The European Origins of Economic Development

William Easterly and Ross Levine, Brown, June 2012

Abstract

A large literature suggests that European settlement outside of Europe shaped institutional, educational, technological, cultural, and economic outcomes. This literature has had a serious gap: no direct measure of colonial European settlement. In this paper, we (1) construct a new database on the European share of the population during the early stages of colonization and (2) examine its impact on the level of economic development today. We find a remarkably strong impact of colonial European settlement on development. According to one illustrative exercise, 47 percent of average global development levels today are attributable to Europeans. One of our most surprising findings is the positive effect of even a small minority European population during the colonial period on per capita income today, contradicting traditional and recent views. There is some evidence for an institutional channel, but our findings are most consistent with human capital playing a central role in the way that colonial European settlement affects development today.

[Editor’s Note: The full study is available here.]

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • WmarkW

    It’s often pointed out that knowledge is the one inexhaustible resource — its acquisition by one party does not deplete it for another.  Beginning 500 years ago, Europe began creating  a society based on the marketplace of ideas — capitalism. the scientific method, and democratic-republican government, are all approaches to testing ideas against evidence and experience.  Europe paved the way for a culture based on knowledge acquisition.  Today’s most successful ones, are precisely those that imitated it; and the ones left behind (Islam, sub-Saharan Africa) are the ones that rejected it.

    Western man and his culture thrive on the free exchange of ideas and societal rules that allow the best to become implemented.  The inferior cultures depend on controlling and limiting knowledge, to create the appearance of their equality.   A free and open society will eventually imitate a white one the best it can.  The world’s other peoples deserve their chance to aspire to be like us; they are not well served by trying to limit us to live like them.

    • WhitesRdumb

      ” WmarkW wrote: Beginning 500 years ago, Europe began creating  a society based on the
      marketplace of ideas — capitalism. the scientific method, and
      democratic-republican government, are all approaches to testing ideas
      against evidence and experience.”

      A quote from a source I can not remember right now. “There is no difference between Capitalism and Communism: Both seek to take the wealth of the people and enslave them.”

      A quote about Democracy:
      “I do not say that democracy has been more pernicious on the whole, and
      in the long run, than monarchy or aristocracy. Democracy has never been
      and never can be so durable as aristocracy or monarchy; but while it
      lasts, it is more bloody than either. … Remember, democracy never lasts
      long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a
      democracy yet that did not commit suicide. It is in vain to say that
      democracy is less vain, less proud, less selfish, less ambitious, or
      less avaricious than aristocracy or monarchy. It is not true, in fact,
      and nowhere appears in history. Those passions are the same in all men,
      under all forms of simple government, and when unchecked, produce the
      same effects of fraud, violence, and cruelty. When clear prospects are
      opened before vanity, pride, avarice, or ambition, for their easy
      gratification, it is hard for the most considerate philosophers and the
      most conscientious moralists to resist the temptation. Individuals have
      conquered themselves. Nations and large bodies of men, never.
      John Adams, letter to John Taylor (15 April 1814)”

      Remember that our founding fathers didn’t allow everyone to vote; only those with something to lose. You can see what happens when you let dummies have an equal vote by the condition our country is in today.

  • alastairabbacle

    A laudable study!:
    “(1) to construct a new database on the European share of 
    the population during the early stages of colonization and (2) to examine its impact on the level 
    of economic development today.”Fromhttp://thosewhocansee.blogspot.com/2012/04/building-better-currency-union.html: “Like so many policy domains, international economic policy in the West has fallen victim to the Late Twentieth Century Delusion: ‘People are people.'”I bet some of the study authors read this blog or similar at some point:http://thosewhocansee.blogspot.com/The best post: “Hunting the Yeti: Institutional Racism in the 21st Century”http://thosewhocansee.blogspot.com/2012/05/hunting-yeti-institutional-racism-in.html

  • JohnEngelman

    The legacy of the British Empire has been representative democracy and reasonably well functioning economies. The legacy of the Spanish Empire has been poverty and tyranny. 

    • APaige

      The difference could also be the people that each empire colonized. The British Empire did not leave ‘representative democracy’ to the U.S.

      • zimriel

        Actually, the British did exactly that.

