The most successful societies till today were homogeneous...

>were homogeneous
Define homogeneous.

you can be expansionist while maintaining your homeland intact by exploring other people

religion,culture and race

France got some wide mutlicuturalism before the revolution, then procced to ethnonice their country into France.

They made themselves homogeneous via assimilation. See China, Rome (for a while at least), America, France (still trying to do it with people from colonists, but they succeeded in snuffing out regional differences)

You cannot. It literally never happened.

Is that why the Middle East is so much more successful than the West?

gonna have to back those claims

>homogeneous
>dominant-expansionist

Which cultures did the muds conquer?

they just killed each other

>Middle East
>homogeneous

then you need to keep your guard against rival powers and engage in multiple wars and conspiracies, see Spain vs England

were the British isles much multicultural during the British empire?

kek

and you've already triggered whitey

>The most successful societies till today were homogeneous, patriarchal and dominant-expansionist (cooperation with lesser cultures is a bad practice)

>prove me in the wronging

China is the oldest civ wich still exists. They are expansionostic but not to expansionistic they are more introverted.

Women have the same rights and duties.

But the mandarines are very rigid and have a 0 tolerance to betrayal and any intrusions from outside.

Rome lasted hundreds of years though. Seems pretty successful to me.

Just because they aren't still around now doesn't mean they were a failure.

List all your "successful societies" to start normal discussion.

Of course.

The empire was the decaying stage though, Spengler explains this pretty well.

It can and it has happened all the time. The whole point of expansionism is to expand. That is not even possible without maintaining your own identity.
The Middle East is hopelessly divided by culture, religion, and nation, Bringing up this region nly supports the point of OP.
You clearly dont know shit about the expansionism policy of Rome.

And even that took hundreds of years.

I'm gonna have to list every civilization in history that had any relevance at all

Here is a map of all french dialect
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_France
>At the time of the French revolution in 1789 it is estimated that only half of the population of France could speak any French, and as late as 1871 only a quarter spoke French as their native language

Most people didn't speak french as their native language in France until relatively recently.

If your legs are rotting slowly instead of falling apart overnight does this mean you're okay?

>prove me wrong

USA, China

/thread

The most successful society is the current western one that pushed nation-statehood, liberalism and capitalism to the confines of the Earth.. It is far more dominating and it has expanded farther and wider than any other before. All without a trully concerted effort.

>Britain
Became a multicultural shithole

>Rome
Became a multicultural shithole

>USA
Became a multicultural shithole

>Spanish empire
Became a multicultural shithole

>France
Became a multicultural shithole

You're just as fucking retarded as the communists who will try the same shit over and over and be baffled over getting the exact same results each time. The only way to preserve your race and your culture is isolationism, period.

that just proves my point further

when was France the most powerful again?

>The empire was the decaying stage though
Republicans get out REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

I actually feel pax romana was the apex of Roman society and Caesar was the best chance to curb the corruption of the Senatorial class and bring much needed agrarian reform to the people of Rome.

Japan stood still tho

You tagged the wrong post to reply to, I presume?
Are you referring to the society that is collpasing before our own eyes and that is in a precarious state of identity crisis?

Read Spengler.

And it now in worse shape than even any of those countries listed

>utter disregard for law
>despotism and personality cults
>corrupt as fuck
>degenerate, decadent and carnal as hell

Says a lot about you if you consider this to be the apex.

Japan is a-okay

English culture, Welsh culture, Scottish culture, and Irish culture were all distinct cultures speaking different languages with distinct Churches, although these days they're all pretty similar.

If they had been separate nations rather than united, only the English Empire would have had small influence, with the Scottish Empire dying due to debnts, and the Welsh and Irish never forming an Empire.

Multiculturalism between different European cultures is still multiculturalism, and if they had not united into a multicultural union they would not have been as hugely successful.

>The most successful societies till today were homogeneous, patriarchal and dominant-expansionist

Doesn't the country you're posting this from directly contradict that?

USA is not homogeneous, not patriarchal and not dominant expansionist.

How the fuck would you know if he's posting this from the US?

when there's a clear power unbalance you can't call that relation a "union"

the lesser cultures were assimilated by the english

I didn't say that modern USA was any of that

and I'm Brazilian

Because they had a real empire for what, 20 years? Even so they got a million Koreans and half-flips are not a rare sight.

technology makes so smaller time spans can produce as much transformations as bigger periods of time

And is already on its decline. The USA was at its greatest when it was more homogenous.
America is a case in point that a non homogeneous society just becomes more and more fractured.

When an italian join them and their multiculture to form a merry empire while assimilating the jew?

Humanity has always organised itself along economical opportunities that were, in turn, dictated by environmental factors and technological advancement. Patriarchy fit a level of development in which every means to create value for the society (hard agricultural work, killing others for theirs) was done infinitely better by men due to biology. Dominant expansionism was a good model until bilateral trade started to yield better economic results in the long run. Homogenity is a factor that is up to discussion.

>join

they were co-opted

>utter disregard for law
Laws were bad anyway.
>despotism and personality cults
It worked.
>corrupt as fuck
Same as before.
>degenerate, decadent and carnal as hell
It was like this the longest time, if anything they got more pruddish as they continued to decay after Christianism (not saying Christianity caused the decay, they were already decaying).

Greatest peace within borders in ages, greatest growth in territory and wealth, they got to enjoy commodities such as an excelent road system, a postal service, a police service, a firemen service, etc.

You say that like the Japanese empire didn't coexist with the European empires for the duration of its existence.

All societies collapse, just like all living beings die. These aren't measures of success.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sakoku

So basically the modern USA.

Why does it become fractured?

Switzerland

Relevancy is an overrated meme

Every racial, cultural and ethnic group have their own political agendas. You got republicans where there are conservatives, libertarians, christians, pro-israel jews, anti-communist/socialist latinos from socialist countries,etc. Same with the democrats where you got labor unions, progressives, feminists, etc.

What I think OP means is that if everybody would become WASP with the same job of raising cattle in the Western frontier then most people's political struggles would be the same. Now you got every specific group with their own problems and solutions to their problems which doesn't allign well with other groups.

Now that I think about it scap racial, cultural and ethnic group. Most disuputes people have is because they have another sort of jobs. The problems farmers in the Mid-West face aren't the same as the problems factory workers have in the Rust Belt and those aren't the same as the tech companies in Silicon valley and not the same as the banks/financial institutions that are situated on the east coast.

>Most stable empire of all time
>Lasted from early antiquity to the high middle ages

Case and point, chumps.