• agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Nothing I said conflicts with any of that? Han, Mongol, Turkic, Persian, and many other “ethnicities” across the continent play out just fine when taking light skin tone into consideration. Again, explicitly not race. I am talking about “white” as a skin tone, potentially correlated with harsher climates.

    • XiELEd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Also you’re too focused on trying to defend yourself from that one accusation, as if that’s the only thing challenging your argument? What about that point someone made that in some points of history, regions of relatively high development change over time? Like at this point in time, Europe is the one with high development, but back then, it was in warmer areas, with cold areas not being as developed. You know, like the Mediterranean? Known for mild winters? Which Greece and Rome were located in?

      • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        All I’m saying is that regions with harsher winters experienced early consistent pressures to develop specific technologies: agriculture, food storage, preservation, textiles, and weatherproof shelters. Early development of those technologies helped push them toward industrialization earlier. Not that they’re the only regions that were ever developed, especially after the establishment of wider trade routes. I don’t understand the enthusiasm of everyone to turn this into a race thing.

      • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Okay. I am, in the context of skin tone, witch is the only thing relevant to my point. I don’t subscribe to racist ideology. “White” isn’t even a coherent race.