        For a start, there was the English Common Law. The charter it gave to Connecticut left it essentially an autonomous dominion, much like Canada’s status as of now. The other colonies were almost as autonomous. It was the *principle* that the King and Parliament were sovereign that George III was trying to get across in the 1770s.

        The Americans had a long tradition of local government behind it; that’s how they *understood* how liberty was supposed to work, in a way the Haitians (say) did not.

    •  Argentina was one of the wealthiest nations in the world during the early 20th century.

      • Achaean

        I used to think it was all about institutions; North America developed whereas South America did not due to the different institutional structures set up in each of these continents. Granted, I still agree that one cannot ignore the fact that the Spaniards who came in the 16C brought their feudal norms and institutions, whereas the English, who gradually settled in the North, came with more modern norms of work, enterprise, private property rights and representation. But the Spaniards did not come as settlers, but as a tiny minority of gold diggers in a sea of natives; and today most of the South countries, besides the ones listed above, are not Western ethnically speaking, and this alone explains lots. 

        • WhitesRdumb

           

          Most of what America has it stole from others with its military might, or bought with its 120 trillion debt. It also exaggerates it greatness. Other than the land which no American created, there is nothing special about this country. In fact – it is a joke.  I am not free: I am a slave. If we are free, why does everyone need to keep telling each other that they are free?  Bill Gates doesn’t need to tell people that he is rich; Michael Jordon doesn’t need to tell people he can play basketball; Jeff Gordon doesn’t need to tell people he can drive a stock car, but Americans always have to tell each other that they are free.

  • WmarkW

    “In this paper, we (1) construct a new database on the European share of
    the population during the early stages of colonization and (2) examine
    its impact on the level of economic development today.”

    I do wish someone would construct a table comparing the per-capita income of blacks compared to the percent white population among countries with large populations of both.  It would quickly show that the best-off blacks are those who live in white-majority countries like the USA and Canada, followed by those with significant white minorities like South Africa, with the all-black nations like Haiti and Uganda last.  This should dispel any notions that black poverty is caused by whites.  We’re the ones who RAISE their standard of living.

    • mikejones91

      I heard somewhere the richest man in Africa is richer than the richest man in America…Idk, just saying. We don’t really need a table for something we ALL know. However this study is very useful.

      • That might be a jew diamond guy. Also some people consider north africa part of africa like the tax haven Monico.

        • zimriel

          First, the “diamond guys” in Africa are goys – Nederlanders, in fact (De Beers). Second, it’s spelled “Monaco” and it’s in Europe.

          Are you my rabbi or something, trying to make anti-semites look like fools? If so, l’chaim!

          • The__Bobster

            http://edwardjayepstein.com/diamond/chap8.htm

            The syndicate in London to which Rhodes contracted to sell De Beers’ entire production of diamonds in 1893 was made up of ten firms. These were Wernher, Beit & Company, Barnato Brothers, Mosenthal Sons & Company, A. Dunkelsbuhler, Joseph Brothers, I. Cohen & Company, Martin Lilienfeld & Company, F. F. Gervers, S. Neumann, and Feldheimer & Company.

            All these firms were interconnected by marriage and family ties, and all were owned by Jewish merchants. The fact that Jewish companies completely dominated the distribution of diamonds at the end of the nineteenth century was not particularly surprising. For a thousand years, diamonds had been almost entirely a Jewish business.

            Until the early part of the eighteenth century, the entire world’s supply of diamonds came from India. The caravans that brought them across Arabia traded these rare stones to Jewish traders in Aden and Cairo for gold and silver. The traders then resold them to Jewish merchants in Venice, Lithuania, and Frankfurt.

            It was a natural enterprise for the Jews scattered throughout central Europe: Since they were moneylenders, they had to concern themselves with assessing, repairing, and selling gems that had been offered to them as collateral for loans. They also had close connections with the Jewish trading centers in the Ottoman Empire through which all the Indian diamonds passed.

            The cutting and polishing of diamonds, moreover, was one of the few crafts that Jews were permitted to participate in by the medieval guilds in Europe. For most Jews, there was no choice in those days: If they wanted to have a vocation, it had to be either gem-polishing or money lending. In either case they dealt with diamonds.

          • zimriel

             Ah, okay, you got me.

