I believe that the superiority the Europeans felt was racism. When the Europeans first came in contact with natives they felt they were barbaric and uncivilized but not due to the color of their skin. The natives were different culturally and not as advanced technologically or politically which led to the feeling of superiority in the Europeans. While the supremacy was originally due to cultural differences, racism quickly developed. The association between skin of color and subordination quickly formed causing racism to form. While originally there was only discrimination due to less technological and political development, racism quickly emerged shaping European slave trade.
I believe that when the Europeans first came in contact with the Africans and Native Americans they viewed them as they did every other culture, which is as uncivilized barbarians. Previously this has been one of the recurring themes in European history. Any contact that the Europeans had with people whose civilization was not as technologically or politically developed, even the mere fact that they were not Europeans automatically earned them a label of uncivilized barbarians. I believe that a similar attitude was taken toward the Native Americans and Africans in the earliest interactions. Then, as the world economy developed and plantations were formed the Europeans thought that they were simply utilizing the NA and Africans, even helping them. Thus the slave trade was born. However, after centuries of the NA and Africans being treated as property and slaves and several social hierarchies being formed around the color of your skin and race the Europeans formed a sense of superiority and racism was introduced to the relationship.
I believe that the feeling of superiority that the Europeans had is the same thing as racism. They saw that the Native Americans were less technologically advanced than them and immediately took advantage of that fact. From there first arrival the Europeans were asserting their superiority over the Native Americans. They targeted the Native Americans in massacres and took away many of their rights. In my mind this is racism, because it is purposefully targeting one group of people. Also, feeling superior over a certain ethnicity of people just because of the color of your skin or where you were born is racism.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an explorer/conqueror, I would see myself as being a very powerful and influential person! So, if I were to come across new land that already had people on it that were obviously less advanced than I was, I would see myself as being superior. I would jump to that conclusion that just because they were different than I was, I was better, more powerful and more worthy. In my mind, seeing yourself as being better than someone else because of advantages or differences in your life is racism. Therefore, yes, I do think Columbus was being racists toward the Natives.
I feel that when the Europeans initially came into contact with the Africans and Native Americans they did exhibit some racism towards them. Because the Europeans viewed themselves as being superior to a specific group of people, in this case the Africans and Native Americans, the Europeans were being racist. I also believe that the degree of racism increased dramatically over time. As Europeans began to use African slaves much more and began massacring Native Americans, they used racism both as means of justification for their actions and to help further their dominance over them. While the Europeans almost certainly oppressed the Native Americans and Africans partially because they were less technologically advanced and the Europeans did not want to oppress people of their own countries, European racism definitely played a part in the decision to oppress the Native Americans and Africans.
I think that the superiority the Europeans felt simply started because they had better technology, were more advanced, and were more 'civilized.' They often considered African and Native American practices and people to be barbaric and animalistic. The fact that they could so easily conquer and exploit African and Native American peoples no doubt caused the Europeans to view themselves as superior. I think that over time, this feeling over superiority got translated into racism, because whites were in power and those with darker skin were subordinate. The general superiority the Europeans felt when they first discovered the New World translates to the racism that is palpable even today.
I believe that Europeans confuse barbaric with different. Also, African and Asian advances culturally were far superior to many European contributions. Personally, I feel that Europeans have always considered "white' skin to be superior, which in itself is the basis for racism. Pigmentation, or the lack of it, does not define superiority or intelligence.
I believe that the superiority that the Europeans felt towards the Africans and Native Americans was not exactly racism, but simply just that they felt they were more advanced. At least this was the case to begin with. As time went on, slavery started to play a role which is what I feel initiated this racist surmise. When the Europeans arrived in African territory, they treated the Natives violently and with disrespect, but as Katy said, it was not due to the color of skin. The feeling of superiority was understandable because of their more advanced ways and prominent stability. Slave trade and racism developed hand-in-hand because slaves were of African and Native American origin and they were proclaimed slaves, where the Europeans were in charge of this trade. Slaves were established based on race which was a result of the European's initial sense of superiority. So, basically, I think that the European's original dominance was not the same as racism, but over time I think that racism developed as slavery was established.
I do think that the Europeans were being racists towards the native Americans and the Africans, because they saw them as inferior solely based upon their race and origin. Even though they did not look down upon themselves as being racists at the time, and the concept was not as fully formed as it is today, they were racist. no matter what you want to call it, seeing someone as inferior based solely on their race is racism, no matter what time period or circumstances it is under. Apparently, the Europeans thought that Africans didn't even have souls, which proves even more the caliber to which the Europeans saw the Africans and native Americans as inferior.
