Why are Indo-Europeans so powerful?

Why are Indo-Europeans so powerful?

Attached: Indo-European-speaking_world.png (4500x2234, 241K)

Every last indonigger country loses to Finnland.

Why isn't Haiti dark?

it's time for the buttsex with your black boyfriend, pekka

Attached: pekka2.jpg (612x408, 26K)

Even our blacks (second generation and so after) are fully integrated law abiding educated citizens who support the nationalist party. We are literally perfect.

For example?

Blacks integrate better than camel jockeys.

For example:
Happiness index 2018 & 2019.
Finland is #1 BOTH years.
Example:
Good country index.
Finland is #1.
Example:
Most stable countries.
Finland is #1.

arabs haven't been here for long.
Turks are integrated.

Made by some dumbass who thinks Creole is a Bantu language, I guess

Most cucked group on Earth

Attached: cc7c497.png (960x820, 1.75M)

>ultra clear borders on a map that represents a time when only Greece, Anatolia and the Levant actually had writing to confirm which language they spoke

they domesticated horses which gave them a huge advantage against lesser people, got butt raped by semites tho

Racemixed with the Neanderthal, which contrary to popular belief were both smarter and stronger than homo sapiens.

Your understanding is below average.

>destroying tons of culture and acient civilitations

based strong barbarian

They were stronger but not smarter
Probably smarter is some field (like motory intelligence) but not smarter than H. Sapiens overall
Beside every people outside of Africa have some Neandertal in them so nope they didn't mixed with them just 4000 years ago

What IE language is secondary in Egypt and why isn't french secondary in Morocco or Algeria?

>civilization

How can you destroy a concept which didn't even exist yet?

Rome and Greece weren't Barbarian mapucheboy

Egypt was a mistake

Coptic would count but its a dead language

i just edited a map from wikipedia so idk why morocoo or alg

North italians have the highest neanderthal admixture and IQ in Europe

Attached: 1510480146270.png (720x720, 907K)

i wouldn't call them civilizations
cultures more like it
besides that i agree the glorification and all that mythologies and even ideologies woven around them is just ridiculous

I thought coptic was afro-asiatic also isn't it just lithurgical these days?

Based and truthpilled

>I thought coptic was afro-asiatic
it is, he's a retarded american teacher
> also isn't it just lithurgical these days?
used in some villages in Egypt, quickly being abandoned tho

Buddhist Indo-Europeans used to live in Western China too but now it's just Muslim Turks and some random ethnic groups the Manchus sent over there like the Xibe.

fair skin

And in Turkey and Central Asia too
Turan stronk

>Rome
>Not barbarian
yes they were, and very barbarian as well. Most than the saint inquisitition i guess

>used in some villages in Egypt, quickly being abandoned tho
What a shame. They should focus more on language revitalization.

coptic was native Egyptian language

but it had heavy Greek influence in loanwords

Republican barbarians? What?

Iranic people still live in Central Asia.

It uses a modified Greek alpabeth as well IIRC. Still an Afro asiatic language though.

Rome invented the concept of barbarians to descrive people like you

why?
and more importantly why are you preaching it, you're basically becoming americans within the next 50 years

Because it's part of their cultural heritage and it would be sad to see it lost. Also I don't consider the Americanization of western Europe a good thing if you think that. I think a lot of modern problems hail from just that issue.

can you read the map

the lightest colour is for Indo-European language as a classical language for loanwords i.e. Sanskrit in South India and Southeast Asia

I see, my bad then.

*prior 50 years.

They'd have to retain an awful lot of languages if they wanted to retain their cultural heritage. Ancient egyptian, greek etc.

i realize your intentions are probably romantic in nature
but all i can understand is
>yo arabs go and fragment into a hundred sub cultures from 2000 years ago while we increasingly unite under one cultural sphere, to keep out imperialism nice and easy going

>out
our*

Well invading half of a continent and other spaces can be called something like barbarian. Republican or not, they were invaders

Was not the greeks? Anyway 'barbarian' can aplie to any West European empire that destroyed half of the earth.
>Muh mongol invasion were savage

At least they were more polite and least primitive

This

Indo Europeans were in majority great civilizations like the Hittite the Ancient Greeks, the Romans, the Persians and Indian Empires as well

germanic barbarians are just a little part of the equation

Well the Romans never invaded anyone. All their wars were defensive, or in protection of an ally. I don't know how you can be so wrong seeing how they're pretty much apex civilization.

Indo Europeans invaded many Semitic lands and enslaved many Semitic people over centuries. The only example of the reverse is Arab early conquest before turko-Mongols started raping everything between the Volga and the sea of Japan.

nah proto-semites put a hard stop to aryan advance, and early Semites repelled them too
most importantly even when losing to persians , Semites managed to keep their culture, Persian empires were basically semitic empires with a Persian king until they made Persian the official language and crashed their shit

Sweden didn’t. Neither did Russia