            Still, even if it is the Jews and not the Dutch who are running Botswana, they are *still* doing better for the natives than the natives would for themselves . . .

          • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

            The truth of this is so overwhelming that even the English word for diamonds and precious stones in general is JEW-ELS, and when the stone are wrought into decorative pieces for wearing, it is called JEW-ELRY.

            Far too many whites posting here do so little actual historical research and clear thinking before they post that they challenge the claim to superior IQ for whites in general.  They also serve to  embarrass those of us who know these things, but seek to prove none-the-less that whites are unique and deserve their own place in the sun.

          • WhitesRdumb

             Maybe you should see a psychiatrist or something. It’s that false persecution thing.

            “Whomever screams the loudest is the biggest.” my personal quote.

            Blacks scream racist louder than anyone else. You and yours scream persecution louder than anyone else.

          • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

             So what is your excuse for Amren and its posters?

            That Jews have been unfairly persecuted for centuries is not an illusion, it is an easily and well documented set of historical facts from the forged passages in the New Testament averting blame for the crucifixion from Rome to Jews so that Romans would convert more easily, to the 14th century Jewish well poisoning hoax used when no prayer by anyone, even the Pope could halt the black plague, to the huge set of obvious history — AND finally to the way some posters here go to such extraordinary lengths to blame all maladies including the handy way we whites so often shoot ourselves in the foot – ON JEWS.

            As I wrote some poster yesterday;  If and when there are no more Jews to blame, people like you will find Jewish demons possessing others, even other whites so that your ongoing psychosis can be fed.

      • That’s definitely not true. The richest man in America probably has more wealth than all of Africa combined.

        • WhitesRdumb

           Not according to an email I got from Nigeria. There is this guy who just got a lot of money and want to share it with me.

          • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

             He wrote me too.  Just remember to keep out of my business in Nigeria, bub.

    • I saw something similar to that recently. It was average income levels of immigrants in America by continent. White Europeans had the highest by far, something like $90,000 per year, followed by Asians, then I think it was Africa. These were skilled migrants so Africans had relatively high incomes. I think what you’re saying is pretty obvious. Blacks living in countries with the highest GDP per capita are going to make more than those living in Africa. Pretty common sense. What it interesting though, is that the poorest countries tend to have the highest out-migration of educated populations. The brain drain is highest from least developed countries to most developed. Unfortunately, we get the best and the worst from Africa. I’ve drawn the connection between most and least failed states, GDP per capita, population increase, IQ scores, economic competitiveness, and ratio of academic publications per person. The results were too predictable.  

    • Yeah but according to Obama’s Africa plan, Africa will be the next great economic hub! What an insane statement – so far from any truth conceivable. Not even President Bush uttered something so delusional. President of the greatest economic power in history saying that Africa would be the next economic hub – it’s like the CEO of GM who said that Lexus was the best car brand out there. Most African countries’ GDP by PPP barely exceeds $1,000 per year. Meanwhile, their populations are skyrocketing. The lowest IQ countries have the highest birth rates.

  • When zimbabwe had only 4% of the population being white it was a breadbasket of africa.

  • loyalwhitebriton

    When I look at Europe, a collection of (predominantly, though dwindling) white nations, I see all of the achievements made by men (and a few women) in science, medicine, philosophy, art, law, music, democracy; and these achievements made by white men in white countries are just about the whole of it, copied by non-white men in non-white countries (to varying degrees of success).
    Then I look at Africa, and I think “If all men are the same, why isn’t Africa like Europe; a collection of black nations that is technologically advanced with enlightened ideas about law and liberty etc?”
    The answer is obvious; they are not like us. We are different.
    A culture is the product of it’s people.
    People are determined , in large part, by their genes.
    Ergo, whites are genetically superior to blacks.
    But then again, what would I know, I’m just a “racist”!?

    • mikejones91

      More than a few women btw. Nice post either way.

  • Thanks for picking up this story. I commented about it last week. Hard to believe this guy is at UC Berkeley.

  • CourtneyfromAlabama

    We keep hearing about how arabs, Indians, and the Chinese were so much more advanced than us for so long. Even if that were true, which it isn’t (Greece, Rome), it is completely irrelevant, considering that the outpouring from Europe during the last 500 years has been unmatched in a very lopsided manner when compared to any achievements that came before it.