Based on the documents that give evidence that Europeans felt superior to the Natives and African Americans, I would draw the conclusion that the Europeans were indeed racist people. The Europeans evolved from a more advanced and civilized area, hence their thought process of thinking that they were superior and "better" than the Natives and African Americans. Europeans came from a wealthier and more fortunate background and looked down upon the others that they conquered and encountered. Because they did look down on these people, for multiple factors including skin color, customs, and how they lived their everyday lives, I would conclude that the Europeans were indeed racist. Racism is prejudice or discrimination directed at a specific group of people (race) and it is obvious that this was what the Europeans were doing. I don't believe that the initial intent was to be racist, but over time, the Europeans discrimination was interpreted as racism by others.
I do think that the feeling the Europeans had in this situation was racism. Obviously, they were more civilized, and came from a more fortuitous background than the Africans. Yes, they were more advanced in all areas of life. But however they tried to present it or look at it, they were simply racist. Simply looking down or casting one as inferior for simply having a different skin color than you cannot be anything but racist. Even if they see it as stating a fact, it is downright racist. Racism was used to justify controlling groups of another race, and I don't know if that can be excused by the fact that "everyone else was doing it." The Native Americans had no chance against the Europeans and the Europeans exploited them, eventually kicking them completely off their own land. To feel that another race is worse than you simply because they aren't as developed or advanced is racism.
I think that the Europeans were racist, but I don't think it necessarily started out as racism. In the beginning, the Europeans definitely felt superior to the Africans and Native Americans, because the Europeans had better technology and thought of the others as barbaric. The color of their skin could have been anything, the Europeans still felt better than the Africans and Native Americans. The superiority the Europeans felt evolved into racism later, but it didn't start out that way. The Europeans felt superior and were white, and the people they felt were barbaric and had darker skin, which probably led Europeans to see everyone with darker skin in a lower light. This association became a norm, and racism became a norm as well.
I believe that the Europeans feelings of superiority towards the Native populations of America and all Africans were racist. However, I believe that race was not the primary reason why Europeans felt superior, in the beginning. Cultural, societal, technological as well as many other differences between the Europeans and the Native Americans, as well as the Africans, existed and these differences are what led the Europeans to feel superior. Because these differences existed Europeans looked down upon these other peoples as barbaric and overall inferior to themselves. Since the Europeans directly associated these beliefs with these populations I believe that racism resulted. This belief of superiority became more about race than anything else and thus European feelings of superiority over other populations were racist.
In my opinion I do not believe feeling superior to another is the same as being racists, though I do believe it is wrong. The majority of people in the world now, all think that they are superior to another due to social status or material wealth, but they are not racist. The Europeans did the exact same, but it was simply conveniently the natives did not have the same culture and color as the Europeans. They believed since they had more advanced technology, and were more civilized in their own terms, they were superior. So it is racist only because they were a different race? l I believe that the definition of racism itself is vague "a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others." This implies that if one believes they are superior to their own people it is fine but if they are a different race then it is all wrong. In conclusion I believe that the Europeans did not have racist intentions when meeting with the natives ,but throughout time as the natives assimilated into the Europeans culture, they were continued to be seen as lesser beings which caused the term racism to really amplify due to it.
I believe it was partially racism, and partially not. At first it probably wasn't racism and simply it was because of the guns and technology that the European explorers had, and that made them feel extremely superior to them. However, later on as the societies evolved, and the Europeans took over more lands, they evolved into a more racist state. While they at first thought they were superior due to technology, the race became a factor as their societies soon had social classes based around simply the color of their skin.
When the Europeans met up with the Native Americans for the first time they showed more of a diplomatic side. But as soon as the plague began wiping out thousands if not millions of Native Americans, they swooped in and started to take their lands. They subjugated them, believing it was god and their technology that allowed them to take over and that made them better. In Africa, they were sold slaves by Africans, and did not take them by force as much. They used a clever technique of selling the Africans guns, and then getting more slaves as the Africans with guns would take in prisoners. This made them feel superior due to a clever trick they used, but in the end it started to evolve more and more towards race.
I do not believe that the Europeans were being entirely racist towards the native Americans and Africans. The main reason I say this is because the reason they abused the other areas they went to is mainly because they were less advanced than the Europeans. This even continued, for example, when the Dutch took over Java because they could, not because of skin color. Had the Europeans been racist, then there would not have been mixed people like mulattoes due to the fact that Europeans would not have wanted to breed with them. This is different than the current world where we all have equal established rights, but people negatively generalize a race of people. They are not abusing them or taking away their rights like slavery or servitude would. Using the justification of racism for the Europeans actions is not accurate, considering that they mistreated their own kind while they were doing all of these things to Americans and Africans.
