@Deleted User

@The Big Oof

Any of you lot wanna carry this on with me

perhaps @Vilhelmsson

or @Selous

Any of you lot

pls

im bored and need to debate

Idk, what did you talk about?

Why africans and other culture

never developed as much as europeans or asians

Eg carrying on the previous topic

You're viewing the topic in a very Whig way.

whig way???

Whats that

@Deleted User Are you progressive?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whigs_(British_political_party)#See_also

i dont think so

wait one sec

sO, WHY YOU ARE USING PROGRESSIVE VIEW OF hISTORY?

lemme post a pic of a quick political test i took

http://www.politiscales.net/en_US/results/?b1=83&b0=7&e1=45&e0=40&p0=26&p1=62&m1=50&m0=14&j1=55&j0=40&s1=90&s0=7&c1=81&c0=14&t1=52&t0=24&reli=100&femi=14&comp=67&mona=100

Here

@Draco

oK, so Whig view of History is about examining History in a linear fashion. The other view is Cyclical History. West is basically at its highest point, or was and it would only decay further while Africa would develop

hmmm

history in a linear fashion?

Have you read Spengler?

nope

History in a linear fashion means that civilisations progress and become better over time

havent read much about politics, just kind of taught myself by looking at actual examples of systems in use

if thats the definition of history in linear fashion

then i dont subscribe

Well, the debate about progress is meaningless in cyclical view because there is no such thing as progress

and i disagree with cyclical history aswell

Lol, how do you view history?

in my mind

The only way to get better is to look at what worked and why and what didnt work and why

then to mix it with modern ideals that work

to try and find something better

to rinse and repeat till you reach utopia