It's rare to see a complete disregard for historical fact coupled with a tinge of racism and religious zealotry uttered with an almost Victorian era sensibility - Bravo.
Lets start with a few misconceptions - the 12th and 13th century crusaders coloured their wars of aggressive territorial expansion for the Polish, Swedish and Danish Kingdoms by claiming it as a series of wars to spread the Catholic faith. We know that is just a smoke screen because the Lithuanians were targeted by these "crusaders" despite being Catholic. These crusaders also tried to annex lands from the Orthodox Slavic kingdoms, so the spread of Christianity was NOT the prime reason for these wars - control of territory was.
Second - like most people living in Europe at that time, the Balts were farmers or fishermen. there were few cities of the sort found in Germany, but there were some. The Old Prussians, Wends, Latvians, etc. were not savages living a hunter-gatherer lifestyle - they were farmers and fishermen.
Third - why is your set of superstitions preferable to the Baltic peoples set of superstitions? Christianity has been the tool of the ruling classes to ensure that the lower orders don't argue too much against their station in life or poor treatment by their superiors on the grounds that their rewards for obedience will come in the next world and to ensure that women are restricted to being second class citizens (if that). While I haven't looked at Finnish or Prussian pagan beliefs to any great extent, the old norse faiths didn't restrict the legal rights of women to the same extent as their contemporaneous Christian counterparts did.
What you've argued for in your statement is a slightly milder version of "white man's burden", a mode of thinking that denigrates any social order, thought pattern or ethnic origin other than one's own. It very clearly demonstrates a racist mode of thinking.
I was being tongue-in-cheek. Sometimes it is a useful exercise to take a contrarian stance, in an attempt to get the objective view, rather than falling back on attitudes we were taught in schools or through one's family, friends, social media, the press, tv, radio, etc., etc,.
Yes, we all know 'the ruling classes are bad', 'the serfs are the victims' or that 'inequality is the only thing stopping people reaching their potential'.
But do people ever examine their fondly held beliefs, or do they simply fall back on trendy slogans and sound bites?
In history, nothing is 100% good nor 100% bad.
Did Christianity introduce oppression of women?
Control of territory? I am sure this was an aim. However, bear in mind the population of Europe was much smaller than today, and the plague wiped out over 25 million people in the late C17 and early C18. So one needs to beware of juxtaposing the conditions we live in now with those in the Middle Ages.
The truth is, ports, harbours, roads, farms, fisheries, boats, the navy, the army,
et al, had to built up from scratch. Who do you think did all that? The same people who got up and explored the world and took opportunities where they found them.
Name one and show their Hunnish ancestry.