Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the format Name#Password
[i]Italic Text[/i]
[b]Bold Text[/b]
[spoiler]Spoiler Text[/spoiler]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace Text[/pre]
[super]Superset Text[/super]
[sub]Subset Text[/sub]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists


Imperialism general

- Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:15:51 EST 5jBNoNKF No.58033
File: 1595441751506.jpg -(574931B / 561.46KB, 1400x787) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Imperialism general
Why do humans want to colonize and dominate other peoples? Why did the British occupy and terrorize India, why didn't the US colonies descend on the Americas peacefully? Why did the Spaniards and Portuguese find america and mexico and want to take them over? yall ever wonder bout the motives of imperialism?
Angus Crucklebidge - Wed, 22 Jul 2020 19:39:41 EST PqIVyg6p No.58034 Reply
me tribe good, you tribe bad

kinda how people suppress all the evil, its for the benefit of the tribe
Beatrice Grandhall - Wed, 23 Sep 2020 00:07:50 EST EDZZZ3IE No.58058 Reply
Just land I'm sure. The only real commodity
User is currently banned from all boards
Hugh Pullerstot - Mon, 05 Oct 2020 16:01:26 EST z71lLGSG No.58060 Reply

It's simple biology. We evolved competing both within our own group and with other groups about resources. We're just glorified apes motivated by simple, biological and subconscious drives. People that talk about what separates us from the animals are full of shit. The idea that the Enlightenment started a new era where humans focused on rationality and shed themselves of false beliefs is total BS. Imperialism is just an expression of fundamental human nature, it's got fuck all to do with ideology.
Martha Dartgold - Thu, 08 Oct 2020 23:42:30 EST 3UypTvG0 No.58061 Reply
Resources, land, necessity. Nowadays nobody should need to do this anymore.
Clara Hammlesin - Tue, 01 Dec 2020 06:37:52 EST AVgVPKOZ No.58068 Reply
Yes, but - I think it's worth considering the development of market economies. The expansion of the American frontier, India under British rule, and other instances of imperialism typically depend on resource extraction, as well as land grabs. Which is to say: Capitalism, more than biology, is the primary "motive of imperialism," to answer the OP>>58060
Archie Sinderkock - Sat, 05 Dec 2020 21:03:59 EST G67yLtCt No.58069 Reply
Man could you imagine how fucking kickass a super-empire of combined Spanish, Aztec, and Incan empires combined would be? Imagine the Spaniards met the Aztecs and Inca peacefully, they united with modern weaponry and tech and then took over half the fucking world
Barnaby Fuckinghall - Mon, 14 Dec 2020 09:55:12 EST yrBh+Fw6 No.58071 Reply
Village life vs imperialist is a weird one. I kinda want to move to a village and just anything I want but I know I won’t have access to so many things. Honestly anyone that mentions how there is no difference is lying to you and they probably don’t even realise either
User is currently banned from all boards
Jack Sommerwitch - Sun, 27 Dec 2020 09:17:16 EST cUvyqSo1 No.58082 Reply
Individuals working in governments and big companies have funny motivations, I've found. The goal is to get as many bricks in the pyramid beneath your own. To Be Big is the sum of God+Gold+Glory.

If you study how the colonial powers initially acquired their own homelands you'll see a lot of disturbing parallels to their colonial actions abroad. England conquered Wales by snowballing each little conquered village into the king's army. Just like how they took India with a small expedition, Raj by conquered Raj, the Indian Army grew. This is how they obtained control, by exploiting old feuds.

The Castillians and Aragonenses also obtained control with local help. Then, they burned alive any practitioner of foreign religions after La Reconquista, and later did so in every other literate American territory they found. All but three Mayan books were burned in this way, and the language died. The promise of self determination for their allies meant little when they were forced to obey the Church.

This is how small, dissimilar, and far-off countries keep control over a people much more powerful than themselves.1st, exploit local tensions and legitimize any grievances. 2nd, kill their culture and replace it with your own so they forget you're even foreign. Wash, Rinse, Repeat!