Thieves in the name of Superiority. Europeans had nothing. They still the biggest criminals and murderers in modern time.It in their blood God raised the white from from synagogue of satan. People who came from European caves eating raw meat were not civilized more than the black.
As an indigenous African am writing from a state of great understanding.Superiority grew from the Europeans state of self realization. When they first discovered the new African world no doubt they realised that those who lived in it were less or more behind in understanding themselves.They were comfortable living in bushes, necked and at times ran away on presence of Whites,which directly drew a concern by the Europeans to explore more of the blacks.Their technology was undefined, they defended using stones and spears and hated knowledge. Their governments and cultural practices were were baseless. If today you were in the shoes of the then Europeans no doubt you'd view yourself superior since you knew more than the black's. No one would let illiteracy have a way in superiority. Everything the white deed was superior,overshadowed and doubted African understanding.
Today, liberals bombard America with multiethnic propaganda. They have been encouraging the immigration of sub-Saharan Africans into the country.
In this author’s home town, an entire section of the city has been overrun by Islamic Africans who can’t speak a word of the English language.
Those who embrace ethnic pluralism expect Americans to believe that these Third-World foreigners are the future of our magnanimous Western civilization.
As Christians concerned for the future of our communities, neighbors, and posterity, the question should be asked: can people of African ancestry sustain Western civilization with its complex institutions and cultural expressions? If not, Christians should not simply accept the destruction of our faith's civilization This would benefit neither the world nor Christ's followers. It’s time for Christians to start confronting the tough questions.
For anyone willing to look, there is a massive amount of data upon which to construct answers. I would like to argue that no historical truth is more certain than that Afroethnics are incapable of sustaining our civilization.
Evaluating the history of the now ruined city of Detroit, the now ruined continent of Africa, and the now ruined island of Haiti while comparing them with Japan and Puerto Rico should provide sufficient evidence from which to decide upon the ability of Afroethnics to sustain European civilization.
Once the largest factory in the world. Today, the Packard Plant (Detroit) stands in ruin.
Due to White flight, vast urban areas around America have been abandoned to African Americans residents. The most amazing example of this situation is the city of Detroit. After World War II, Detroit was one of the most prosperous cities in the world. It was given the nickname “Paris of North America.” 
In 1950, the city was the fifth largest in the country, with a population of 1,849,568. At the peak of the cities prestige (1940), European Americans made up 90.7% of the population.  Detroit’s Euro-American population has shrunk considerably, however, since the middle of the last century. This demographic decline has presaged a broader deterioration of the city’s reputation and importance.
Today, African Americans make up 82.7% of Detroit’s population (a near complete reversal of 1940), and the city has diminished to 680,250 inhabitants. 
In only a few years White flight caused the complete handover of one of the most distinguished cities in the world from Euroethnics to Afroethnics.
One significant reason for the rapid exodus of Euro-Americans from the city was African American violence. This was exemplified by the Twelfth Street Riot, the second largest and most destructive riot in United States history. European Americans, fearing for their lives, fled Detroit following the uprising. They left one of the most prosperous cities on earth in the hands of Afroethnics.
Prominent Black economist Thomas Sowell commented on the riot:
“Before the ghetto riot of 1967, Detroit's black population had the highest rate of home-ownership of any black urban population in the country, and their unemployment rate was just 3.4 percent. It was not despair that fueled the riot. It was the riot which marked the beginning of the decline of Detroit to its current state of despair. Detroit's population today is only half of what it once was, and its most productive people have been the ones who fled.” 
Sowell conceded that the ethnic violence didn’t break out because African Americans were suffering a terrible economic situation, in fact, the opposite was true. This event alone speaks volumes about the effectiveness of multiethnic social arrangements.
The importance of Detroit’s historical situation is that by evaluating the last 60 years of the city’s history we have a nearly perfect case study of what happens when current Western prosperity and institutions are handed over to those of African descent. Detroit is exemplary in that it was not handed over to degenerate Afroethnics but, as Thomas Sowell said, the most prosperous Afroethnic people in America (and therefore the world).
The story of the decline and fall of Detroit is well known, and anyone who is interested should research it personally.  The collapse of Detroit following its Euroethnic population’s replacement by African Americans is so dramatic it appears almost unbelievable.
Detroit has fallen so far since the 1950s that today it is often compared to a post-apocalyptic environment. Much of Detroit is characterized by its remarkable similarity to a vacant dilapidated world in which humanity has suddenly been struck by a cataclysmic event.
In 2010, the History Channel aired a documentary called Apocalypse Man in which host, Rudy Reyes, demonstrated how to deal with scenarios one might face after a catastrophic event suddenly ended civilization... the documentary
treated them like faggots
Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.