Why was sub-saharan africa incapable of creating any civilization or culture of great value?

Southern Europe
It really isn't part of "europe" though. It was connected and part of the Mediterranean.

Compare northern europe in the 1800s to sub saharan africa in the 1800s and tell me that

>the people who invented the fucking concept of Europe are not European
Fuck off please.

>Lack of frequent river basins
>Constantly changing yearly weather patterns forcing people to move hence not being able to settle in one spot and build cities
>Large portions of harsh terrain (e.g. congo jungle, mountainous regions in south africa)

>1800's
>creating civilization
Retard/10

>southern europe isn't a part of europe

>Farmers and fishermen
>Famine common

Vs

>Farmers and fishermen
>Famine common

Not seeing much difference

They were part of the Mediterranean.
Euros just claim them as part of Europe to piggy back off their achievements so they don't feel left out even if said Southern Europe never associated with those other people.

>Euros just claim them
But they were Euros, they called THEMSELVES Euros. What the actual fuck are you even implying here, Greeks and Romans are the default Europeans, everyone else adopted the identity from them.

>it's a sandnigger trying to claim Italians and Spaniards are more similar to sandniggers than to other Europeans episode
it's getting tiresome

They re their own thing.

>Greeks and Romans are the default Europeans, everyone else adopted the identity from them.

Nope. they made claims to but the reality is completely different.

...

Ahmed please.

If your judging by antiquity then North Africa and the Middle East should both be higher than Western Europe. While Gauls, Britons, etc. weren't literal barbarians like the Germans, they were much less advanced than just about any Mediterranean civilization (except in a couple areas like iron working).

If you want to claim Nordics and Germanics are not European then fine. But calling Greeks non-European is asinine, if they're not European then nobody is.

>Middle East
Yes.
>North Africa
No.

European is a meme construct.

So is "Mediterranean".

No it isn't.

Yes it is. There is no such thing as Mediterranean civilization or race and never has been.

compare europe in 2000 bc to egypt in 2000 bc, you can fling this shit both ways.

It started out as a meme construct but it became relevant with the collapse of rome and the islamic conquests.

>Egypt
>subsaharan Africa

It started out by Greeks differentiating themselves from the Persian barbarians. There's also a ton of symbolism in it. In the legend, Europa was a Phoenician princess kidnapped from Tyre and taken to Crete, kind of symbolically passing the torch from Semitis Middle Eastern civilizations to a Hellenic (European) one.

>subsaharan Africa

a nonsensical term.

You can call it Niggeria if you want, it would be a more accurate term.

>lmao africans never made a civilization or something
what about egypt
>oh uh I mean THIS specific part of africa
what about the mali
>uuuh jewish tricks that doesn't count cus I say so
sage this shit like always

Even that aside, the point still stands. Civs rise and fall at different times. It's not some linear game . There are countless variables to account for.

>mali

Even if we want to discount all the great West African civilizations, there's always Buganda, Ethiopia/Aksum, and the Kongo Kingdom.

>Wattle & Daub buildings mean it's not a civilization

Oh I am laffin

>literal sand castle that needs to be rebuilt every odd season because it melts away

>why are sub-saharan africans incapable of leaving the fucking stone age?
>oh yeah? but what about this retarded sand castle? check mate!

Are the people who laugh about Nordics the same people who think shit like Kongo or Zimbabwe were great civilizations? That would be the toppest of keks.

Why do all these morons that would've probably been peasants that contributed nothing to the world while others built civilization obsess over black people?

>probably been peasants
Speak for yourself, some of us actually descend from gentry.

Africa is a rich continent if you know how to construct a strip mine.

but it's pretty desolate to a man with a spear

Africans knew hew to mine gold and iron, some of their KANGZ have been wealthy as fuck. Trouble is they never invested this wealth in anything but frivolities and bling while most of the country itself was a stone age dump, you can actually see the same behavior displayed by modern African and African-American people.

You don't descend from shit

Throw Abyssinia in there too. Axum was an interesting civilization too, and Oriental orthodoxy has a pretty long tradition.

reminder that all the forced anti nord shite on here originated from butthurt blacks on /new/,/pol/, and /int/ who were constantly triggered over people making fun of niggers own lack of accomplishments.

Wattle & Daub techniques were used into the 15th century in Northern and Western Europe.

t. mad plebeian

right there was no difference between copenhagen or london and the heart of darkness

I mean it's one thing to say that Rome and Greece was more advanced than northern Europe at one point, which is correct, but it's a completely different ballpark to claim a bunch of African drystacks, mud temples and spear chuckers in subsaharan Africa are on par with northern Europe.
Pic related is medieval Novgorod which was an ass end of the world and still a million times more impressive than all of subsaharan Africa put together.