Ideology and Racial Differences?

[Tooting Carmen]

The thing is that Global South was colonized by more advanced people. Cruel, but more advanced.

Neither Ottomans, nor the Soviets were more advanced than Eastern Europeans/Balkans.

Who gets to decide who has the 'right' to colonise and who does not? Notions of 'advanced' are highly subjective.

[Straightman]

Who gets to decide who has the 'right' to colonise and who does not? Notions of 'advanced' are highly subjective.

No they are not. Thinking and reasonable people can tell and judge for themselves about such things. Your problem is you are a Marxist.

[Hektor12]

Neither Ottomans, nor the Soviets were more advanced than Eastern Europeans/Balkans.

Are you sure? Theres some rumors about medieval islamic world was more advanced than europe. For example, Ottomans had coffee houses when coffee was unheard in europe. Another example, Ottomans penetrated walls of Constantinople with heavy siege equipment which also cant be found in europe.

[Lioncourt]

Are you sure? Theres some rumors about medieval islamic world was more advanced than europe. For example, Ottomans had coffee houses when coffee was unheard in europe. Another example, Ottomans penetrated walls of Constantinople with heavy siege equipment which also cant be found in europe.

Bombards were known in Europe by that time, in fact one of the artillery engineers during the Siege of Constantinople was Hungarian - Orban.

[Lioncourt]

Who gets to decide who has the 'right' to colonise and who does not? Notions of 'advanced' are highly subjective.

Point is that impact of colonisation of Africa and Asia was not entirely negative.

[Hektor12]

Bombards were known in Europe by that time, in fact one of the artillery engineers during the Siege of Constantinople was Hungarian - Orban.

Known in europe is something -were they able to build one and use in any war? But Ottomans had cannon technology to build and operate such gigantic cannon even pre-Istanbul era. More generally, all historical accounts state that Ottomans had superior firearms to any european and they were able to quickly conquer Balkans.

I think this facts contradict with your "not superior" Ottomans idea.

[Tooting Carmen]

Known in europe is something -were they able to build one and use in any war? But Ottomans had cannon technology to build and operate such gigantic cannon even pre-Istanbul era. More generally, all historical accounts state that Ottomans had superior firearms to any european and they were able to quickly conquer Balkans.

I think this facts contradict with your "not superior" Ottomans idea.

Yes, at the end of the day who has the biggest weapons gets to conquer. Everything else is minor.

[Tooting Carmen]

No they are not. Thinking and reasonable people can tell and judge for themselves about such things. Your problem is you are a Marxist.

Your problem is you have a blind dislike-cum-hatred of (most) non-whites. For a Bulgarian to complain about the effects of Ottomans and Soviets is neither more nor less valid than for a Bangladeshi or Burkinabine to complain about the effects of the British and the French. (The Bengal Famine especially comes to mind).

[Straightman]

Your problem is you have a blind dislike-cum-hatred of (most) non-whites. For a Bulgarian to complain about the effects of Ottomans and Soviets is neither more nor less valid than for a Bangladeshi or Burkinabine to complain about the effects of the British and the French. (The Bengal Famine especially comes to mind).

Soviets and communists did some good things or even more well meaning things by trying to industrialize and urbanize really fast the still backward countries of Eastern Europe and had miixed results for it. Ottomans did not do anything positive of constructive for the economy or infrastructure, education etc. They just taxed the hell out of people and built mosques and invested in the military, the sultan's court and the corrupt administration. They were highly oppressive and intolerant. West Europeans did invest in the economies, infrastructure etc. You are just a hateful Marxist homo yourself who has a fetish for non-whites and mixing and think anything short of your disgusting fetishes is hate. I don't know about the Bengal famine, but I doubt it was willfully engineered by the British, like the Soviets did in the Ukraine.

[Tooting Carmen]

Soviets and communists did some good things or even more well meaning things by trying to industrialize and urbanize really fast the still backward countries of Eastern Europe and had miixed results for it. Ottomans did not do anything positive of constructive for the economy or infrastructure, education etc. They just taxed the hell out of people and built mosques and invested in the military, the sultan's court and the corrupt administration. They were highly oppressive and intolerant. West Europeans did invest in the economies, infrastructure etc. You are just a hateful Marxist homo yourself who has a fetish for non-whites and mixing and think anything short of your disgusting fetishes is hate. I don't know about the Bengal famine, but I doubt it was willfully engineered by the British, like the Soviets did in the Ukraine.

Not initially, but Churchill's insistence on importing rice from India to Britain rather than leaving it to feed people there exacerbated it considerably. Anyway, like I said, who has the biggest weapons gets to conquer, whether that is the British, French, Belgians, Dutch, Spaniards, Portuguese, Russians, Japanese, Chinese, Ottomans or Arabs. Whatever good things that temporarily or even permanently come about due to said colonisations are largely incidental.