Why were the Mesoamerican civilizations locked into such a consistent cycle of growth and collapse?

>Do you wonder why did middle-easterners spent more than 6000 years to develop bronze metalworking after they got civilization, meanwhile southamericans spent 4000 years?
Because Amerindians were ethnically superior and thus had a higher development rate than Eurangutans?

eurangutans*

Huh?

he is butthurt because "incatard" claimed natives are superior and he is mocking him

>natives are superior
Explain.

OP I garuntee you 90% of the people on Veeky Forums don't even know what you mean by that, most people here probably don't even know any Mesoamerican cultures beyond the Aztec, Maya, and Olmec, let alone stuff like formative vs preclassic vs classic vs postclassic.

Anyways, I'm not sure myself.

>Yeah but it seems like these cultures would experience something akin to Bronze Age Collapse every few hundred years, yeah obviously there was high and low points in Asia and Europe but usually that was just a set back and not the end of an entire civilization

I think your impression of tthis is skewed: There's was certainly a patttern of rises in power and then collapses, but my understanding is this is more in regards to the rise and fall/fracturing of speficic politically dominant states, and then a new state becoming a huge dominant force and eventually collapsing.

Like, after Teotihaucan lost it's influence, it's not like technology and progress stopped or was set back (though no other city/state really adopted a lot of it's innovative urban design traits till the Aztecs), nor did that happen when the Toltecs lost their massive influence after they had risen up and filled that domiant niche.

Even the Maya "collapse" was mostly just a loss in power and population in specific parts of the Yucatan, with then other Maya city states and kingdoms in other parts becoming power domiant and powerful: The largest maya state ever, the League of Mayapan, was only formed in like the 1300's or 1400's IIRC, hundreds of years after the Classic Maya collapse that people make a big deal of.

At least, that's my understanding of it

Good post.
There seems to be a real lack of substantive Mesoamerican discussion on Veeky Forums, since you’re clearly more educated than me on the subject would you ever consider doing info dumps like those old Great Game threads to generate interest?

I mean, they aren't the majority of threads but any time I pop on here there's usually at least 1-2, and there ARE people on Veeky Forums who know enough about Mesoamerica and, say, the Andes (See the user that popped into halfway through the thread, for instance. I still need to resume making posts tthere explaining why that guy who said the Aztecs were neolithic tier is full of shit, as well)

I'm also not sure I am confident enough in my own knowledge to do something like that: I don't have a formal education in this stuff nor have I even just read a lot of the primary sources or the literature/books and sources that are considered the gold standard on these topics, I just have an interest in the region and have done a lot of reading on it online. Like, I know for sure I know more then 99% of people, but I still feel sort of awkaward acting as an authortative source of information.

What I was doing and plan on resuming though, since I found the guy after losing contact with them; is working on the mega folder for Mesoamerica (it has folders for other regions in the precolumbian americas as well, mega.nz/#F!vtQ2EIKK!Z7R8gN5vTsfalKDn18jOmw) that was being made by another user for the Library of alexandria thread from like half a year ago; which has a lot of books and stuff and I plan on adding art to.

>europeans
>from aurignacian proto-gravettian to solutrean:10000 years (30000BC-20000BC)
>from aurignacian-antelian to neolithic: 15000 years(30000BC-15000BC)
>from neolithic proto-agriculture societies to neolithic revolution: 6000 years (15000BC-9000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to copper and arsenical bronze: 4000 years (9000BC-5000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to bronze age and tin bronze: 5200 years (9000BC-3800BC)

>Amerindians:
>from aurignacian proto-gravettian to clovis: 4000 years (15000BC-11000BC)
>from aurignacian proto-gravettian to the start of crop development: 7000 years (15000BC-8000BC)
>from neolithic proto-agriculture societies to neolithic revolution: 5000 years (8000BC-3000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to copper and arsenical bronze independently: 2000 years (3000BC-1000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to bronze age and tin bronze: 4000 years (3000BC-1000 AD)

>buy my book
classic

sad

Agriculture appeared in Europe (South Eastern Eurooe) in 7000 bc at most

Europe didn't spend thousands of years of transition from tribal matriarchy to patriarchal based agrarian cultures, they were forced to adopt it from middle eastern cultures that migrated to europe.

The comparison is taking into consideration the "vanguardist" cultures whose legacy wasn't lost and were adopted by other cultures that continued the technological development alongside the social reformations over time.

More like outrageous.