How come all the land brits conquered became a single country...

How come all the land brits conquered became a single country, but all the land spaniards conquered became a thousand fragmented countries?

Attached: 920x920.jpg (920x696, 62.04K)

the land the brits took didn't become a single country, Canada still isn't a part of the US to say nothing of all the other territories
as for South America, not sure

Instability, A lot of the south American countries were always either very broke up or too large with too many cultures

Like Gran Colombia or the USCA

USA, Canada, Australia, India, some others.

This, also New Zealand was part of Australia at one point

I guess I should have been more specific

Why was the US more stable? Why were they not? You seem knowledgeable.

Intent. My forefathers mostly came to Pennsylvania with their wives and children and created a country of their race, culture and religion, entirely distinct from the natives, who were not many in number.

Spaniards came as armies of men and subjugated densely populated kingdoms, which they immediately started converting and mixing with. The resulting people were of lower ability than the Spaniards and had a strange mismatched culture that is in part both European and native, and this leads to corruption and instability.

The English exported Europe, the Spaniards exported empire.

>not many in number

lack of social cohesion due to racial diversity

Ill*****ti dismantled their royal power structures

Attached: 1557543392748.jpg (480x476, 35.63K)

is that an olmec?

Spaniards conquered the entire thing, so when the colonies got independent they couldn't expand their territory dominating others who had the same "culture" they had, political solutions were attempted and then ditched

When USA acquired independence, they were able to expand murdering natives left and right like in the good old times, so the whole terrain ended up being theirs.

The natives initially lost 90% of their population due to diseases which were brought by the Europeans. They had no immunity because they've never had to face these sicknesses before. After their population was depleted, they were easily subjugated.

The inquisition was a double bladed axe with South America, it left it more stable during the majority of its existence but during the industrial revolution, all of that advanced stuff was banned. Late too printing press and now late to the industry the south american colonies were pretty destitute when they had just gotten out of an impressive and bloody civil war. (across the entire fucking two continents as well)

Mexico was always pretty divided and that was mainly cause of it's poor economic situation and division in ideologies. On top of that mexico had a roman tier way of generals controlling armies so the government rarely had control of its armed forces. And lets not even start on the short lived French puppet state in Mexico, which also led to more fucking civil war.

For the USCA it was really just divided culturally as it was a mix of Nahuatl, Mayan, Spanish and native central americans so of course it would split up.

Gran Colombia was looking good cause it was all the good things of the USCA (agriculture galore) but again, cultural difference broke it apart. Also the original geography left everything pretty split up.

The only one I can think of that didn't get fucked up was Chile and Argentina. Too bad argentina is NOW fucked up, it was looking pretty good too.

___________________

For the US it always had a favourable history. Geographically it was open and arable. A massive river system, in fact literally the largest in the world. It's fucking China tier. Thankfully they were culturally strong because they never had an inquistion it was always very free. Religious and cultural acceptance was pretty much the norm so their were never any divides. Freedom built the US in literally every shape and form, Individual Freedom, Freedom of Press, Freedom of demonstration, Free speech, a strong democratic government that wasn't fucking corrupt. And what government their was they were pretty good with autonomy to states and territories.

Attached: 1490732661848.jpg (748x1022, 117.93K)

Not. It's a mexican.
t. mex american who's grandpa looked exactly like him.

I have a skinny frame myself, but I still got those godly upper trap genetics. Girls like to squeeze them. Thank you grandpa.

>brit colony
plains and forests connected by one uninterrupted coastline of people with similar culture
spic colony
A series of deserts and jungles separated by mountains and oceans, full of vastly different people.

looks like an olmec

A quick reverse image search will tell you that this is an indigenous Mexican, retard.
Are indigenous Mexicans known for having strong traps? I'm very interested in anatomical differences between races, and how certain races developed unique body structures.

Your referring to the U.S.A I'm assuming?
There are a few reasons.
>1. Geography - the US had only occupied a stripe of land from the coastal regions where there were no significant barriers to travel between population centers. Whereas the Spanish colonies where vary distinct. The Mississippi river helped with cohesion as the us spread out.
>2. Ethnic cohesion - there were only two key distinctions in the us, whites and slaves, in Spanish territories had lots and they where all struggling to gain power
>3. Political structure - /the US always had more freedom as certain perks of the Englishes location enabled them to govern differently, this meant the us had a fairly functional and stable political system to develop from.
>4. Allies - the US's independence was largely one and supported by the french, as they were able to aid the us in trading and staying secure on the world stage.
There are a lot of other cultural and geographical reasons but that's a start.

Wish I could show you a pic of my grandpappy. Dude was like 5'4", but built like a brick shit house. His wrist was thicker than mine even though I'm 4 inches taller.

Not traps per se. Just fucking neanderthal thick frame in general. Wide mouth, and big ears too. Nobody seems to notice that though.

>will tell you that this is an indigenous Mexican
yes, an olmec.

Attached: OLMEC BVLL PHENOTYPE.png (493x623, 476.99K)

>is that an olmec?
no its me

Interesting. I know that indigenous Americans have the highest percentage of neanderthal DNA coursing through their veins, so I'm sure that plays a part. I notice this a lot when looking at Mexican boxers like Mikey Garcia and his brother Roberto.

>all the land brits conquered became a single country
Ah yes, the great nation of the United States of New Austracanadealirelindiakistan

Oh, my bad lol, I thought the olmecs were further down south. I guess I'm the retard

most injuns from mexico & central america are racially olmec (margid)

Thanks user, I didnt know that. I always thought that the olmecs were strictly in central America.

and why didnt the south american natives die then

They did, they just recovered quicker cause that's where first contact happened and they lived closer together, hence greater population plus and faster spread.

Yes, olmec genetics and massive frame.

Attached: 20200502_024433.jpg (426x650, 233.06K)

They did. The spanish spared a lot of them though for helping them fight the aztecs.

I'm pretty sure it was open season on natives in the US though.

Cool, he looks strong and reasonably intelligent. One thing I noticed about a lot of indigenous Americans though, they never have visible abs no matter how strong and lean the rest of their bodies are. It's like they naturally have a higher disposition of fat in their mid sections.

Wide bois

Attached: get.jpg (683x1024, 99.2K)

Yup, they used to pay for Injun scalps back in the day. That's actually where the whole scalping stigma originated from, they just started scalping us back when they occasionally killed a couple of us.