Is it historically correct to say

Social construct. The white race doesn't exist. Go to stormfront if you want to discuss 19th century race pseudoscience.

Depends. Are we talking absolute numbers, or per capita?

In absolute numbers it *might* be correct, though the fact that both "atrocities" and "White European race" are hard to define doesn't help you any. Are the famine deaths attributable to Mao's regime "murders"? Are Russians "white"? Well, you know, how about Georgians (Stalin)? How about Turks? The Mongols and the Japanese certainly aren't.

Per capita white Europeans might have committed the FEWEST murders of any race (insofar as that's even a meaningful statement given how our concept of 'race' has changed over the centuries). Prehistory was extremely violent, and even once it enters the historical period, the more complex a society becomes, the less violent it becomes, proportionally, even though the absolute number of deaths etc goes up.

The takeaway point: it's not really a meaningful question, and if you really have a Master's in World History you should know better, but you're more wrong than right.

You must be a white liberal nigger. Kek show me proof that there's no such thing as a white race.

If there was a white race, he wouldn't be able to be a white nigger.

Are you a white american who really thinks he has more in common with me living on the other side of the world than with his black neighbor?

Sorry.

>Caucasian race

That's more acceptable in Veeky Forums I guess.

>>The White European race committed the most human right crimes and atrocities in history with little to no consequences.
Humans rights and war crimes are imaginary social constructs, and can not be measured.
>The White races around the world killed more innocent people since the beginning of modern civilization.
This is possibly true (although Asians have killed quite a few people). However, there's nothing wrong with this. Every race on earth is willing to commit genocide and mass murder. The only difference is that Europeans have historically been the WINNERS, not the losers.
>>That if we look at the White European race as a whole that their body count is greater than the current population of the earth in regards to historical genocides.
That's impossible to confirm or deny, and most likely not true. There are 7 billion people on earth, and the worst genocide white people have committed only killed an estimated 11 million people.
You're both retards in slightly different ways.

>White race
>White races

If we're going by American ideas of race, then if white people kill other white people, like say the Slavs chimp out on each other again, does that make the one being killed non-white?

How about we just have three groups of people?

>Angry Niggers in power with a bone to pick because they used to be scared niggers and are now acting on their Victim complex
>Scared Niggers getting their bone picked because the Angry Niggers are mad at them and are developing a new Victim complex
>Fence sitting Niggers that want all the other Niggers to chill out and get pissed off enough to join either side

I sound fedora as fuck, but half of human history is like the chicken & the egg problem. Which came first, the Victim, or the victim complex?

Do your homework Timmy,
Can you even read?

>Virtually all physical anthropologists agree that Archaic Homo sapiens (A group including the possible species H. heidelbergensis, H. rhodesiensis and H. neanderthalensis) evolved out of African Homo erectus (sensu lato) or Homo ergaster.[54][55] Anthropologists increasingly support the idea that anatomically modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens) evolved in North or East Africa from H. heidelbergensis and then migrated out of Africa, mixing with and replacing H. heidelbergensis and H. neanderthalensis populations throughout Europe and Asia, and H. rhodesiensis populations in Sub-Saharan Africa (a combination of the Out of Africa and Multiregional models).[56]

1) There is no one "white European race". Racial blocs are an American invention.
2) Besides that "White European" is kind of redundant, as Europeans are only white. Non-white ≠ not European.
3) Mongols probably killed more. In modern times, Stalin and Mao are the humans responsible for the largest losses of life -- political 'purging', war, manufactured famines, etc. Stalin was a mountain goat or something, and Mao was a Han Chinese Clonedroid.
4) As the human population adds another billion every 20 years, it's kind of silly comparing to the past. It's like when movies advertise "OMG WE MADEZ THE MOST MONAY EVAR, XYZ TRILLIAN!!" Yea well, they never adjust for inflation or spread of movies today, so of course no early talking from the 1930s can compete.

You're a fool if you think any 'race', whoever happened to be dominant, wouldn't also be treating the planet like their playground. Be LUCKY it's white people. Can you imagine dominated by, say, Muslims, or Africans or Asians? *shudder*

If that is now 21 century race theory don't you believe that we all are mixed after over 10000 years?

>White European race
no such thing

>white people are a homogenous group
>white people can be viewed as a group at any point in history
>any race can be viewed as a group at any point in history

Seeing how distinct the groups are we're clearly not all mixed.

Probably most 'crimes' and 'atrocities' were committed before light skin was ever present in humans
>It has been hypothesized that dark skin pigmentation was the original condition for the genus Homo, including Homo sapiens. However, as populations migrated away from the tropics between 125,000 and 65,000 years ago into areas of low UV radiation,[8] they developed light skin pigmentation as an evolutionary selection acting against vitamin D depletion.[3][9]

Europeans invented the entire concept of "atrocities" as something you aren't supposed to do. For most of history in most of the world, rulers simply butchered the innocent whenever it was expedient to do so, and did it without a second thought.

Also:
>Genghis Khan
>Timur
>Zhang Xianzhong
>Mao
>Pol Pot
Asians win by a wide margin.

its right and you should be proud of it user, you're no different tham other races, just more successful
t. asian

*The British

Honestly, I think it would be the asians. Simply do to the number of them