>>3831 (OP)
Why is the fact that white people have conquered the planet being used as a point against their supremacy?
If someone walked into a room full of people trying to beat each other up and kicked all their asses, I wouldn't consider that guy and say "what a loser", he is by any definition the winner of that exchange.
Global conquest didn't just take brute strength, it required technology, diplomacy, strategy, and economic prosperity.
You can't even say we are exceptionally cruel when the only reason why so many of the races we colonized still exist today is because we purposely chose to hold ourselves back from just wiping them out and taking the land and it's resources.
We didn't spare them because we needed something only they could provide, we were often better at thriving in foreign lands than the natives were.
We held back out of a moral sense of restraint, and a naive hope that the lesser races could one day rise up to be our equals.
The left is cringe when they bring up white victory as if it were a loss for the race, and the conservatives are worse when they accept the premise that the success of their race is somehow a thing they should feel ashamed of.
Any other race but white people would be like "hell yeah, we built the greatest civilizations and pwnd the world", in games like civilization or age of empires this is the condition for winning.
"The jews only exist because the whites chose to allow it" that just makes us look really awesome.
Only an idiot hates themselves for their own accomplishments.
What's the greatest thing blacks have achieved? Whitey deciding to make them their bitch a little less severely than before.
Every other point in this pic can be reframed to make whites look like the master race.
For example, "jews being relevant for thousands of years" vs "whites only being relevant for a couple hundred" translates to the jews taking thousands of years to achieve the success they have, while whites only needed a fraction of that time to do the same, but better.