Why didn't Europeans get along?

Simple, Europeans are seperated by different languages unlike the other examples in your pic

>India speaks one language

neck yourself senpai

Mandarin, Cantonese, and Mongolian are no more mutually intelligible than French, Spanish, and German.

India has become united because the brits made it a single big colony. Without british unification who knows what would have become out of it. Since the end of colonization bangladesh and pakistan have ripped of and this in modern times.

3 different languages vs 20+ in europe

This. The Church occupied the position that in China or Japan would be reserved for the Emperor. Unlike the eastern emperors though, the Pope never quite managed to become the unchallenged arbiter of all his vassals like in China nor managed to elevate one vassal to supremacy like in Japan. The Protestant Reformation and the rising power of individual kingdoms dampened the Church's authority considerably, and it had too many disputes with the various Byzantine and Holy Roman Emperors to fully commit to raising one above all others - and even then there would be someone else powerful enough to say "no" and set up a counter-pope in protest.

There are well over 20 languages and "nations" in China and they were even more prominent before Han imperials started homogenizing them. There are a fuckload of Romance languages because the Roman empire splintered and they drifted apart, they would have spoken one tongue if it had endured.

Those are just three I picked out out of dozens. Don't be dense. Mandarin in practice is more an umbrella language similar to 'Romance' or 'Slavic' and China has just as many language families as Europe.

What the shit is this retarded image trying to prove?

China, yes fine.
India was only united because of the British,a forced unity which experiences sectarian difficulty to this day and only just survived because most Muslims pissed off to form literally another country
Japan and the Japanese have always considered themselves one nation, it's just the different daimyos and clans were more independent. It's called feudalism.
The Roman empire united people who were never united, just barbarians, but nowadays the distinct geography of Europe made the people quite separate making it difficult to unite. European nations more or less follow its geographical borders.

India was almost completely conquered by the Mughals, then almost completely conquered by the Marathas, before the British came and took over individual princedoms when the Mughals and Marathas began to collapse.

I would consider Mandarin closer to "German" in all its variety or one of the big branches of Slavic,

Retard. There's like 15 recognised languages in China alone but that's not even reality, in reality each city has its own language which cant understand the next.

Zhejiang for example speak Wu Chinese, also known as shanghaiese, however in hangzhou you cant understand someone from shanghai, nor someone from quzhou, these places arent more than a few hundred miles away and all in the same province. This is why they all speak mandarin as a second language. Otherwise you literally cant leave your city and be understood.

Well standard mandarin these days is one language.

>India
>get along
>what the fuck is Pakistan

Those princedoms were taken over by the brits because they were collapsing? Lol they collapsed because the british kicked their ass you mean

Blabla china is so strong bla bla, didnt you started to get colonised because 1 or 2 british ships sailed into a chinese port and shot some cannon rounds at frightened chinese faggots? The LOLZ

The same way French is one language. The point is we wouldn't be having this discussion about there being 'too many' disparate languages in Europe to unify it if Europe had been dominated by a single state and ethnic group for as long as modern China.

China was colonized by +- 100 british troops and their magical boomers, Lolling so fking hard right now

>The Mughal Empire

lol

do you know how many sectarian conflicts China has had?

Japan is a good example though, they have their shit together.

>Blabla china is so strong bla bla
What? Did you even read my post, i was talking about Chinese languages. I'm not even Chinese, I am British.

Exactly my point, on paper they were unified but a kick in the door and the so called "empire" fell in pieces quickly, so much for "unification" with different language

What are you talking about?? Mao unified China after warlords and civil war, and introduced standard mandarin long after the Europeans left and long after the Qing dynasty.

I don't think you know basic history.

The Japanese are unified linguistically and racially to a remarkable degree, China is the world's last true empire besides the Russian remnant. The Indians don't get along if you noticed.

(((They))) shot down our last attempt at unification.

Yes he unified, after a bloody civil war and with tens of millions dead and starving. Anybody that did not fit in was slaughtered, so much for the great unification, unification through fear and violence, not because they were people who managed to overcome language barrieres and diplomats, you know very little of history

And yet they are unified. I don't think there's any unification in history that wasn't won by bloodshed and force.

Regardless while Mao did unify China the idea of a unified China had existed a concept and fact for millennia, his goal was communism, and the reinstated unification.

What's with the hateboner for China?

The question of the op was, why didnt the europeans get along, then showing an example of a unified china as if they got along. I dont think you understood the question of op

I only came here to make a point about languages because some ignorant fool claimed China had 3 languages.

well, i pity him.

>

>EU third reich

But the actual answer is the formation of nationalism before civic unity.

India is far less unified and far more regionally divided than commonly assumed.

Somewhere between the EU and USA.

Closer to 300 ships + 60,000 men

Freedom or death.

>Somewhere between the EU and USA

It is vastly closer to the USA than the EU. People have been predicting India's collapse since the 50s, yet it never happened. Instead many other entities fell apart in the meantime, such as USSR and Yugoslavia. While India actually gained new States such as Goa and Sikkim.

There would have to be some kind of major shift or event, but India today is far too powerful now to get pushed around again.

>Implying Indians got along
You can't compare the unification of India to the likes of China's unification. It's gone through its own waves of centralized empires to fractured kingdoms over the course of centuries. The idea of a unified Indian populace and culture is the result of 20th century nationalism, and even then it's still got a lot of separate cultures beneath that unified political banner.

But they did have a common ideographic writing system and a common culture, which allowed the empire to be administered without the need for a full language unification. It's actually something of a miracle what Qin Shi Huang accomplished.

WTF? Mongolian is whole different language it's more similar to turkish then to chinese. Maybe you wanted to say manchu - which only has like 30 speakers left

hmm...

>Haha we conquered a China that was still using crossbows against our cannons.
>that means that England could take on all versions of China.

How about the England of 1066 against China?

Good luck trying trying to colonize China now, when you can't even keep Mohammed from raping your daughter.