Why, despite higher average IQs and being ahead for most of history has Asia not dominated?

Average IQ reflects the education system.

IQ is a meme

>it's happening again

wew

all these larpers saying china/asia was worth shit then where did the accumulation of all this lead to? at what point were they overtaken? portuguese had a global empire in 1500, chinas never had one
the masonry/artisan of the west far supercedes that of the east, as well as intellectually in terms of philosophy, and religion, the evolution of ideas, and inhabitants

Whites are biased asshats and the japs will believe anything they tell them.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Divergence

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Divergence
china becoming one kingdom so early on stiffled its growth.

anarchism is life
statism is death

(((in short)))

>enters and exits bronze age ~1000 years after most of rest of the world
woah, so this is the power of chinese iq.

Europe was ahead since the Renaissance hit, you ungodly imbecile.

I'd argue that the breaking point where Europe surpassed "the East" to be around 1650, after the peace of Westphalia and the rise of modern states.

It's this change that allowed Europe to better leverage the resources within a state and pull ahead of Eastern countries.

If you're arguing overall power, sure, but Europe was ahead in advancement a couple centuries before that.

It was more like 1525

Absolutely not. Suggesting that the West was more dominant than Ming China in 1500 is laughable.

Depends on how you look at it and just what they were better at. The West was surely picking up faster during Ming China.

You’re right, China has always been huge and powerful with no true rivals, their only competition being unable to supplant their culture and ultimately integrated into it instead. Meanwhile the competitive multipolar geopolitical environment in Europe created a diversity of ideas and competition, meaning that no one group is ever in absolute power stagnating all development. It would be like if after Rome fell, another dynasty just inherited it and despite a few changes the whole empire remains virtually the same for thousands of years with no real forces of innovation at play; in that hypothetical Europe never surpasses China, because you can’t beat China at their own game, however after the rapid innovations Europeans eventually became worth far more per capita than the Chinese because they had learned to work with less and against adversity, you get comfortable on top for thousands of years and suddenly you’re not in the same league as your smaller neighbors, suddenly it takes 10 Chinese to match a single enemy, and as numbers mean less and less as modern warfare evolves to be less about pure manpower and more about logistics and technology, that manpower advantage means less and less, eventually culminating into far smaller cultures absorbing large parts of China in the 19th and 20th centuries due to the vast technological and logistical superiority of their enemies. The Chinese civilizational strategy will continue to get weaker and weaker with the march of time, at every point that eu think they’ve caught up, the intense competition between their rivals will have already pushed them to the next level. Everyone always thinks they understand the balance of power in the world until they don’t, it has to be tested and the powers that are tested the most make the innovations when they matter. China might perfect the 20th century European way of life, as they always tend to perfect the old paths already treaded, but not the new path.

>dominant ming china
dominated what?

and the second the west did get to the east you had opium wars and colonisation (hong kong etc)

Or about three centuries after they got to the east.

Iberian sailors did dominate the seas right away, but the land was not as simple.

The Portuguese made contact with China in the 1500's, and the Opium Wars were in 1840. That's 340 years.

In between, Ming/Qing were able to fight and win wars with the Dutch, Portuguese, and Russians, albeit at the very edge of the ability for those countries to project power.

>second the west did get to the east you had opium wars and colonisation (hong kong etc)
The second the west did get to the east, you had Portugal asking China for a place to trade. Chinks gave them the island of Tunmen as a trading post, on the agreement that they aren't to step on the mainland. Then Portuguese niggered out and started kidnapping/buying Japanese and Chinese slaves. The Ming got pissed off at Joao's acts of piracy and drove them away in two battles.

Themselves and their close neighbors since they can’t keep their ebin half a million man armies in the field outside of China for more than a few months before they all start starving and eating their horses and each other, Ming China couldn’t project power nearly as far as even the least capable of Europeans powers at the time, and they didn’t have the individualist mindsets of smaller European groups willing to travel the world and test their mettle against larger but less daring and less capable opponents comfortable dominating their own little worlds, the Chinese social structure does not produce individuals like that, it produces whipped dogs happy to be cannon fodder for the heavenly empire, unwilling to take independent risks. After all, most European exploits were private affairs by private men looking to make a name for themselves with the blessing and support of a standing power, the Chinese might dominate China and their neighbors but they can’t dominate anything beyond their isolated bubble.

>being able to defend the waters right in front of your country against an enemy from far away
>impressive

I'm not trying to impress you, I'm just making you eat your words.
>herp derp second the west did get to the east you had opium wars and colonisation (hong kong etc)
>But that wasn't the case
>You: "tch, you think that's impressive kid?"

