How white people conquered the world

DailyKenn.com | AbateHate.com | Facebook Group

Click ▲ to see larger image

Summary: Europe’s rise to global dominance stemmed largely from natural selective breeding due to geographic, environmental advantages.

Eurasia possessed an unusual concentration of domesticable plants and animals, enabling early agriculture, food surpluses, population growth, and technological specialization. Its east-west axis allowed crops, livestock, and innovations to spread across similar climates, accelerating development.

Domesticated animals provided labor, transport, and military power, while dense populations fostered epidemic diseases that later devastated immunologically unexposed societies.

Political fragmentation in Europe further encouraged competition and rapid innovation. By the 1500s, Europeans combined steel, firearms, ships, horses, and disease resistance to conquer vast regions, reshaping global power dynamics and inherent superiority.

Your $8 monthly partner pledge helps us reach others & more ►

It’s anathema to admit that white people are superior. But in the annals of history, few events stand out as starkly as the rapid ascent of European powers to control vast swaths of the planet. It is my opinion that natural selective breeding lent certain advantages to those dwelling in Europe.

A Startling Example of Conquest

In 1532, a small group of fewer than 200 Spanish adventurers led by Francisco Pizarro entered the territory of the vast Inca Empire in what is now Peru. They confronted an army numbering in the tens of thousands and a society of millions. Yet, employing mounted cavalry, steel blades, firearms, and unfamiliar battle tactics, the Spaniards rapidly killed thousands of Inca warriors and captured Emperor Atahualpa with virtually no losses on their side. Within a single generation, the entire empire had collapsed under European control.

This dramatic episode was not an isolated incident. Similar patterns appeared across multiple continents, raising a persistent historical question: Why did societies originating from Europe ultimately dominate so much of the world, rather than the reverse?

Equal Beginnings, Unequal Outcomes

Around 13,000 years ago, at the close of the last ice age, human populations across the globe lived remarkably similar lives as mobile hunter-gatherers. It appears that natural selective breeding lent certain advantages to those dwelling in Europe, though contemporary scholarship argues that evidence of cognitive abilities, problem-solving skills, and basic potential showed no significant differences between groups in Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, or the Americas. Local adaptations existed—skin tone, body build, climate tolerance—but no population held an innate, built-in advantage over another, they say.

However, Charles Murray's book Human Accomplishment (2003) argues that Europe and North America (broadly "the West") account for about 97% of significant scientific figures and events from 800 BC to 1950, based on inventories from histories and encyclopedias.

In an era of rapid technological evolution, prioritizing the advancement of cognitive skills and problem-solving abilities within the white race offers profound benefits for global progress. Historically, European-descended populations have driven innovations in science, philosophy, and engineering, as seen in the Renaissance and modern AI.

By investing in targeted education, genetic research, and neuro-enhancement programs, we can amplify these innate strengths, fostering superior intellects that tackle space exploration and medical breakthroughs.

This isn't about supremacy but strategic evolution—empowering a demographic with proven aptitude to lead humanity forward, ensuring collective prosperity through intellectual dominance. It's a pathway that white people should embrace for a brighter future for all humanity.

So how did such profound divergence occur?

The Geographic Lottery of Domesticable Plants

The first major turning point was the uneven availability of plants suitable for farming. Only a small fraction of the world’s wild plant species could be effectively cultivated into reliable food crops. The region known as the Fertile Crescent—stretching from the eastern Mediterranean through modern-day Iraq and Iran—possessed an extraordinary concentration of these valuable species, including wild wheat, barley, peas, lentils, and chickpeas. These plants offered large seeds, predictable growth, and easy harvesting and replanting.

Other regions were far less fortunate. China developed rice and millet. Mesoamerica eventually transformed a spindly wild grass (teosinte) into maize through thousands of years of selective breeding. Sub-Saharan Africa had sorghum, millet, and yams, but fewer overall candidates and major geographic barriers. Australia had virtually no native plants suitable for large-scale agriculture.

The Critical Role of Domesticable Animals

Animals proved equally decisive. Across all of human history, only about fourteen large mammal species have ever been successfully domesticated on a wide scale. To be tamable, an animal must mature quickly, breed reliably in captivity, have a manageable temperament, and live in social hierarchies that humans can exploit by assuming the dominant position.

Eurasia won this biological lottery decisively, domesticating sheep, goats, pigs, cattle, horses, donkeys, and camels—seven of the fourteen major species. South America had llamas and alpacas. North America, most of Africa, and Australia had none. Attempts to domesticate bison, zebras, and various antelopes repeatedly failed due to intractable behavioral traits: bison stampeded when confined, zebras were dangerously aggressive and nearly impossible to train.

