If India has existed for thousands of years , why is it a shithole...

If India has existed for thousands of years , why is it a shithole? America has only existed for hundreds of years yet it is the one superpower.

Attached: 13538919-ACE3-4461-BCBC-84CB80A4275F.jpg (557x550, 27K)

time doesn’t equate power, therefore development
abuse does

Bongs

Biology. It is the same reason why East Asia is more developed than Southeast Asia and Chile + Argentina are more developed than Peru.

India and the middle east used to be more advanced than Europe. How do you explain that?

They were one of the richest regions on the planet. Then spent centuries in fighting and getting invaded by Hajis. Finally Brits raped whatever wealth and intellectual elite was left

you’re fucked in the head nigga

low IQ, low social trust, fewer natural resources managed by decades of fabian socialism

because they had more fertile farmland.

by the middle ages, europeans started to surpass asia/middle east due to technologic advancements

Europe is pretty fertile too, and there are also multiple rivers running through Europe. Why aren't they more advanced than the people living in jungles and deserts since the beginning?

Attached: images - 2019-05-24T130221.302.jpg (607x505, 92K)

>people living in jungles and deserts
the fertile cresent, nile and gangetic plain had multiple growing seasons as well.
they could grow more higher yield crops allowing them to support larger populations.

It was Britain that benefited from the industrial revolution. In fact, India was devastated by it,

India's stagnation was more due to malthusian growth during the British Raj and an inefficient centrally planned socialist economy after independence

is this the effect of wh*Te inbreeding?

मेरा सौभाग्य है कि मुझे बचपन में शक्तिमान देखने मिला।
वरना आज के समय में तो टाॅम एंड जैरी जैसे बकवास कार्यक्रम देखने पङते।

Attached: D7Pc1C0WkAAIsEt.jpg (720x651, 63K)

Massive natural resources, rivers that absolutely help US industry and their expansion in 1800s, massive influx of immigrant which are also happened in 1800s.

>by the middle ages
You mean early modern history brainlet. Middle Ages is when the Ottomans and other steppe gunpowder empires were still relevant in history.

True, but due to the very nature of India and the world that we live now, the industrial revolution was a major problem for them, and I think it was the point of inflection on what India is now.

I'm not saying that is Britain's fault. They were the ones who weren't able to keep up.

seems more like Europe could only surpass the middle east and asia after technological advancements in those regions. Why can't Europe develop these technologies until the early modern period? Was Europe only biologically superior to other people after this period? What happened?
Also Ukraine is very fertile, what happened there?

Attached: d7d8733.jpg (1280x656, 164K)

they are good at stacking rocks

Today's Indians didn't rule India millennia ago.

>seems more like Europe could only surpass the middle east and asia after technological advancements in those regions.
yep
>Why can't Europe develop these technologies until the early modern period?
I don't know. why didn't the rest of the world develop technologies before europe, considering they had more resources and more people
>Was Europe only biologically superior to other people after this period? What happened?
wut? why are you talking about biologic superiority
>Also Ukraine is very fertile, what happened there?
again low crop yield due to fewer growing season, can't grow crops high in calories like rice.

>they could grow more higher yield crops allowing them to support larger populations.
No. By the Middle Ages Europe actually had a larger population than China.

>I don't know. why didn't the rest of the world develop technologies before europe, considering they had more resources and more people
A lot of Eastern societies are more inwardly looking then Abrahmic societies. That and a mixture of steppe nomads raping the world (why Greece was at its brightest thousands of years ago too)

>wut? why are you talking about biologic superiority
because the american I was replying to originally talked about biology.

he probably meant that the economic difference is because of high IQ of European / Northeast asian people
Even if it was true, it still wouldn't lead to technological innovation. Its mostly down to luck and developing the right cultural framework.

Ill tell you what happened, western Europe was just at the right location. Its not Europe that developed, its WESTERN Europe. Outside of Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, France, Italy, Netherlands, Belgium and UK, the rest of Europe simply benefitted from the advancements of these countries.

You know why? Because Western Europe was just at the right distance from foreigners. Back then, everybody fought each other, there were warring states in India, Europe, China etc., but it was Western Europe that was shielded from savages.

India was invaded by Huns, which ended the Gupta Empire, and later by Turkic Muslims, who pretty much ravaged it’s civilizational backbone. Same for China, Mongols and Manchus. Same for Eastern Europe, ravaged by the Ottomans.

Europe was shielded, but was still at enough distance to have contact with the rest of world so that it could benefit from the inventions of other groups. This is something abos and native Americans didn’t have.

And the Middle East? You tell me. Its easy. 5 letters.

Bharat existed for thousands of year's not india
There is a big difference between both

Considering flights in Sweden (the most modern country in the world) get delayed by 9 hours I imagine Indians have to wait in line for approximately 3 weeks. Eventually shitting on the carpet is going to look pretty OK.