>won’t even report their own losses because they were probably embarrassing
Figures

Renaissance allowed them to pull ahead but it wouldn't be until somewhere in the late 17th century that they finally did.
In some aspects but some parts of Asia were more civilized and prosperous than parts of Europe later on.
>and the second the west did get to the east
Actually the Spaniards had dreams of conquering China for a long time. They never got around to it since it was nigh impossible for them in the 17th-18th centuries.

>Portugal
>west

also reminder that without westerners Japan would still be stuck in feudal times

>Ming China couldn’t project power nearly as far as even the least capable of Europeans powers at the time, and they didn’t have the individualist mindsets of smaller European
>Muh individualism.

Lol, European explorers had state backing, while the private trading posts set up by Chinese merchant clans were not only done so with their own money, but were conducted during the 25 year sea-travel bans that the Ming Emperors enforced to deter piracy. What they did was highly illegal but did it anyway because $$$.

A few of them in Borneo even became countries of their own, ruled via "Kongsi" or "Clan Hall" government. Which basically is a sort of representative democracy based on Chinese village government back home where families are to send their patriarchs in clan hall meetings to discuss governance matters.

>they were superior and more civilized!
>ignore this retarded law the emperor passed which crippled them and their lack of exploring skills caused by that!

>it wouldn't be until somewhere in the late 17th century that they finally did.
I'd reckon a bit earlier.

>In some aspects
Some. Namely science and the arts. Though the middle east was relatively comparable.

Lmao superiority? Was shooting down your meme beliefs of eastern lack of individuality.

You've been humiliated twice by this point man, come on.

Without westerners Japan wouldn't have closed their borders. They did so to prevent the gradual Christianization of their country, but were competitive in the East Indies when they did it.

No Europeans, Japan continues developing control in the East Indies.

>No Europeans, Japan continues developing control in the East Indies.
Japan didn't even have a competent navy to speak of.

they couldn't even discover Australia before an Englishman did it, that's how "advanced" they were

>shill chinks getting riled up

Nice shifting of the goalpost, how does traders developing influence within China prove that China can project power with individuals? Where are China’s conquistadors, their tercios, their private empires conquering other nations with private funding and support with strings attached that they had to actually lobby for? Your examples of individualism are trade guilds, good for you, European individuals are conquering nations and forcing trade with other nations at sword and gunpoint, the proof is in the pudding, you cannot deny that individualism propelled Europeans where the Chinese would never go because they were comfortable in China. Comfort=stagnation. Living on the shitty British isles=the motivation to actually travel the world and conquer it, but of course the Chinese could never dream of traveling the world with a few men and dominating vast swarms of inferior peoples, because they don’t have the mettle for that. They don’t trust that each one of them is worth 10 of the enemy, they trust that their 9 friends will give them the edge over the one enemy, and that way of thinking does not lead to great stories of adventure against adversity.

>lack of individuality
>by showing how CLANS did stuff

Japan didn't have a unified navy. They did have ships and sailors all over the East Indies, with some being cut off when the country was closed. If the choice was to compete with Europe at it's own game instead of close off, the same central state structure that allowed it to close off would have allowed it to command that navy.

>Me.
>Shifting goalposts
You're the one implying I was talking about superiority.

>all the wh*Toids getting their jimmies rustled
I guess this is what happens when you get out of your bubble

>Japan didn't have a unified navy.
Not only that, they have a severely outdated navy by East Asian (or really, Everyone's) standards.

Ergo its ludicrous to think of 1500s-1600s Japan as going around dominating the East Indies.

Although there was that one point the governor of the Philippines shook in his boots when Hideyoshi threatened the Spaniards in the Philippines. But he may be thinking more of the ground forces than the Nip fleet.

You write like a retard

I agree with you tho

they are just really smart bugmen, but dont have the most important quality needed for innovation, and thats imagination. Probably because of their very rigid "we all rook arike" culture

>saying this while anime and japanese videogames dominate the world and are praised for their creativity by everyone with a brain
>also not knowing about chinese modern art

Asians are smarter but not very creative.

>anime
>creative

No. It's practically an endless stream of clichés and stereotypes at this point.

We’re talking about the age of exploration and why the Chinese didn’t take part, and why their fundamental differences in social structure, history, and geopolitical situation explains this lack of participation, and why Europe creates things like the British east India trading company and China creates you little democratic trade guilds you’re so proud of.

Asians are creative, they're just not as creative as whites. Anyone with a brain knows that.

>Ergo its ludicrous to think of 1500s-1600s Japan as going around dominating the East Indies.

That was the time when they were competing in the East Indies. Nobody was dominating, Europeans had the edge.

