Plenty of areas have looked plenty of ways, and before global imperialism was practical, the inequality between those regions was not always exploitative.
Lmao maybe antarctica. Scales of civilizations have always been growing, the only way to skip from tribalism to imperialism without feudalism is to deny that a continent ever had anything but tribes before being conquered: an insult to them.
I don’t even know where to start with this. Every single thing you’ve said or implied is so wrong it’s also based on something wrong.
If I had to guess I’d say your view of ancient and even slightly pre-modern societies is entirely extrapolated backwards from eurocentric capitalist just-so stories and takes no account of anything else–not to mention that my mention of global imperialism just meant a relatively wealthy north American culture 2000 years ago wasn’t necessarily exploiting a devastatingly poor European one, because that would have been impractical, so only regarding cultures within practical reach of one another is more sensible than a global comparison is a more sensible measure of this for most of human history.
You said the, “The inequality was not always exploitive.”
Inequality only happens from exploitation. Royalty existed on the backs of the working class. Royalty in ancient times wasn’t an exclusively Western feature.
When has this ever not been the case?
My thoughts exactly. When has the world not looked like this?
Before we invented agriculture. Looked worse though.
Plenty of areas have looked plenty of ways, and before global imperialism was practical, the inequality between those regions was not always exploitative.
Feudal Periods did not have less inequality.
There are entire continents that never had feudalism except in colonies.
Lmao maybe antarctica. Scales of civilizations have always been growing, the only way to skip from tribalism to imperialism without feudalism is to deny that a continent ever had anything but tribes before being conquered: an insult to them.
I don’t even know where to start with this. Every single thing you’ve said or implied is so wrong it’s also based on something wrong.
If I had to guess I’d say your view of ancient and even slightly pre-modern societies is entirely extrapolated backwards from eurocentric capitalist just-so stories and takes no account of anything else–not to mention that my mention of global imperialism just meant a relatively wealthy north American culture 2000 years ago wasn’t necessarily exploiting a devastatingly poor European one, because that would have been impractical, so only regarding cultures within practical reach of one another is more sensible than a global comparison is a more sensible measure of this for most of human history.
Except the Antarctica thing. Maybe.
You said the, “The inequality was not always exploitive.”
Inequality only happens from exploitation. Royalty existed on the backs of the working class. Royalty in ancient times wasn’t an exclusively Western feature.
Never said anything abou that. It was not meant as a political view. Just a funny little tangent.
Before agriculture I dont think any of the pictures could have happened.
Well yeah of course not. We didn’t have cameras back then
That is true@– I won’t bother to delve into exactly when, but I think we invented photography way later.