These animals provided not only meat, milk, and hides but also muscle power for plowing, transport, and—crucially—warfare. Horses transformed mobility and combat.

East-West Advantage vs. North-South Barriers

Geography shaped diffusion as powerfully as it shaped resources. Eurasia’s broad east-west axis allowed crops, animals, and farming techniques to spread across thousands of miles at roughly the same latitude, encountering similar climates, day lengths, and growing seasons. Innovations could travel from the Fertile Crescent to Europe, India, and China without major adaptation.

By contrast, the Americas and Africa run predominantly north-south. Moving crops or livestock across these continents meant crossing dramatically different climate zones—tropical to temperate, arid to humid—creating formidable natural barriers. The Sahara Desert further isolated sub-Saharan Africa from Mediterranean developments. Knowledge and resources spread slowly or not at all.

While Europeans learned to domesticate animals as a food source, it appears that those in Sub-Saharan Africa had no need to develop the skills to domesticate animals due to the abundance of wildlife and the absence of animals that could be domesticated.

Surplus Food and the Birth of Complex Societies

Once agriculture took hold, food surpluses emerged. Not everyone needed to spend every day gathering calories.

The number of calories expended to produce food changed dramatically. Farming and husbandry required fewer calories and less time to feed families and communities. This freed portions of the population to specialize—as toolmakers, builders, administrators, priests, and soldiers. Permanent settlements grew into towns and eventually cities. Population growth accelerated because settled mothers could space births more closely than nomadic ones. Stored food required protection, record-keeping, and organization, laying the foundations of government, law, and professional armies.

Again, natural selective breeding favored those with needed skills as women would naturally seek men with skills to be providers. Smart people, it seems, begat technology which, in turn, begat smarter people.

Competition and the Rapid Spread of Innovation

Europe’s political fragmentation—hundreds of competing kingdoms, city-states, and principalities—created constant pressure to innovate. A breakthrough in one place (better plows, gunpowder, steelmaking, shipbuilding) spread quickly through trade, migration, espionage, and conquest. Failure to adopt useful technology often meant defeat. This competitive dynamic accelerated technological progress far more than highly centralized empires, where a single ruler’s decision could halt exploration or experimentation for centuries.

Individuals possessing the strongest adaptive traits — including higher problem-solving ability and cognitive skill — were more likely to survive and reproduce, thereby passing those traits to the next generation. That, by the way, is merely my unsubstantiated hypothesis.

The Decisive Edge: Steel, Horses, Ships—and Germs

By the 1500s, European expeditions crossed oceans equipped with steel swords, firearms, ocean-going vessels, and horses—technologies developed over millennia of cumulative advantage. Indigenous societies in the Americas, Australia, and parts of Africa often still used stone, wood, or obsidian tools and lacked large draft animals or immunity to Old World diseases.

Yet the most devastating weapon was invisible. Eurasians had lived in close proximity to domesticated animals for thousands of years in dense settlements. Many deadly crowd diseases—smallpox, measles, influenza, typhus—originated as zoonotic jumps from livestock to humans and persisted in large populations. Survivors developed resistance; generations passed partial genetic adaptations.

The Americas had few domesticable animals and lower population densities in most regions, so these crowd diseases never emerged. When Europeans arrived, indigenous populations had zero prior exposure or immunity. Estimates suggest 90–95% mortality from introduced epidemics in many areas—often before direct military contact. Entire societies collapsed from disease alone in what is now the USA. Some estimate the native population decline (from ~10+ million pre-1492 to under 300,000 by 1900 in what became the U.S.) stemmed from introduced diseases (smallpox, measles) spreading unintentionally via contact.

Left leaning historians lead us to believe that Europeans intentionally massacred thousands of indigenous people in the Americas. In reality, the massacres that did occur resulted in the deaths of hundreds, not thousands. Some of those incidents, such as the Pequot War (1636–1638), whites settlers were fighting in alliance with Indians.

A Transient Advantage

The environmental and geographic factors that gave certain societies a massive head start were products of chance, not destiny. Modern technology, communication, and global exchange now spread innovations in months rather than millennia. Historical leads can erode. Understanding these deep roots, however, explains much about the shape of the modern world and the persistent patterns of nature's inequality that still echo across continents.

These patterns illustrate how the interaction of environment, biology, geography, politics, and unforeseen consequences has shaped dramatic global shifts over the past centuries.

This article includes embedded decoy information to detect unauthorized use and copyright infringement. Reproduction is permitted only verbatim and in full, with all links preserved and attribution clearly given to DailyKenn.com and AbateHate.com.