The two largest empires in history were British and Mongolian. The most dominant race in history were those of Anglo-Germanic blood. Cold winters create high trust, physically strong, low time preference peoples, all of which are powerful traits. Vice versa, the closer to the equator you are, the less your environment changes, the less adaptable and forward thinking you need to be. The global south has always been at the mercy of those more northward of them. Northern europeans are losing everything their ancestors brought them precisely because they lost their "winter" (aka natural external threat) due to their technology, and became mentally/physically/spiritually weak as a result.
This is how I see it. What are some arguments against winter theory? Change my mind.
You’re correct, certain harsh jungle environments can probably simulate a similar natural selection process, at least in regards to intelligence. However such jungle selected individuals might lack testosterone and risk-taking. Maybe getting into fights is more risky in tropical environments. Or big, energetic people just die off from the heat and parasites
Browsing IQfy really is like stepping back in time to the 19th century, where half-baked theories about geography and race are passed off as historical law.
How do you explain Europeans and North Americans becoming minorities in their own countries if it is "just theories"?
Time to go back buddy, this is IQfy not /misc/, we deal with the past, not paranoid right wing prophecies.
What's the paranoia when you only need to read the news?
Yeah, news is also a different board, this is IQfy, how many time do I need to tell you? I mean I know you are stupid but how can you be so stupid you cant even read?
The only reason whites and gulf arabs are becoming a minority is because of cheap chinese, latinx and indian labor. And the Arabs don't whine about it because they don't want those jobs for themselves anyway.
>What are some arguments against winter theory?
you're trying to make a sweeping historiographical theory out of a sample size of literally 2, one of which doesn't even fit your theory that well considering how mild English winters are for their latitude
The English didn’t evolve in England they migrated there
The Saxons were irrelevant morons in Germany and only become the world spanning industrial Empire after a good 1500+ years in Britain.
Also, English ethnogenesis occured in Britain, with Aethelstan being the first king of the English a good 400 years after their departure of Germania. Genetically the English are also mostly identical to native Britons (and to the French) with just a little extra continental German influence sprinkled in.
Britons didn’t spawn in Briton they migrated there from Eastern Europe, why are guys deliberately acting obtuse?
How bad is your Asperger's? Britons have been on this island for at least 4000 years at this stage, WE are not fricking steppe people m8
Only about a quarter of England's (not the UK, but just England) ancestry is Germanic.
Anglos are mostly celts
If that was true why was Scandinavia a massive shithole until the 19th century and why did the Roman Empire exist?
The Roman empire existed because the sacking of Carthage left a regional power vacuum and nobody was ready to take over. Also the Roman Empire never dealt with "winter theory" peoples like the Visigoths, Huns and Germanic peoples. I think the Romans mostly left the Germanic ones alone once they discovered they had hundreds of thousands of horses and were eating milk and cheese every day.
>Also the Roman Empire never dealt with "winter theory" peoples like the Visigoths, Huns and Germanic peoples
The Goths were mostly chilling on the Carpathian/Black Sea region by the time they actually started achieving anything worth recording.
https://www.skiresort.info/snow-reports/carpathian-mountains-karpaty/
It snows in the mountains, no shit? They didn't live above the tree line lmao. Have you ever been to the Black Sea coastline?
>Belgium, northern France, Switzerland and Austria don't have winters
Kys
Belgium and Northern France have mild, wet, winters like England. They're Atlantic coastline and therefore considerably warmer than further inland areas.
It's often forgotten that Paris's climate is almost identical to London's.
That's not really the point. There are limits to the Roman Empire's power and they clearly weren't able to domesticate all the pagans in Western Europe, they were too strong for that.
Dumb moron. Literal baboon chimp.
Cope and seethe
>The Roman empire existed because the sacking of Carthage left a regional power vacuum and nobody was ready to take over
You're pretending like it wasn't the rise of Rome which caused this, by the time Carthage was sacked Rome was already the foremost power in the Mediterranean. Carthage at that point was quite literally only a city state without interior Africa.
>Also the Roman Empire never dealt with "winter theory" peoples like the Visigoths, Huns and Germanic peoples
Does the entirety of the 3-5th centuries not exist in your mind
Mongols are descendants of Gog, as they are magog (the ethnic group of mongolia/ seperate to the tartarians). Genghis Khan was also possessed vampire like qualities as the records indicate.
which qualities are those?
>What are some arguments against winter theory? Change my mind.
Russia is cold as balls and has been famous for being backwards, low trust, corrupt, etc. for centuries.
Meanwhile, France has very warm winters (mostly rain rather than snow) and was the center of European power for approximately 1000 years.
>Outside Europe
Southern China is warm and borderline subtropical and yet the Song were some of the most advanced, wealthy civilizations in history while the Mongols and other nomads up north were ooga booga savages
>Vice versa, the closer to the equator you are, the less your environment changes, the less adaptable and forward thinking you need to be.
Ah yes, the famously advanced uhh... Navajo and Mohawk?
Far far better compared to those lazy bum ass Mayans, Aztec, and Incan Empires which were closer to warm climates closer to the equator
>What are some arguments against winter theory?
Russia.
Russia was frequently raided by muslims, taking slaves and making them eunuchs and using the women in the global sex trade. That's where the world slav comes from. It only makes sense they are weaklings and it does not invalidate winter theory.
It's like saying "Europe was frequently raided by vikings".
Mongols are recent arrivals to Mongolia, they are from further Southeast. Winters aren't exactly super cold in England.
england does not have cold winters
Western Europe does not experience cold winters. Eastern Europe does.
Literally Rome
>but they couldn't conquer the hardy winter north Germanics!
There was nothing worth conquering, I live in a North Germanic country and even I know that argument is cope, we we're simple people not yet developed, later in history our time came, but it had minimally to do with us being winter blooded or whatever.
Winter takes care of the poor. This is why there aren't favelas in Russia
It wasnt cold winters that did this but rather the Ice Age which selected for people who had the potential to conquer and hold due to becoming more robust, aggressive, and physically larger than Southern populations.
Ultimately - Industry is built on the back of servants/slaves, people taken in warfare or subdued to a great Chieftain. A people can be naturally industrious but their industriousness, to be useful, must be focused, and for this to happen they must be ruled and legitimacy has been historically among these peoples decided by the sword.
Wealth to pay the servants comes from spoils.
The Spoils from successful campaigns.
Cold Conditions breed tougher people but its not the origin of Great Empires, just a form a nutrient in the soil by which great Civilizations are grown.
Ice Age Europeans got wholly replaced by later arrivals.
>more robust, aggressive, and physically larger than Southern populations
That's thanks to steppe genes, but these guys lived near Caucasus and Black Sea, it's not super cold there.