Japan just completed a civil war, and the state was powerful enough to order guns be given up, and they were. The most guns per person on planet Earth, with a population of veterans. This is basically the situation Spain was in when they conquered the world. They could have ordered this resource to go and do what the Europeans were doing instead of trying to conquer Korea and China and then turning inwards.

>They don’t trust that each one of them is worth 10 of the enemy
Funny story about that
>be this guy
>"Discovers" strait off coast of Patagonia
>Sends 2 ships to scout and they never return
>Bailed out on him to go back home lmao
>Make the journey across the Pacific anyways
>Didn't supply correctly so most of the sailors are dying of hunger and scurvy
>Starts thinking God sent him and he is bullet proof
>Stops in Malacca and Enrique (Magellan's slave) realizes he speaks the same language
>Realizes he was raised in Malacca before being kidnapped and taken into slavery by Magellan years prior(Enrique is now inadvertently the first man to circumnavigate the globe due to previously traveling to Portugal from Malacca)
>This also fails to register with Magellan or is ignored one
>Meets king of Filipino island
>"Converts" 2000 islanders to Christianity (which wasn't part of the kings order)
>Tells King you can cut my head off if sick man doesn't heal after converting
>By chance actually heals
>Tells King he will ally him and bully other islands into following King
>Everyone telling Magellan stop
>Wasn't part of the orders of Spain
>Magellan ignores them and orders attack on neighboring island anyways
>Says 1 Spaniard can defeat 100 filipinos a piece
>Goes in with 50 men and no backup because ships are too far off shore due to tide
>1500 Filipinos show up and Magellan gets BTFO
>Dies
>Most of his men watched from the ship either cause they hated Magellan

Funniest part is the shitload of Filipinos he brought with him watched off the coast cause Magellan told them they weren't needed

>he thinks japanese games are better than western games

>and why Europe creates things like the British east India trading company
The creation of the East India Company came because the bongs didn't have the manpower to take down India directly.

It's why there was never a Russian East ___ company. You're comparing apples to oranges.

I like how nobody is even bothering to answer OP

Fair enough. There was that adventure of Hideyoshi's in Thailand after all.

> The most guns per person on planet Earth

That's actually a myth. Japan didn't have that many guns per capita, because guns were expensive and required lots of steel, which was in short supply in Japan.

All the same equipment and none of the same results, but it’s not about the equipment it’s about the mindset.
Go to school, scholars have discussed this thoroughly. Japan didn’t start conquering because the got European guns, they started conquering when they started THINKING like Europeans, when their society became a pseudo-European nation, when they started creating individuals doing individual things like dominating the Chinese black market, because when you create a society of individuals they spread out in every direction and dominate people who think like cattle because the world is made of lions and sheep and Japan became lions when they adopted the Meiji colors. Sheep can only ever go one direction, together, in a herd. They can do a stampede better than any lion could hope, but that’s all they can do. The lion is a jack of all trades, he does WHATEVER necessary to get that sheep, he innovates and finds new ways to get that sheep, he doesn’t trust what lions did before, he is the lion of the future and his children will likewise grow to find their own ways. You want us to stand in awe of the fact that China is the greatest sheep herd ever assembled. Give me 20 good lions any day

...

>didn’t have the manpower

EXACTLY
THATS MY POINT
NECESSITY BREEDS SUCCESS

You're a retard who knows nothing about Asia.
Japan invaded Korea several times just to conquer China. Even in their WW2 era their end goal was China.

They never accomplished shit until American guns opened their ports, height of Japanese history is imperial japan and only a retard would deny this.

>The most guns per person on planet Earth,
The phrase is "Japan produced more guns than any single European state" at the time. In the 1500s, most Euro countries are small while Japan is pretty much the size of California and then some.

Pretty sure Ottomans, Safavids, and the nearby Chinks made more guns than they did.

Not really a good answer by any means, but ok.

>SUCCESS
The Bongs were successful because of the decline of every major power in the country. Not because of muh individual mindset.
They wouldn't start making large gains until the 19th century, despite the advantages they had.

>The closest they got was turks, arabs, and rejected mongoloids trying to get back inside the house..
>muh asia isn't competitive
>turks and arabs are bad at war (they are now tho desu)

You think history happens in a vacuum and nations rise and fall arbitrarily? Did you ever think that maybe the british mindset is the reason for their success, and that your eternal butthurt is projection of your eternal jealously of the inherit fact of Anglo domination? I pity you.

>maybe the british mindset is the reason for their success
But its honestly not.

France was more relevant from the 17th to 19th century and their greatest impact in the last century is creating America.

