How diverse of a place was medieval England?

How diverse of a place was medieval England?

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    Bait.

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      I'm sorry?

  2. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    not diverse at all, it was 100% black

  3. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    Modern scholars love to call it multi ethnic but won't elaborate that it was Danes, Norwegians, Anglos, Saxons, Normans

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      so, multiethnic

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        Is there really an ethnicity difference between a Dane and a Saxon?

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        Not denying it's multiple ethnicities but let's be a bit more forthcoming with the information.

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          The romans didn't really think about race as we did.

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        But not very black

  4. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    Not diverse it was nothing but Anglos barely any other British ethnicity let alone West Euro

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      More diverse than other places in Europe. You had French nobles, anglosaxon people, people with Viking heritage, ancient Celtic people. Probably one of the more diverse regions of Western Europe

      the duality of man

  5. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    More diverse than other places in Europe. You had French nobles, anglosaxon people, people with Viking heritage, ancient Celtic people. Probably one of the more diverse regions of Western Europe

  6. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    RIP Roger Scruton

  7. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    It was 100% white. Since lords were private property holders of their territory they had a vested interest in increasing the value of their property. Which means they were never going to bring in a bunch of worthless Black folk to destroy their social and economic capital. This is the complete opposite to "public" ownership of land by the state where land is administered by bureaucrats with no skin in the game. Just as capital was administrated in the soviet union by bureaucrats who let it go to ruin because they had no skin in the game.

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      It was 0% white. "White" did not exist in the Middle Ages.

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      >white
      Modern perception of race

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      Private companies love diversity because the conflict prevents the creation of unions. And your typical lord was a foreigner (Norman in England) that hired other foreigners to deal with the peasantry, usually israelites, his skin in the game was ensuring the israelites brought him the taxes so he could pay his own taxes.

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Private companies love diversity because the conflict prevents the creation of unions.
        Land is "publicly" owned so people who advocate immigration don't incur the costs.

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Since lords were private property holders of their territory they had a vested interest in increasing the value of their property. Which means they were never going to bring in a bunch of worthless Black folk to destroy their social and economic capital. This is the complete opposite to "public" ownership of land
      Land owners all over the Americas imported Black folk, curious.

  8. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    Britain has always been a hub of immigration. The indigenous there were bred out by Anatolians in the neolithic, and then Steppe nomads, then Celts, etc.

    Brown Kids at a brown school doesn't mean Britain is finished, it's just another cycle. What makes it notable is that this is a direct consequence of Britain's colonial exploits. It's coming back to bite them and they don't want it to. Somehow Brits expected that they'd be able to get rich and powerful but that it had no downsides.

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      As long as the upper class remains white it doesn’t matter what the lower classes consist of.

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        Have you ever heard of a little place called Haiti?

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          Modern weapons and private security companies make that implausible to happen again

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            >surely the praetorian guard will protect m- *ACK*

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            praetorian guards werent private security, they were a State apparatus like JSOC.

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        like latin america?

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          Theres been many colored presidents in latin America, that ship has sailed

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          >moron thinks upper class military officers and caudillo land owners were exclusively Spanish
          Not even by the mid 18th century. Spain gave up the caste system and allowed rich landowners like caudillos trace their ancestry to prominent men regardless of ethnic background. Lots of independence leaders were mestizos and mullato.
          I suspect you are a beaner yourself, given their proclivity for insisting their countries are whiter than they really are.

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        minority rules never lasts
        >haiti
        >latin america
        >south africa
        >mughal empire

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          Times have changed, few soldiers can mow down endless unarmed people unlike before

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            The british wont do shit

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            He’s integrated.

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        Until the upper class is slowly infiltrated.

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          He’s been banished for it

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            I thought it was just for being a massive twunt.

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      >What makes it notable is that this is a direct consequence of Britain's colonial exploits
      It's a direct consequence of the government inviting them over as a conscious policy to exterminate the natives.

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      >this is a direct consequence of Britain's colonial exploits
      How is this allowed to be so moronic?

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Be imperialist nation
        >Get rich and powerful off of economically raping other countries of all of their resources (colonialism is economic exploitation by definiton)
        >Develop massive industry, wealth and political power
        >Colonial empire collapses
        >In order to maintain the current level of economic growth/boom, immigration is required
        >take in migrants from your former colonies who are familiar to your economic system and industry, language and allow you to maintain business relationships with your former colonies
        >Current situation

        If they didn't have to take them they wouldn't. Reality is, people from other 'white' countries aren't chomping at the bit to migrate to other 'white' countries. Thirdies are.

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          Examples of countries taking massive amount of immigrants they were completely unrelated with are not few
          Migration is not a direct consequence of falling empires

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            Post-imperialism/globalism immigration is. We've never had that scale of economic activity before

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            And they're not completely unrelated. France gets lots of African immigrants from ex-French colonies. Britain, Spain and Portugal the same. Colonial countries like Aus, Canada and the US were always immigrant hubs

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            Sweden get Black folks from Somalia, Germany get turks and arabs, Belgium and the Netherlands get nafris from Mooroco

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            Majority of those are refugees

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah they're fleeing their civilizational inferiority
            But sadly they bring it with them

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            I wouldn't consider Europe culturally superior lol. Europe isn't even at the top of the Western hierarchy

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          Your timeline is off by more than a few decades.

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          >In order to maintain the current level of economic growth/boom, immigration is required
          Where do people get this horseshit?