Both powers came to control
Ian Goffingridge - Fri, 09 Apr 2021 03:51:46 EST TNopvyeZ No.58113 Reply
1617954706056.jpg -(65351B / 63.82KB, 736x618) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Most land grabs were made under mercantilism there is a difference in method anon. Mercantilism favored raw resources from colonies being shipped off to the occupying nation. Mercantilism has loyalty to the state. Capitalism has no loyalties to anyone country. The aim for mercantilism is a closed system of subservience to the imperial power, the aim of capitalism is maximum profit. Both can be tools for conquest but then again so can "communism". China still has xinjiang, inner mongolia, tibet, and manchuria as territory even though they are an avowed socialist state with the CCP in control without opposition. Bascically a third of china is occupied land, sounds imperialistic to me. And they are still so called leftists. Human beings have an innate desire to dominate others regardless of what system is in place. Theoretically most forms of governance if followed to the letter should be fair. But the issue is humans mostly.
Henry Pettingbadge - Mon, 01 Nov 2021 06:36:15 EST zXumkxX7 No.58180 Reply
This is true for old imperialism of the 15th-16th centuries, but the new imperialism of the Scramble for Africa, the Chinese concessions etc. were purely capitalistic in origin and goals. Leopold III even owned the Congo as his own private corporate body, unconnected to the state ffs.
Jeff Jones - Fri, 10 Dec 2021 04:33:32 EST mBM6rNdv No.58195 Reply

Mayan is still spoken though and became more literate during after Hispanic arrival than before. The book burnings only happened because of pagan rituals induced within the paper so the bishop had them burned but only after their contents were written down. Though it wasn’t thorough and there’s more than three still in existence. And Indians were considered perpetual neophytes so they were protected from Inquistitory executions and burnings. The burnings in Spain only affected Christians, Jews and Muslims were not their jurisdiction.

The cultures are destroyed, they just change, mostly because of migrations from the conquerors homeland. And many allies joined with the imperialists with complete notion of their subservience.
Ernest Fesslehot - Mon, 13 Dec 2021 17:30:12 EST 2n2vRbCp No.58196 Reply
Of course capitalism was used for human conquest anon. It isn't the system thats the problem its the people on top. Capitalism, monarchy, democracy, republics and communism all have conquered lesser nations due to these forms of of governance being imposed by a more powerful country. The problem is the people in leadership, as in the bureaucrats, CEOs, kings, queens, Presidents, Supreme Leaders, Cominterns, Party secrataries, Head revolutionaries etc...
Anytime you beat your enemy you want revenge. Anytime one person is the head of any movement they take the lion's share of power. Look at stalin, pol pot and mao and compare that to hitler, franco and Mussolini. Same poverty and oppression of masses different excuse. There is very little difference in the elites across all time. Vilfredo Pareto's equations achieved special prominence, and controversy. He was fascinated by problems of power and wealth. How do people get it? How is it distributed around society? How do those who have it use it? The gulf between rich and poor has always been part of the human condition, but Pareto resolved to measure it. He gathered reams of data on wealth and income through different centuries, through different countries in two different continents: the tax records of Basel, Switzerland, from 1454 and from Augsburg, Germany, in 1471, 1498 and 1512; contemporary rental income from Paris; personal income from Britain, Prussia, Saxony, Ireland, Italy, Peru, ottman empire, the adab caliphates,Tang china, tibet under the buddhist monk rule over 9 centuries ago, the Mamluks of Egypt. What he found – or recorded – was striking. When he plotted the data on graph paper, with income on one axis, and number of people with that income on the other, he saw the same picture nearly everywhere in every era. Society was not a "social pyramid" with the proportion of rich to poor sloping gently from one class to the next. Instead it was more of a "social arrow" – very fat on the bottom where the mass of men live, and very thin at the top where sit the wealthy elite. Nor was this effect by chance; the data did not remotely fit a bell curve, as one would expect if wealth were distributed randomly. "It is a social law", he wrote: something "in the nature of humanity
Human beings are tribistic and prone to back stabbing, scheming and conflict anon. We can't help ourselves its in our instincts. Logic cannot stop the gaping maw of human emotion

Report Post
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.