Why South East Asia was never as important as India or China?

Why South East Asia was never as important as India or China?

Fuck ton of Islands are annoying to colonise.
They did well for themselves mind you.

What about the non-island part of south east asia?

Landlocked.

India was connected to China, SEA, Africa, Mideast, etc

China was same, except without Africa/Mideast, but with Steppes

SEA thus remained under the influence of India/China

Southeast Asian never rivaled China, but was just as if not more advanced than continental India.

Thats why Southeast Asia is called Suvarna Bhumi, which means "land of gold" in Sanskrit

Pic related is largest Vishnu temple in earth from Cambodia.

This pic is second largest Shiva temple on earth, in Indonesia

It could be said that we surpassed the continental Indians.

Kind of like how the Romans probably surpassed the Greeks

There's only so much land down there. Countries like Siam and Burma did alright, but to live up to the notriety of India and China is hard. China is basically the oldest, still living country (besides Egypt). It's vastly culturally influential over the Eastern countries and has destroyed a rebuilt itself many times. India, while smaller than China, is still very big and has important ties to major world religions. I think development of technology and civilization is harder when it's just you and two great powers breathing down your back, as opposed to Europe where it was a bu ch of different warring nations.

Perhaps in terms of development, but the world will never forget India's impact on religion, for Buddhism, Jainism, Hinduism and Sikhism.

What Wat is that?

To what extent is India's impact on religion due to the British invasion and occupation spreading the Indian thought worldwide? It is my understanding that much like China the Indian civilization was mostly self-contained due to its geographic location and so never really had a worldwide spread of knowledge outside of some parts of SE asia

Except it's always important because it's located in a major trade route, in the Cold War too, and now in the struggle of pacific dominance.

Goddammit, American daytime threads are always shittier in quality.

For western civilisation you are "kind of" correct, the first contacts came with us reaching out to them instead of the other way around, from the time of the first portuguese jesuits.
I won't talk about the rest because it would awaken my autistic rage and wikipedia can do it for me.

It's not a temple.

It's a history theme parkish thing in Thailand with many ancient buildings from different time periods reconstructed

>more advanced than continental India

top kek

Actually India has hosted civilization for significantly longer than China has.

You are clueless. India conducted trade with the entire ecumene for all of its history, and started very early as well. Aspects of Indian culture/invention traversed the span from Ireland to Japan before the first millennium.

They were constantly cucked by either India or China for most of their early history, and then by the Muslims, Europeans, and the Japanese for their later history.

Their entire culture is just a mishmashed ripoff from India and China ffs

/pol/ pls go

Well considering they are ultimately of Chinese origin anyway, saying they developed no indigenous culture is kind of disingenuous.

>everyone who has slit-eyes is Chinese

American education

>doesn't know his Asian Neolithic prehistory

Pathetic

He's right you know

>uses the term prehistoric in 2016

Pathetic

>ultimately of Chinese origin anyway
Hmong Mien,Tai Kadai,Austroasiatic and Austronesians aren't Chinese.

they do originally came from china

He used the word 'cuck' and 'mishmash' to describe a culture. He doesn't know what he's talking about.

Yeah, but they came from what was then *not* China.

Sure, there are a lot of Hmongs, Tai, and other Austronesians who lived in China, but there were also shitloads of them who migrated before the Chinese acquisition of the South

Not him but what would be the proper term in 2016?

Continental india was probably the best place to live in the old ancient world.

/pol/ would say they are the miscegenated descendants of ancient Aryans.

they also have the largest buddhist temple in the world

> It is my understanding that much like China the Indian civilization was mostly self-contained due to its geographic location and so never really had a worldwide spread of knowledge outside of some parts of SE asia

Your understanding is totally incorrect. They had the greatest influence out of any civilization or culture up until the last few hundred years. This includes major influence in all of East and Southeast Asia.

Hinduism and eventually Buddhism were the first true globalized religions, predating Abrahamic religions by several hundred or even thousand years.

>Continental india was probably the best place to live in the old ancient world.

Was probably the most peaceful at least.

no chariots

>Hinduism and eventually Buddhism were the first true globalized religions, predating Abrahamic religions by several hundred or even thousand years.

Nigga what?

They may be older but they were not globalised until way, way after.

Depending on how you want to define it either Islam or Christianity were the first globalised religions.

You can find Hindu and Buddhist artifacts and temples from Afghanistan all the way to Indonesia and Korea. This was hundreds of years before Muhammad or Jesus balls ever dropped.

That is the definition of globalization.

>From Central Asia to SE Asia.

So... Asia?

Do you not know what globalization means?

You don't need to be on every continent. Just expand far beyond the region and culture.

Setting up a sweat shop in Africa is globalization, you don't need to have a shop in every continent.

Good thing we had fast boats given the uselessness of horses in the region.