  • zimriel

    This article is hilarious; like an investigation into the possible presence of Catholicism in Vatican City, or into what bears do in the woods.

    Sadly, in academia, stuff like this is necessary.

  • xxxtonygunsxxx

     some EU guy sunderland or southerland said there are too many whites in
    the eu states or whatever and that they need to import third worlders
    into europe or something michael savage just trashed him royally  CALLED
    HIM A WHITE FAT PIG ABOUT 4 TIMES!!!!!! YOU CAN hear michael now at
    wcbm…dot…com listen live 11 pm eastern on the web

    • mikejones91

      Do you have a link for the exact convo? haha, it sounds great.

  • Europeans thrive wherever they go.  I knew that.  One of the things I love most about Western man is the entrepreneurial spirit that burns in them.  They said the Earth was flat, yet some crazy guy decides to risk his life to prove it was round.  They said we couldn’t go up to the heavens, yet some crazy guys built a hunk of metal that put a man on the moon.

    There are now those that say that European man can’t  survive the coming cataclysm and will go the way of the Neanderthal.  We’ll see about that.  Don’t tell a European he can’t.

  • Mahound

    I like the way they talk about “Europeans” in place of “Whites”. That should make it easier for liberals to digest. 

    • mikejones91

      Exactly. When discussing ANY topic that doesn’t sit well with libs (anything NON-pc) I rarely say white. I replace it with European. Even though most of its false, the term white has negative connotations associated with it. European on the other hand, really doesn’t. 

  • Vildan

     Well… Duh! Europeans contributed the most to the world, yet about every other race dislikes us. I think colonialism was a very bad idea. The Europeans back then should have left the other people in peace and simply concentrated more on Europe. Natural selection would have taken care of those unable to live on their own and we´d have a lot less problems, most likely. Oh yeah, and the Whites could not have taken away the psychic powers and the ability to fly from the noble blacks as well if they just stayed in Europe…

  • JackKrak

    It’s mind-boggling to me how someone can look at a map and not understand why Canada & America are what they are and why Mexico…..isn’t. Why Australia and New Zealand have indoor toilets, insulin and factories but Indonesia and Tonga…..don’t. Why South Africa has roads, skyscrapers and a stock market but  the Congo….never will.

  • KingKenton

    This paper is only telling a half-truth. It should state that wherever
    societies peopled by Caucasians AND based on Christianity go, success
    follows. It is important to remember that there was nothing civil,
    prosperous, or advanced about pre-Christian Europe.

    • WhitesRdumb

        There is nothing great about Christianity. Christianity suppressed science.  They suppressed Nicolaus Copernicus and Galileo Galilee. Christianity brought an early form of Communism to Europe. Under Christianity, there was a 2 class system, just like communism. “All people are equal except some are more equal than others. ” Now where have I heard that before: The Bible or Orwell’s 1984?

      • mikejones91

        I saw one of your other comments. White women ( vast majority of them) do NOT prefer black men. I work in the busiest/largest mall in America. I see beautiful white women ALL day long. 9.99 times out of 10, they are with a white man. If not, she most likely doesn’t look that great anyway. Cmon now. Where do you live?

      • Sloppo

        You can make valid criticism regarding the actions of many people who call themselves “Christian”, but I can do the same just as easily for people who claim Islam, Judaism, or atheism.  

      • KingKenton

        There is nothing great about Christianity.

        Nothing great about Christianity?!?! All I can say is… WOW! ! It is the constant that has under girded European civilization for nearly 2000 years. No other institution has endured for that long in the West. It’s positive contributions to the development of Western culture is second to none and beyond dispute. No other collected body of writings has had a greater influence in the founding of the United States than those of Christianity.

        Christianity suppressed science. They suppressed Nicolaus Copernicus and Galileo Galilee.

        No, it is because of Christianity that there is science. Christianity did more to promote the spread of learning than any other institution in the history of the West, period. Your sob story of Copernicus and Galileo are the myths of modern Liberalism. The exact same Liberals who claim that diversity is our strength. You will find the facts surrounding this issue to be at great odds with the modern Liberal version.