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            >In order to maintain the current level of economic growth/boom, immigration is required
            We're currently in an economic slump yet the solution from these same "experts" is, you guessed it, import hordes of IQ 80 third worlders and pay them to vote and breed. It seems the only thing hordes of browns can't solve is their own countries.

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            We're in an economic slump because of two frickeit counties causing global issues with supply chains. Russia and China stepped of line and were having to scale back globalisation because of it

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            The problem isn’t with importation, it’s importing the wrong people. Asian people have an amazing ability to assimilate to the local culture.

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            People who understand the situation. Yeah bro just go tell your government and big business you'd rather have negative economic growth than a few Indians in your country

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            >negative economic growth
            The numbers in the spreadsheet have to keep going up! The average person's quality of life doesn't matter. It's the numbers in the spreadsheet that matter and they have to keep going up.

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            Capitalism baby!

            >a few
            LoL. Look I don't mind open borders for whites and fertile age females, that sounds like a fair compromise to me but you leftoids ape out whenever I suggest it. Which means you don't really give a shit about the economy. You just want to destroy white countries by burying them in genetic garbage.

            Whites don't want to immigrate to other white counties. I'm Australian and I would never consider moving to Europe or America

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            >a few
            LoL. Look I don't mind open borders for whites and fertile age females, that sounds like a fair compromise to me but you leftoids ape out whenever I suggest it. Which means you don't really give a shit about the economy. You just want to destroy white countries by burying them in genetic garbage.

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          >In order to maintain the current level of economic growth/boom, immigration is required

          The UK was so short of labour that they sent 1.5 million whites to Australia for subsidised fees under the £10 Pom scheme.
          Untold hundreds of thousands, possibly over a million were sent to settle in other colonies, again for subsidised fees.

          Yeah makes sense

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            Australia was having a post-war economic boom and was in high demand for immigrants. So much so that we lightened our whites only policy and began taking in continental Europeans, who were previously considered non-white, including Germans, Italians and Slavs

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            >germans weren't considered white
            Stop lying your ass of you marxist israelite.

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            >let me tell you about your country

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Brown Kids at a brown school doesn't mean Britain is finished, it's just another cycle.
      Brown people are inferior so yes it will lead to collapse

      >What makes it notable is that this is a direct consequence of Britain's colonial exploits. It's coming back to bite them and they don't want it to. Somehow Brits expected that they'd be able to get rich and powerful but that it had no downsides.
      It's a consequence of leftists allowing mass immigration
      Egypt colonized Sudan yet you don't see them allow Sudanese Black folks to ethnically replace them in their land

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Brown people are inferior so yes it will lead to collapse
        says who?

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          History

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            cares

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Britain has always been a hub of immigration.
      No more so than anywhere else in the world.

      >this is a direct consequence of Britain's colonial exploits.
      No it isn't. The same thing is happening all across Western Europe, even in countries that had no significant colonial empire outside of Europe.

      >It's coming back to bite them and they don't want it to
      Wow no shit people don't want what is bad for them.

  9. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    atleast they aren't speaking german

  10. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    It literally doesn't matter because in the next 100 or so years when England becomes a brazil-tier muttopia the mutts will just rewrite history and say it used to always look like that and George Washington was African
    Britain totally deserves it though and its muttification is a great thing

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      >It literally doesn't matter because in the next 100 or so years when England becomes a brazil-tier muttopia the mutts will just rewrite history and say it used to always look like

      It's literally what they're doing in France right now
      When presented with the evidence that France is getting more and more violent ever since the arrival of nafris in the 60s, leftists claim it was always a violent shithole and cite 19th century offenders known as "apaches" (who were actually mainly arrested for vagrancy)

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        What does this have to do with history and humanities

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          Evolution of criminality rate across time is related to both history and humanities

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            I feel like you’re kinda just racist

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Britain totally deserves it though and its muttification is a great thing
      Why?

  11. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    Here's an accurate reconstruction of a medieval English village

  12. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    Haha nooo France has totally never been violent
    >Except for that massive civil war and revolution which then led to the Reign of Terror
    >Or when France tried to conquer all of Europe
    >Or when France butchered a bunch of Algerians
    >Or when the French have those big strikes every year where they attack police and firebomb cars
    Yeah really convincing argument that it's the nafri minority that is making France violent. That whole country is a hellscape.

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      Look apart from the Albigensian genocide and the war in the vandee France has never been internally violent

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        What about the Protestant pogroms?

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        What about the Protestant pogroms?

        Yeah if you go back to middle ages or earlier, I guess you can find a point when it was already shithole
        I guess it means the massive shitholification that occured between the civilized and pretty much crimeless 1960s France and the current Africa-tier 21st century France is nothing to complain about then
        I guess it would be fine if Japan turned into Brazil in the future, because after all, if we go back 2,000 years earlier, Japan was already an unsafe shithole

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      We're discussing crime rates, not foreign policy

      >Or when the French have those big strikes every year where they attack police and firebomb cars
      Burned cars are 100% nafris
      As for the monthly protests, they usually consist in a bunch of weak effeminated leftist hippies parading in the streets
      Only when nafris join up with their "free palestine" signs do the whole affair turn into violent riots

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        No, you were discussing whether France was 'getting more and more violent recently instead of throughout history. France has always been full of violent ferals, that's why Caesar had to pacify Gaul

  13. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    True. Japan has always been a thirdie tier shithole. People don't change.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *