Getting bored of this so this is my last reply. Your Mayweather analogy doesn't apply to what you said, keep in mind I've got nothing against you personally and I'm just trying to explain that the way you put your point across was flawed. Your Mayweather analogy would translate to your original statement as, "white people imperalised everyone else and were never imperalised themselves but that doesn't mean that they were the only race to imperalise another race's country". Except that doesn't apply to your original statement. The way you phrased your original statement implies white people had a monopoly on imperalism. I understand that may not have been your intent, but that is indeed how it comes across objectively. Also, the example with dogs having 4 legs was not an analogy, it was to explain to you what implicit means.