        Christianity brought an early form of Communism to Europe. Under Christianity, there was a 2 class system, just like communism.
        Which of course is why the number one priority for the Bolshevik Communists was to stamp out the Christian Church in Russia, right? Why don’t you go to the former Soviet Union and tell people there that Communism and Christianity are really the same thing. First, they will laugh at you hysterically. Second, they will probably punch you in the face for making such a stupid statement.

        “All people are equal except some are more equal than others. ” Now where have I heard that before: The Bible or Orwell’s 1984?

        Mostly likely you heard it in your head amongst all the many voices that must live there. And you post with a handle of WhitesRdumb???
        Now, if you want to make the case that there is something of a crisis in the Christian Churches of America in 2012, then I will agree with you (at least in part). But do not blame the failures of the Church on Christianity. Don’t through out the baby with the bathwater.

      • Christianity suppressed science?  The Church invented science.  

    • rosy14

      So Athens and Rome weren’t civil, prosperous and advanced (fot that period)? Are you kidding ?

      • mikejones91

        Yeah, I don’t think he realizes what he is saying. 

        • KingKenton

           No, I do realize what I am saying and I stand by what I said. It isn’t that Greece and Rome didn’t contribute anything to Western society. Rather, their contributions pale in comparison to the overall positive influence of Christianity on Europe and the West. I dare say that not a single poster who bashes Christianity would want to spend one nanosecond in the non-Christian societies they fawn over so much.

          • mikejones91

            The roots of Western Civilization began in Greece. I have a feeling your one of “those” who thins Greeks/Italians are somehow “less white”. My ex-girlfriend was born in Greece. She had blonde hair blue eyes. She looked like a EUROPEAN. I’m Italian, and I am white.

          • KingKenton

            In a certain sense I do think of Greeks and Southern Italians as slightly less White. But hey, as far as I’m concerned, you’re a part of the White brotherhood.

          • mikejones91

            Yeah, I somewhat agree. Some southern Italians do NOT look European at all. Along with some Greeks.

          • mikejones91

            I suppose I “bash” Christianity as a religion, but not “culturally”. I’ve said it before (along with a few other Amreners), I am a “cultural Christian” who doesn’t believe in a god. Although I can’t really say for sure, just like you. I don’t know if he does exist, or if he does NOT. Show me prove, and I will bow down. Not being sarcastic either:)

          • You’re wrong. But, we’ve written on the topic so many times it’s actually boring. Check some detailed histories…John Stuart Mill was right:
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Marathon

            The defeat at Marathon barely touched the vast resources of the
            Persian empire, yet for the Greeks it was an enormously significant
            victory. It was the first time the Greeks had beaten the Persians,
            proving that they were not invincible, and that resistance, rather than
            subjugation, was possible.

            The battle was a defining moment for the young Athenian democracy,
            showing what might be achieved through unity and self-belief; indeed,
            the battle effectively marks the start of a “golden age” for Athens.[98]
            This was also applicable to Greece as a whole; “their victory endowed
            the Greeks with a faith in their destiny that was to endure for three
            centuries, during which western culture was born”.[2][99]

            John Stuart Mill’s famous opinion was that “the Battle of Marathon, even as an event in British history, is more important than the Battle of Hastings”

      • KingKenton

        See my reply to mikejones below…

  • WhitesRdumb

    Opps,  I responded to the wrong post.

  • If the Arabs were so advanced, then why are they so backward today? Why do they still live in caves and behave the same way they did 5,000 years ago? Why do they still ride around on donkeys? How did the Arabs so dramatically reverse in progress?

    • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

       Islam inherited the Hellenized Middle East.  The power of that propelled Islam for some time, but the true character of Arabic and Islamic culture eventually broke down those earlier cultural influences.

      • CourtneyfromAlabama

        I agree with this explanation more than your other one.

        • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

           It would be nice if you understood what I was saying.  Refer to my reply to your above comment.

      • It should also be noted that many of the “Arabic” inventors of the so called “Muslim Golden Age” were actually Persian.

        • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

           As I wrote on another post here, the details of history are important and far too many and complex to set down on a posting board.  Only years of study and objective consideration can give a fuller appreciation of both the larger and smaller “truths.”

          I’ve never liked the way specific incidents in history, whether they are rendered factually or not, are used to give the impression that this is all there is to it.  Politicians and other would be social manipulators do this, and when they do, everyone looses.

  • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

     You are not the everything and end all of historical fact and interpretation.  No could be on a posting board.  So your handle is pretentious at best, ridiculous more likely.

    Islam in Spain was pocked by Islamic civil war that raged nearly the entire time. This is how eventually Christian Spain regained the initiative and reconquered the entire peninsula.  If you look at a time lapse map, the time Spain dominated the larger part of the land was fairly short.  Also, they treated Jews and Christians as second class citizens.  The fact that the Christians treated Muslims and Jews even worse does not mean that Spanish Islam was a period of peace and enlightenment as so many liberal historians attempt to claim today.

    Also,  you left out the huge Jewish contribution to not only Islamic science and knowledge, but Europe’s survival and emergence.  Jews were suppliers to the Roman army long before the advent of Christianity and they accompanied Rome even into Britain.  Later, they were the bankers and suppliers of luxury and financial products to nearly every European King including William the Conqueror.  The only medical school in Europe in the middle ages was in Montpelier and was run by Jews.  It is highly likely that Columbus was a Jew, but it is well known that there were several Jews on the voyage of 1492.  Also, Queen Isabelle’s banker was a Jew and without him she could not have financed the voyage.

    However, because of the absolute nonsense some forger wrote in the New Testament, Jews were blamed whenever anything went wrong.  So when all else failed and God did not answer all the prayers, even the Pope’s, the Jews were blamed for the Black Plague in the 14th century.  Much of today’s lingering knee-jerk anti-Jewish thinking actually stem’s from this period.  A deep read of the details of history make this plain with no interpretation necessary.

    • CourtneyfromAlabama

      I thought you were the poster who was always putting down religions that came from the Middle East. Please correct me if I am wrong. I don’t think I like your post any better than the other guy’s. So Jews are responsible for everything great about the West?

      • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

         It isn’t very wise to make big assumptions about one piece I write where my larger view of things is concerned.  I’ve studied history and religion, Western mostly, all my adult life, and I even lived in Europe and did “field study” as well.

        You are also making a mistake to think that just because the contributions of Jews might get recognized (as they are by serious historians) that this means they are responsible for “everything great about the West.”  History and it causes and effects are far more complicated than that.  But since Christianity and Islam both usurped Judaism to create themselves, whatever they claim as merits has Judaism as its point of origin.  You’ve got to get over the problem that there is a very old religion that had so much influence in the West and it turns out to be Judaism.

        This is not hypocritical or contradictory on my part.  The post of mine below that you like is an example of what I mean.  When Alexander the Great Conquered that region and many more others, the result was that Greek Hellenism took hold.  Richer Jews in the first century were certainly Hellenized.  Saul (who became Paul) was a Hellenized Jew.  This is why he used Greek Polytheism and Judaism to create Christianity.  The title “Jesus Christ” is Greek, not Aramaic or Hebrew.  So really, it was the Greek civilization that is the origin and cause of Western greatness, even if it took a path through the Middle East on its way back to Europe over the centuries.

        The other great thing, and the one thing that really makes the West stand out historically and most responsible for Western achievement is PHILOSOPHY.  The Greeks were the first to come up with the notion of CRITICAL THOUGHT, and this led to scientific  investigation and forensic inquiry.

        You are reacting to my comments differently because you are ignorant of history in general and are reactionary as a practice.  You could gain much more and it WOULD contribute to white realism and survival if more did so. 

        Of course, the reason I post things like that is because I believe that indulging in ignorant denial of historical fact and feeding this obsessive psychosis that blames Jews for things we ought to be chastising ourselves over – DOESN’T DO US ANY GOOD.  And it guarantees that white realists continue to look like hateful idiots.

      • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

         Read this again.  I am amazed at how people make interpretations, reading in assumptions.  Certainly, whether it’s you or even Question Diversity, there are NO attorneys posting here. 

        You lend yourself to error when you insert in language things that aren’t there out of either error or laziness OR relying on incorrect stereotypes that exist in your own mind.

        I am against any sort of religious self deception, wherever it comes from.  I have said and it is easy to demonstrate that the most destructive religions in the world are those that come from the Middle East; in particular Christianity and Islam.  Judaism has never gone forth and waged wars of conquest, but supplies the sort of conceits that lend support to such actualities.

