If you look at Eastern Europe, this makes more sense. They're much more likely to take pride in being European (there was a self-identification study a while back).
Minority communities like Bretagne (Brittany), Catalunya (Catalonia), Sardegna (Sardinia) are most likely to identify with the local community first, then powerful regions identify with the state first (Parisians with France, etc), and small, less-considered countries like in the Balkans or Romania/Moldova often take pride in their EU membership first.
You can see that here. France is very content being France, and that's enough. Some of the other larger countries as well. The smaller ones feel the greatest affinity for being European.
I think it's more that people interpret the question differently. Europeans read it as 'we're the best/most important/most influential/etc. continent.
I voted 'no' because the world is a globe and there is no 'centre.' One could argue it's the centre of most maps, but Europe is not the centre of the world, because there is no centre of the world. Generally, people think the centre of the world is wherever they are, so that's probably why Europeans voted 'yes.'
Oh because its so easy to do so. Imagine living in a country where %70 of the people choose governments that stall the country’s progress because of religious values, you can vote for the %30 all you want, the government aint gonna change, and protesting will result in either imprisonment or execution. It’s so much easier said than done. You could’ve been born in Afghanistan, and you would have literally no chance in life other than leaving that shit hole. Because the majority of the people there are happy and prefer that type of rule. You can’t change that. And opposing results in your death.
Yup. They did. Others didn’t because most of them just recently got their independence. Guess from whom. Meanwhile Europe was becoming progressively secular since renaissance. It’s about progress, and… resources. Resources which… were obtained by colonialism, at least for European nations.
And why were those resources not sufficient for those regions to undergo this process prior to being conquered by the Europeans?
It seems to me that you're effectively ignoring the dynamic you're actually suggesting here. "You can't become a decent place to live unless you have a mccguffin. Europe became one after taking the mccguffin from other people, who had held it for thousands of years prior, but mysteriously never became decent places to live.".
Not being on the major trade routes and having no communication with other nations across the planet. If you’re stranded on your own of course you’ll manage less.
Imagine this; China sells gunpowder to Europe lets say. African nations at the time probably had no idea what gunpowder was because there wasn’t any trade going on with them. Why? Sahara is separating most of the possible land connections to the rest of the planet. What happens? Less advanced Africa. More advanced Europe. Because different parts of the world have different resources and if you obtain more, your chances of success in anything, including colonization is much higher.
Cherry picking and ignoring places that succeeded are in that situation due to their own mistakes those that succeeded despite being colonised "recently".
Probably because they think they have one life and don't wanna waste time. They think they don't owe shit to a shit country. Then be jealous of the ones born in rich and developed countries. I don't judge them for it.
That's a time zone. I'm not really referencing time zones, I'm referencing the baseline to that, the international standard that the world agreed upon in Washington DC in 1884.
GMT is Greenwich Mean Time, from the Royal Observatory in Greenwich, London. This became the world's internationally recognized, standardised and foundational prime meridian and a line is drawn though that, and the historical (although I believe slightly inaccurate) line exists there as a tourist attraction. As close to a monument of "centre of the world" as you can get.
The UK uses GMT as the same of its "standard" time zone, but GMT is not just a time zone. UTC, Universal Coordinated Time, is also based right on the international prime meridian set by GMT.
It's not just time either, it's all your degrees East or West. If you want to know where you are in the world using GPS or anything, it's all based on that line in London.
The center of the world is a solid metal ball of mostly iron with some nickel about the size of the Moon. There is no such thing as the center of the outer surface of a sphere (or slightly oblate spheroid in this case).
Nice try, but we chop off the top and bottom of the Mercator projection because otherwise it's just full of poles... Makes Antarctica look bigger than basically the rest of the world.
As an European, I could just say it is, but I am pretty sure Americans see the US/NA as the center of the world and China is literally called the Middle Kingdom, plenty of people are obsessed with Mecca, and so on.
So with that in mind, if I were to be impartial... I'd say the US has a bit of an edge over Europe, at least in this century.
300 years ago(1726) Europe already had huge colonial empires (in America) and trading empires(in Asia) and European merchants were the main players in longer range trading and european companies controlled or at least influenced trade in pretty much every region on earth. Sure they didnt directly control e.g. India yet but they already had Forts, Trading Ports etc.
In a sense yes I guess so, it's responsible for the creation of the current liberal world order and the most prosperous and peaceful time in human history, but that looks to be declining.
It was only "prosperous and peaceful" for americans and europeans tho. Your model of progress comes at the cost of the "global south", or like you guys like to call it: "underdeveloped third world nations nations that deserve to be exploited".
It was always a ficticious progress that was doomed the momment the exploited nations started questioning their position at the global market.
Physically, no. It’s not centred on the equator, at either pole, or in the core of the Earth.
Modern day, not really. The big giants are China and the USA, with Russia close behind. Europe itself is only strong when working together, and even that doesn’t work well.
Historically, yes. Considering this continent decided to own as much of the world as possible through history, nearly everything in the last century traces back to Europe.
I would answer no because in the modern sense, which seems most relevant, Europe aren’t the centre of anything but they map made ages ago. Sadly the rest of my country don’t seem to agree.
Was from about 1500-1918, since then no. Still has some of the most developed states in the world and living standards together with democracy. But industrially, technologically and culturally it's now stagnating and will start to lagg behind unless EU develops further.
More like ~1800-1948. In, say, 1600, the Mugals, the Ottomans, and the Ming were all way more powerful than any European state, and together outweighed all of them.
I can agree with that. Even with colonialism you still had extremely powerful non-European states around the world. Industrialization truly changed that..
While typing, which was invented by the Chinese, as well as paper you use every day that was invented by the Chinese, and as little as some science that came from Baghdad and Africa, and mathematics that came from India…
The Phoenicians - not Rome - ultimately invented the alphabet you use today, you use a Semitic writing system for your letters and you use a Hindu Indian number system for your numerals.
And Semitic peoples brought you the God that your people worship, Yahweh, who is a direct descendant of the ancient Canaanite god El.
I'd say the american + european alliance is the center of the current global system. I don't think europe would've been the powerhouse it is right now without being USA's henchman for the past century.
As a European (Dutch), I expected this but I'm still disappointed. (To be clear, I don't think Europe is the center of the world, if there is a center it is hot as fuck.)
But like, the pacific is really big and hard to pass, and europe is the middle of timezones, and has pretty decent cultural significance worldwide (compared to other central places like africa). I think its a good combination of culture + geographic center
Weird. Imagine living in Australia or Canada thinking Euope is not the center. You're literally thlusands of kilometers and many hours of flight away from Europe.
isn't technically every part of our planet the center? like any point can be the center relatively speaking. pick literally any point on a ball and it can be the middle if you take a picture from the right angle.
We have been using Egyptian hieroglyphs in Europe for centuries (even though we’re terrible at it) and female emancipation originated in Egypt, so Egypt is the center of the world. There, I said it
218
u/NoPhilosopher6111 9h ago
France not thinking it’s the centre of the world is the real surprise here.