I won't deny their influence in the 1800's century but it's not because of their mindset.

France and Britain were about equals in relevance.

Are you joking? The West had long surpassed China by the 16th century.

They can't fight very well

>what is kung fu

So are we intentionally forgetting the Mongols existed or what?

a joke and mostly meditative

bad post

Why does everyone keep forgetting Byzantium? During Classical times Ancient Greece and Rome were arguably just as advanced as China, after the age of Exploration and Empires Europe totally dominated the game again, but between the fall of Rome and the 15th century which is when a lot of you seem to suggest China was ahead, the ERE was an equal in diplomacy, bureaucracy, military training and all sorts of other supposedly "great" attributes of China. They even cucked them out of their silk monopoly.

user. It's wrong to say anything good about the West. It's practically racism.

Because you don't see SEA's pretending they're Chinese to make up for the fact that they had shitholes. People wouldn't have a problem if they said Greece or Italy but to say Europe as a majority was always equal to China is a meme and should be outright punishable.

>but between the fall of Rome and the 15th century
Again, China really declined behind Europe as a whole during the later 17th century when the Qings came into power.

>They even cucked them out of their silk monopoly
Which is only because of the Arab gains of the silk road.
Rome *was* equal to China but not the Byzantines just by themselves.

Yeah, we get it, White power, exterminate the shitskins.

Because everything white is related to extermination.

Because anything positive said about shitskins is liberal propaganda.

Much is great regarding the East. Only it sucks when you can't say you're proud to be white anymore without being labeled a fucking supremacist.

Welcome to Stormfront. Stormfront is NOT racist. We believe in giving freedom and respect to ALL peoples.
Actual Content: Exterminate all shitskins. Shitskins are useless animals. Anyone who disagrees is a libtard or a shitskin himself.

>world population has been growing
>we looked at all the inventions from ancient times until recently
>we found that the continent that has been most economically and politically dominant for the last 600 years had the most inventions
>we were amazed
Take a snapshot at AD 1300 and you might conclude something different.

You consider a geographically global empire to be more important than an empire of a huge number of people that is not spread out geographically?

>Improve on
>Not copy

Holyshit this thread
>anons imply the west had long surpassed China by the 16th century
>doesn't even bother to say why
>doesn't even bother to read Jesuits accounts on the Ming Dynasty
>the ones that do say its because the west had global Empires but don't go into the detail how the Ming economy still dominated.
Why do they even post here, doesn't even answer op's interesting question.
>Why, despite higher average IQs and being ahead for most of history has Asia not dominated?
Higher IQ does not mean they automatically get more geniuses. One could argue Europe got more geniuses per capita because of China's autistic bureaucracy that at some point could dominate you on an individual level, compare this to Europe where citizen life where mostly dominated by the village community, and Merchant Guilds and Guilds in the cities that each set of specific rules. Successful craftsmen could not marry a mediocre one, so successful people would marry successful people.
Its true that Chinese bureaucracy did support new innovations and practices during the Tang and Song Dynasty, but it was far from the norm during the Qing.
Qing Conquest Theory is the best explanation. M*nchu hadn't conquered you might have seen China as one of the 19th-20th Great Powers

>i'd argue that the breaking point where Europe surpassed "the East" to be around 1650, after the peace of Westphalia and the rise of modern states.
Problem is that one could argue China was the first modern state.
>the ERE was an equal in diplomacy, bureaucracy, military training and all sorts of other supposedly "great" attributes of China. They even cucked them out of their silk monopoly.
Kek how, Diplomacy? certainly not, they got cucked by the Arabs and Vatican and their Imperial Title stolen by HRE
Bureaucracy? Now you are just being dishonest or you have little knowledge of the Meritocracy based bureaucracy in Imperial China.
I would like you to elaborate more on how the ERE supposedly was equal.

God you're retarded. Take a fucking breath.

>I would like you to elaborate more on how the ERE supposedly was equal.
ERE was inferior to any and all Charlemagne successor states, not to mention Chinese Empire.

I am sorry for actually answering OP question

IQ isn't as important as people think. IT's not useless but it doesn't factor in other components of success, like motivation, willpower, leadership, diplomacy, and luck ,which Asians historically lacked in all departments.

Why do weebs think the Japanese empire was impressive in any way?

because IQ is just a test and not measure of all intelligence. Of course, many here will give you round about answers and deny this, but that is the only true and logical one. They will also forget all the other social also straight up circumstantial factors that just kind of happened.
Whites were also just always super militaristic than average with eachother and then everyone else .
Remember chinese invented gun power.

they lack willpower and individualism of white man