        I have said many times in posts on Amren that these religions don’t help white people – they betray us.  I have repeatedly asked anyone to prove any support for white exclusiveness in Christianity. They can’t because it isn’t there.  What is there is a trap for any white who tries to deny universal acceptance of all peoples by Christianity.  Once Christianity assisted European expansion abroad.  Now, it supports non-European invasion into the West.  The way and justification for both is doctrinal.  White Separatists and supposed White Realists become hypocrits automatically when they claim to be that AND Christians at the same time.  White exclusiveness, separation, specialness, exclusivity, etc., can be shot down in an instant by the overwhelming verbiage of the New Testament.  Not recognizing this is simply denial.  The harm it does whites is real and not recognizing that guarantees that any and all efforts to save the white race is doomed to failure.

        I have often written that IF some sort of spiritual leader or symbol is needed, then our older European outlooks certainly supply it.  Odin is a war god and exclusive to Northern Europeans.   Asatru combines this and the agrarian Celtic spirituality and system with the Nordic today.  I could never believe in any gods or goddesses or supernatural silliness seriously, but I can sympathize with a system that makes ancestry important because that has practical value for whites, and white survival.  I do see the solar observances of seasons as by the Celts and other pre-Christian groups as valuable because it binds us to our land and returns us to the agrarian lifestyle, which I think is going to become important for whites again as the present civilization collapses.

        You are certainly free to disagree with me, but I want you to at least know what you are disagreeing with.  Many regular posters disagree with me and even detest me, but that is because I make powerful arguments that upset them.  I have a well researched and thought out set of ideas and I present them because I am convinced of their value.  Occasional posters have agreed with me and not everyone who reads posts.  So I see what I write as valuable and even necessary.

  • patriotdad76

    An academic paper that suggests Europeans were good for the world?

    I doubt the author will get tenure…

  • CourtneyfromAlabama

    You haven’t really disagreed with me; you just repeated what I said except you went into more detail while throwing in a couple of paragraphs (such as how the arabs were great achievers) that negate everything else you claim. I was speaking of Europe overall compared to everyone else. You did what liberals like to do by reminding me of how, say, ice covered Norway was behind lush and fertile Iraq in the year 3,000 BC. While that sentence might be true, it doesn’t mean anything in this discussion. Of course what is now known as the land area of Iraq would have been more advanced. This doesn’t change the fact that a short time after that, civilizations on the European mainland were producing far more (Greece). As for your claims about Islam, someone below addresses my thoughts on that. Thanks for agreeing with me that it is foggy in regards to whether China was really more advanced than Rome. If we want to discuss which part of the world did more to lead to the modern world, we would have to say Rome hands down.

  • Rosenkranz

    This study deflates the silly “White Privilege” theories!

  • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

     So if you would argue something, argue it.  Stating what you would argue
    is not presenting the argument.  You haven’t really said much here, and I will point out the problems with it here;

    The European qualities, as you put it were not particularly positive ones.  I am thinking of things like the Church forbidding Christians to handle money, leaving it to the Jews who became the  original and primary bankers in Europe.  I am thinking of greedy European kings and nobles who sought luxuries and used Jews for their supply and acquisition.  More than one European king persecuted the Jews and expelled them when they accumulated too much debt, always finding support from the Christian Church of course.   I am thinking of the Black Plague which resulted in blaming Jews via well poisoning and led to their persecution and  isolation.  Scientists have established that this led to inbreeding and that led to a jump in Ashkenazi Jewish IQ.

    Jews were traders of note even in Roman times.  Jews were already diamond merchants and a wealthy society before the time of the Romans.  They happen to be from an ancient people living in the part of the world where civilization began.  They naturally had the advantage of a head start, but that’s not their fault.  What is remarkable is how they held on to their identity regardless of all the attempts to destroy them beginning at least (provable history) with the two Roman wars to suppress Jewish revolts in the first an second centuries.

    In the Islamic world, Jews were treated better than in the Christian world, although they were taxed as non-Muslims and sometimes massacred in various places ( I have a book on that history). 

    The story of the endurance and the success and usefulness of Jews in European history is similar to the triumph of Reason and the re-emergence of the philosopher and science in the Renaissance.  Is is ironic that this site uses that word but so many regular posters know so little about European history or the Renaissance.