dent in native game) and they finger their long beards as they huddle in their bear skins and eye their long boats as they sharpen their swords and dream of warmer climes down south . . . and easy picking. Thus they go a Viking . . . .

So I think that about the same things would happen over all, just with darker skin tones and different language patterns and ranges of cultures and customs.

 

That makes the assumption that race has no other impact on a group or individual except for the color of the skin... which is preposterous.

 

(Shrug) I don't see it as preposterous considering that anthropologists, cultural anthropologists, and crops and climate experts have actually tracked the human migration patterns -- and their domestic animals -- from Africa outward across Europe and elsewhere. So we know WHY people and their domestic animals migrated and where they went and what alterations those migration made not only on the environment but on native cultural habits and patterns of behavior as well. Some people HAD to go from primarily farming to primarily trade as habits in order to survive much less thrive. Some people HAD to go from peaceful to warlike for the same reasons, and some people simply became victims because they had things too easy where they were living and so they were ripe for invasion.

So pretty much things similar in general would occur anyway and going from peaceful to warlike or from pastoral to cut throat traders DOES enforce massive cultural changes on a people.

 

There are tribes in the amazon that have no outside contact, they show no tendency towards technical advancement. The eskimos lived in the coldest climates, they also showed no inclination towards technical advancement. We actually had to force technology on the Asians, but once they got it they realized its power and are quite good with it. It seems the natural tendency for humans is to not advance technically and economically. I disagree that taking whites out of the picture leads to the same evolution.

 

Taxcutter says:
World-wide Zimbabwe.

 

Well I mean if you're starting from that point in time then wouldn't their skin colors change to white (some of them) as well?

The evolutionary genetic and biological changes that occurred throughout history is what has caused whites to be more innovative than blacks.

 

The Chinese just seemed to quit on technology way back and embrace mysticism, I wonder why. I think they could have led the way, but as it was almost everything flowed from Europe.

 

i have never seen any evidence that Christianity has been anything but a hindrance to human progress and freedom - just my opinion

 

the word Aryan is rooted in Vedic Sanskrit - the Swastika is a Vedic symbol.
don't talk about things you don't know anything about.

it is the white race which co-opted the word Aryan

 

In 1935 the Iranian government requested those countries which it had diplomatic relations with, to call Persia "Iran," which is the name of the country in Persian.

The suggestion for the change is said to have come from the Iranian ambassador to Germany, who came under the influence of the Nazis. At the time Germany was in the grip of racial fever and cultivated good relations with nations of "Aryan" blood. It is said that some German friends of the ambassador persuaded him that, as with the advent of Reza Shah, Persia had turned a new leaf in its history and had freed itself from the pernicious influences of Britain and Russia, whose interventions in Persian affairs had practically crippled the country under the Qajars, it was only fitting that the country be called by its own name, "Iran." This would not only signal a new beginning and bring home to the world the new era in Iranian history, but would also signify the Aryan race of its population, as "Iran" is a cognate of "Aryan" and derived from it.
- See more at: http://www.iranchamber.com/geography/articles/persia_became_iran.php#sthash.aR3NSn0o.dpuf

Please go educate yourself before you open your mouth again.

 

Our culture, our agriculture, science and mathematics astronomy and medicine came from the Middle East, why wouldn't it play out again like it played out before.
Having read Jared Diamond's books, especially "Guns, Germs and Steel", he makes the case that it's not genetics, it's geography that pushed the rate of development faster in Eurasia, than in the rest of the world.
Because technology travels faster in the East-West directions than it spreads North-South, because it does not need to adapt to a different climate.
So 1000 years after the earliest cultivation of wheat in the Tigris and Euphrates valleys, you have wheat being cultivated in China and in Ireland.
It takes corn 10,000 years after it's first cultivation in Mexico to reach New England, because the seed must adapt to the shorter growing season, by moving north very slowly.
Likewise, there is the accident of where the domesticatable crops and animals are found, for all the varied range of man there are a relatively small number of food crops, and it depends on finding the mutation before it becomes extinct, and there are only a handful of animal species that can be raised on a farm.
When the first humans came to the valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates, they found wild wheat, wild barley, wild pigs, wild goats, wild sheep, wild cattle.
These are the discoveries that created agriculture, and civilization.
And whatever black population found itself in Eurasia, the climate would have driven the reduction of melanin in the skin by natural selection, and they would have become the white people.

In other words, genetically, there is far more genetic diversity in the human populations of Africa, than in the rest of the world taken all together.
It's not that the genetically superior strain migrated north, it's that the geographic and climatic conditions they found accelerated the progress of technology.

 

LOL - history doesn't begin during WWII. The word Swastika is SANSKRIT and the word Aryan is rooted in the Aryan concept of the noble race. To this day my Indian grandmother has swastika symbols as it is a symbol of balance and peace.

 

>>>Flamebait Removed<<<They changed the name to Iran to conform with the word Aryan which the word Iran is derived from. I'm sorry you don't like that. But personally I don't give a **** what you like or not.

In the West today, there are very few people for whom Iran and Persia connote the same meaning. Contrary to what the government officials of Persia believed in the 1930s, in the West, not only are people not aware of an association between the name "Iran" and the "Aryan" race, but rather due to the great similarity that exists in European languages between the names "Iran" and "Iraq," many, especially among the youth, mistake Iran with this newly-established Arab entity which borders western Iran.

http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2002/Dec_2002/iran_or_persia_111202.htm

 

This thread presumes what would happen if they disappeared. I won't disagree that if you break it down by ethnicity, whites and Asians may hold a larger share of technological innovation, but you have to think about why that happened. Take the Middle East for example, which was at one point in history a beacon of technological innovation. Of course, they were exposed to constant bloodshed and imperialism since the middle ages, as was much of Africa. Not to say that Europeans and Asians weren't also at war during this period, but they were also the imperialists for the most part.

Long story short, human history has an effect on the advancement of nations. When white people and Asians were on top for so much of world history, is it any surprise that many of these war-torn and unstable countries are still war-torn and unstable?

- - - Updated - - -

Care to elaborate? If I recall correctly, it was the Chinese that invented gunpowder.

 

do you agree the root of the word Aryan is not of Europe but from the ancient areas of Iran stretching into Northern India ?

 

because they stopped sometime around 1000 AD and then everything came form Europe. There are virtually no modern results from the ME

You seem to be saying technology equals agriculture, that's not true at all. Agriculture does not require mathematics, physics, and engineering.

How can the genetic diversity be larger in a place where nobody migrates into?

 

This is a perplexing issue. The civil (and perhaps prejudiced) side of me thinks the "Black Power" movement was a dangerous thing that could have ended in disaster for all involved if not mitigated, but the intellectual side of me thinks, there should have been more of a "Black Power" movement. It was all before the earth was blessed with my arrival, so I don't really have any first hand knowledge of the the times.

 

Modern technology. The opening of Japan by Perry, the British forcing China open to trade, etc. by those times the West was far ahead technically