Throughout history, the countries with the smartest people has shifted from one ethnic group to another. Egyptian, Persian, greek, roman and chinese empires were all the most powerful empires in the world over the past 2000 years. They were mostly of different ethnicities and weren't white. Also the romans being white is just complete nonsense, the ancient roman historians described the romans having Mediterranean features in comparison to germans having western european features in contrast.
My point is that what determines the smartest ethnic groups are just circumstantial luck which allows the populace to take over neighboring countries, trade routes, and to acquire knowledge and advancements. Whites aren't just better than everybody else, contrary to what white supremacists would want you to believe.
Greeks during alexanders time were closer to levatine arabs than germans genetically. Roman italians from the time of Christ were also closer to the levant. They weren't white genetically, deal with it.
The same criteria white supremacists use, which ethnicity had the highest living standards, most power, and advancements.
What kind of argument is that? Greeks were white. So were Romans. So are today's Greek and Italians. I don't care who they were close to - why are Germanic people the criteria of whiteness? How do you determine who's white genetically? Is there a "white gene"? Whiteness is a metaphysical category, not just a biological set of traits. Don't you get you're being ad hoc?
The point is that there's no direct comparison. Carthage dominated Africa but were crushed by Rome when they were confronted. The same happened to the Indian empire, China, Japan, the Aztecs, etc. You have an overly simplistic view of history and economics as if civilizations are pokemon cards with explicit stats that can be compared.
Btw, how do you rule out luck? You appealed to luck as being the reason for white hegemony - how do you know it's not luck that made those other non-white civilizations great? Maybe it has nothing to do with being smart and capable? You only dig yourself deeper.
They are literally closer genetically to levent Arabs than any European population. Pick the Slavs, celts, nords, Germans, and the results will be the same. They aren’t white, deal with it.
Sure, but the ancient Greeks and Romans weren’t biologically white, so they metaphysically couldn’t be.
It’s luck that made every civilization great. Some civilizations have a string of great leaders and the right resources to go out and conquer other nations and make advancements. They do and then become great.
You literally can't understand what I'm saying - why do you assume the Nordic people or the Slavs are the standard of whiteness and not the Greek and the Romans? Of course people from the Levant would be genetically closer to southern Europeans because they live in similar climates and are close to each other. That doesn't make them less white though - it makes Levant people closer to whites and not vice versa.
Imagine going to a Julius Caesar and saying to him he's not white because he's not like the barbarians or the vikings. This is the most retarded bs I've heard in a while.
Thanks for destroying your own argument which was that the greatness of a civilization was tied to how smart its people are. Turns out it's all about luck.
Levant Arabs aren’t white, neither are ancient Greeks and southern Italians from the time of Jesus. You can’t just claim they’re white because you feel like it.
A Roman from the time of Jesus would agree that he is a civilized med and not a white “barbarian” because white≠great.
Luck is what makes one ethnicity “smarter” than another. That’s why whites aren’t “genetically” smarter than everybody else and the smartest ethnicity had been changing throughout history.