Why Europeans conquered the world

[Matt Emery]

JARED DIAMOND, a researcher at UCLA, has been doing fieldwork in New Guinea for over 25 years. New Guinea is home to some of the last hunter-gatherers in the world. A long time ago, one of his New Guinea friends asked Diamond why white people had so much and New Guineans had so little...

From the article:
The answer is, because they happened to live on the Eurasian continent, so they were lucky enough to start agriculture earlier than any other place on earth. Just by luck, they were at the right latitude with the right combination of available animals and plants that could be domesticated. And with a head start of thousands of years, their technology was more advanced. And because of their close association with their domesticated animals, they carried many diseases to which they  had resistance but people from other continents did not. Because of their head start, Europeans possessed guns, germs, and steel and they conquered the world with them.

Much of the global inequality seen today comes from this original source.

Read More:
Read more of this excellent article here; http://www.youmeworks.com/why_europeans.html

[Seeker]

I think some of this was behind it, but I feel we can't completely discredit ingenuity and ambition (also greed I suspect) as large contributing factors also. One more thing too, I personally do not feel badly about it and don't see it as a negative in itself. How they went about doing things wasn't always right of course.

[Matt Emery]

I think some of this was behind it, but I feel we can't completely discredit ingenuity and ambition (also greed I suspect) as large contributing factors also.

He argues against behavioural and genetic reasons.  That's why he made this study - because the commonality of human traits contradicted the fact that certain populations progress, and others remain static.

He also implies that all people have similar levels of ambition, ingenuity, greed, altruism etc.  And he concludes that the decisive factors in the success of certain populations isn't related to those, instead, it's related to geography.

I think he's onto something.

[Seeker]

We'll agree to disagree then. I certainly don't subscribe to most of those ideas.

[Phanatic]

In this day and age it's quite controversial to say, but I believe it's that europeans have higher rates of genius than anyone else.

[Matt Emery]

In this day and age it's quite controversial to say, but I believe it's that europeans have higher rates of genius than anyone else.

That would be an interesting conversation to pursue (in a scientific sense).  I imagine it would incorporate many disciplines; Anthropology, Biology, Geology, etc.

A good place to start would be here; http://anthro.palomar.edu/subsistence/sub_6.htm (it's an excellent read).

[BigKhanz]

Europe was thousands of years BEHIND china in the development of technology. India, China, Persia, Egypt all had thriving empires before the first cities in Europe were even founded. During the Middle-Ages the most sought after doctors were Middle-Eastern. The Native American tribes lived in a land of plenty. Better crops, much better hunting conditions, much more temperate weather patterns compared to the majority of Europe. Everything was so perfect they had no reason to advance.

Cultural reasons are much more likely for the spread and dominance of Europe.

And after travelling the world with US Navy spec-ops, I have learned that all people are NOT created equal. I don't believe in any being better, but certainly different.

[Kate]

I'm a little late here, but I just want to mention the popular book by Daniel Quinn, "Story of B"; he dubs the European (now U.S.) imperialists Totalitarian Agriculturalists, and argues that the agricultural revolution disconnected us from nature and, more importantly, caused our population to skyrocket. 

Because more land was needed to support a growing and greedy culture, the agriculturalists expanded their horizons and took over more and more land.  They were successful not only because of their weaponry, but because they literally raped the land and thus forced hunter-gatherers to have to adopt to their way of life. 

And while the practice of agriculture is able to maintain and, in fact, cause population growth, it is obviously not sustainable.  Because, short of terraforming other planets, we've run out of land to conquer.

[Qommon]

In this day and age it's quite controversial to say, but I believe it's that europeans have higher rates of genius than anyone else.

Why, oh why doesn't M'tbou understand particle physics? I've written all the equations he needs in the sand!

[Brodie]

In my opinion a mix of greed and God-complex. We thought we were better than everybody else (and being British I have to admit we were one of, if not the worst for Imperial expansion) - its a simple process which boils down to this...a gun has more stopping power, armour penetration and range than a spear.

A better question is perhaps why aren't the old European Empires still around like the British, German, French and Spanish Empire with all their hundreds of colonies? The same reason the Macedonians, Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, Babylonians, Chinese, Mayan, Incan, Mongol, Indian and Russian Empires aren't around anymore - Empires rise and fall, its as simple as that, some are because they get too big to handle, some empires had resources others want, sheer volume of enemies from all sides enroaching on said empire's terrritories, some border onto bigger empires and war ensues, others simply decay after years of stagnation.

Regardless the world is too big for one person (or nation) to rule, if only we could all get along it would be fantastic.

Brodie

[Alex Good]

Egypt and the middle east had farming long before Europeans. It's not the location, it's the fighting spirit. White people have more of it.
Oh and here's another possible reason: http://cogweb.ucla.edu/ep/Neanderthal.html. It would certainly explain the broader shoulders of Northern Europeans when compared to other races.