Why do westerners look down on those who are not westerners?

[Shadowmelded]

I can't think of any world champion other than Roman and British Empires.

The Dutch did pretty well but they were more subtle about it.

[Slant]

The rest of Europe generally prefers his country to be controlled by a foreign power, they have a tendency to start world wars when they control themselves.

That's true. We are a bit unruly like that.

The EU is actually a big babysitter program and the Brits are just tired of watching after the toddlers by now, hence the Brexit referendum.

[Kalis]

I can't think of any world champion other than Roman and British Empires.

The French and Portuguese controlled territories in multiple continents, most empires only have territory in 1-3 continents, so do not count as World Champions.

[Idoru]

Why do non-westerners look down on westerners?

[flepser]

People look down upon others from another village, city, state, heck neighborhood even.

[Kuntantee]

Greeks were arguably more successful than Romans in terms of expansion and land mass. For a short period of time, I admit, but still.

What is achieved by Romans is also achieved by Ottomans and Persians. British Empire is a bit hard to compare as tech wasn't the same and navigation around the world was far easier. The history itself challenges that assertion and pretty much sums up European self-esteem.

[Wildtree]

Westerners are usually taller than Asians, what you want me to do? Have my legs shortened?

[Slant]

What is achieved by Romans is also achieved by Ottomans and Persians. British Empire is a bit hard to compare as tech wasn't the same and navigation around the world was far easier. The history itself challenges that assertion and pretty much sums up European self-esteem.

Don't forget the telegraph. I think the Empire showed just how important fast information travel is. Hence the glory of the internet having us being roasted by some Singaporians in real time over something we never did.

[Kuntantee]

The French and Portuguese controlled territories in multiple continents, most empires only have territory in 1-3 continents, so do not count as World Champions.

3 is "multiple" and I am not sure why continent count the ultimate metric. Besides, Ottomans controlled 3, when navigation wasn't that advanced, French controlled 4, when the navigation was advanced. As far as I know, only Brits controlled 5 continents, and it is one of the most successful, but one of the shortest empires of all times.

[Deleted]

We only look down on places and cultures who are still stuck in medieval times and/or are so corrupt you can't even speak your opinion freely without being attacked by the government.

[Slant]

3 is "multiple" and I am not sure why continent count the ultimate metric. Besides, Ottomans controlled 3, when navigation wasn't that advanced, French controlled 4, when the navigation was advanced. As far as I know, only Brits controlled 5 continents, and it is one of the most successful, but one of the shortest empires of all times.

Shortest? 17th-20th century isn't all that short, really. They held on for a good while on stuff...

- - - Updated - - -

We only look down on places and cultures who are still stuck in medieval times and/or are so corrupt you can't even speak your opinion freely without being attacked by the government.

So, Turkey then?

[Kalis]

3 is "multiple" and I am not sure why continent count the ultimate metric. Besides, Ottomans controlled 3, when navigation wasn't that advanced, French controlled 4, when the navigation was advanced. As far as I know, only Brits controlled 5 continents, and it is one of the most successful, but one of the shortest empires of all times.

They are not world champions unless their empires spread across the world, they are regional champions - the Romans were regional, as were Macedonians, Ottomans, Persians, Mongols, etc. Not my fault they had not dicovered the Americas.

[Lupinemancer]

Because most non western countries are raging shit holes that haven't evolved like the rest of us and as a whole are still stack in past times. This is why the majority of people hate the current immigration problems of this age.

This!
Alot of non-western countries are either stuck in the medieval times or even further back. Their mindset are primitive and violent, and their first actions is "Kill them!" whenever someone says or do something they do not agree with, or their "God" hasn't allowed! They are uncivilized and savage.

[Slant]

They are not world champions unless their empires spread across the world, they are regional champions - the Romans were regional, as were Macedonians, Ottomans, Persians, Mongols, etc. Not my fault they had not dicovered the Americas.

That's hardly fair. If you don't know something exists, why should you go there? Nah, if you want to take "across the world" as a metric, you should really say "across the world that they knew". The Brits didn't discover the Americas, the Portugese did that service for them.

[Unionoob]

This!
Alot of non-western countries are either stuck in the medieval times or even further back. Their mindset are primitive and violent, and their first actions is "Kill them!" whenever someone says or do something they do not agree with, or their "God" hasn't allowed! They are uncivilized and savage.

And in what way West is different?

[Katie N]

This!
Alot of non-western countries are either stuck in the medieval times or even further back. Their mindset are primitive and violent, and their first actions is "Kill them!" whenever someone says or do something they do not agree with, or their "God" hasn't allowed! They are uncivilized and savage.

Have you ever been outside your country? xD

[Slant]

This!
Alot of non-western countries are either stuck in medieval times or even further back. They indset are primitive and violent, and their first actions is "Kill them!" They are uncivilized and savage.

Whoa, check your racism... China has been civilised before Europeans knew the word existed. A lot of Asian culture predates European achievements. And most of their countries are peaceful communities that are neither primitive, nor violent and certainly not savage.

[Deleted]

Greeks were arguably more successful than Romans in terms of expansion and land mass. For a short period of time, I admit, but still.

People living in Rome 2000 years ago, a city of a million people, enjoying their heating in their apartments, were surrounded by barbarians wearing loincloths.
What Rome has achieved is unique. Expansion is one thing. Rome built an empire that gave us what we have today.

[Imbalanced]

How is that funny? How would you like if your country was taken control of by a foreign power?

Oh IDK I'd like to think we would rise up and kick them the fuck out then lord it over them for centuries. /murica

[Kalis]

That's hardly fair. If you don't know something exists, why should you go there? Nah, if you want to take "across the world" as a metric, you should really say "across the world that they knew". The Brits didn't discover the Americas, the Portugese did that service for them.

That would make someone from somewhere like 2,000 BC Scotland World Champion for beating up their neighbour, because they had never heard of anywhere else. Were the Incas World Champions?