America VS Native Tribes: Justifiable Conquest, Ruthless Genocide, Typical War, Other? (Page 2)
Click "Show More" for your mentions
Most Helpful Opinion(mho) Rate.
Learn more
Learn more
We're glad to see you liked this post.
You can also add your opinion below!
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
44Opinion
Anytime you cover blankets in small pox and give them to babies it's genocide. 200 million were killed by the biological warefare alone.
The blanket thing happened once. It was done my English officers during a siege I think. Once.
Be serious they didn't have to give them blankets laced with small pox as bubonic plague, chickenpox, cholera, diphtheria, influenza, leprosy, malaria, measles, pertussis, scarlet fever, smallpox, typhoid fever, typhus, yaws and yellow fever were all so prevalent at the time and native Americans were so vulnerable to them that small pox blankets would have been a wasted pointless effort.
And roughly 90% of the natives simply died of old. world infections which they weren't accustomed to, due to not having domesticated animals. This was bot a coordinated effort, this was an accident. Keep in mind, a few hundred years earlier, 60% of Europe died from the Black Plague. Yeah. So 90% ain't that unheard of.
Educate yourself.
90% died of small pox after they were given blankets covered in small pox. It spread across the whole country. It was devised by the British because Native Americans refused to be slaves. There are journals from Native Americans all over the country that never met a white man and still died of small pox.
Don't be ridiculous. Small pox and other old world diseases arrived and spread through the new world the day the first Spaniard sneezed on a native American.
Try again. Native Americans in Mezo America didn't die at the rate they did in North America from disease. This is why there are so many people in South America that are Native American. Small pox is very contagious and very deadly.
Yes they did look it up. Central and South America were more densely populated and with vast advanced and powerful civilisations. How do you think s man like Cortez was able to conquer the Aztecs with only 500 men, because most of them were dying. The spainish also controlled Florida at one time as well as the American mid West and West coast. People in South and central America are very mixed through with Europeans so much so that there are very few actual native people's left.
He conquered the aztecs by looking like some white guy they were looking for in a proficy, then when he met the king he kidnapped him at gun point, demanded all the gold of the nation, then shot the king in the head as he sailed away. You really know nothing about this do you?
If he sailed away how did he conquer them?
How would he have defeated them at Battle of Otumba and capture Tenochtitlan (now Mexico city). Hell Cortez sank his ships before going on campaign.
Obviously you don't know history.
He took that gold bought an army and killed them with guns not disease. Which raiding trip to America do you count as conquering the aztecs?
The one where he captured what is now Mexico city and the whole of Mexico for Spain thus enriching Spain by giving it access to trade routes in the Pacific.
If various plagues in Europe brought from Asia wiped out as much as half of Europe's population at various times what do you suppose happened to native people's in South and central America who had never encountered them. Before Cortes' arrival, the native Mexican population is estimated to have been around 25 to 30 million. Fifty years later, the Mexican population was reduced to 3 million, mainly by infectious disease.
6 years after the British infected northern native Americans with smallpox their population went from 220 million to 20 million. There are books written by native Americans detailing the whole thing. I'm pretty sure cortez really didn't have an army for that tell the third trip.
The arrival of 102 Pilgrims aboard the Mayflower at Plymouth in 1620 and the settlements by the Puritans in Boston, Salem and Ipswich a decade later were accompanied by the demise of the native population of North America.
“Within these late years, there hath, by God’s visitation, reigned a wonderful plague, the utter destruction, devastation, and depopulation of that whole territory, so as there is not left any that do claim or challenge any kind of interest therein. We, in our judgment, are persuaded and satisfied, that the appointed time is come in which Almighty God, in his great goodness and bounty towards us, and our people, hath thought fit and determined, that those large and goodly territories, deserted as it were by their natural inhabitants, should be possessed and enjoyed by such of our subjects.” ––King James I
It was called the great dying. An estimated 18,000,000 Native Americans lived in North America before the 17th Century. As explorers and settlers arrived from Europe, a tidal wave of disease, especially in the years 1616-1619, reduced the native population by up to 90 percent. Pilgrim and Puritan colonists arrived on the New England coast to find empty villages waiting for them to occupy. Among the diseases introduced to the Native American population were smallpox, bubonic plague, chickenpox, cholera, the common cold, influenza, diphtheria, malaria, measles, scarlet fever, sexually transmitted diseases, typhoid, typhus, tuberculosis, leptospirosis, yellow fever and pertussis.
“In short time after the hand of God fell heavily upon them, with such a mortal stroke that they died on heaps as they lay in their houses… For in a place where many inhabited, there hath been but one left alive to tell what became of the rest…And the bones and skulls upon the severall places of their habitations made such a spectacle after my coming into those parts, that, as I traveled in that Forrest near the Massachussets, it seemd to me a new found Golgatha.
And by this means there is as yet but a small number of Salvages in New England, to that which hath been in former time, and the place is made so much the more fit for the English Nation to inhabit in, and erect in it Temples to the glory of God. “
—Thomas Morton, among the founders of the settlement at Mount Wollaston (present day Quincy, MA).
“For the natives, they are near all dead of the smallpox, so the Lord hath cleared our title to what we possess.”
–John Winthrop, Massachusetts governor, writing in 1634 from Boston
You purposefully picked the lowest estimation of population. The average estimate of the indigenous population of North America pre 1492 was 147 million. And yes 90% died of small pox in a 6 year period around 1650.
Well considering there was only maybe 70 million people in Europe at the time, 80 million in Africa, China the largest and most advanced and populous nation in the 1600s only had 200 million by the 1700s. 147 million is to high a figure for North American, it's too high even for all the Americas. There might have been only 500million people in the world at the time mostly in Asia.
Native South-Americans didn't die at such rates (still tragic rates, but lower) because they domesticated animals. Many illnesses came from domestic animals, and Europeans have adapted to it. North-American natives did NOT have domestic animals, therefore they were more suspectible to these diseases.
Also, the natives started dying the moment the Spanish set foot on the continent. This is hardly a debatable fact. Smallpox on the other hand only appeared in the 1700s I think. I'd have to look it up, but I recall they even know the exact name of the ship that introduced it to the continent, having patients with smallpox onboard.
@WhitePanther88 apparently knows a lot more about this than me, but suffice to say, we can all agree that you, sir, should go the fuck back to school, and learn proper history. Not the propaganda bullshit.
By having cows you get cow pox the vaccine to small pox. The disease wasn't transfered by animals. As for the population, I trust the native American numbers more than your estimate. The native Americans didn't suffer the Spanish flu killing 75% of everyone in Europe and Asia so to think they had less than one person per square mile is preposterous.
@Benedek38 lol the first instance of smallpox in the Americas was around 1496 among the Tanio people in Cuba. When spainish took control of the island. The spainish brought smallpox to the Americas when they first landed and it as well as all the other old world diseases spread through the continent like wildfire during the 1500s whether it be in the Caribbean, florida the Aztecs or the inacas. Small pox outbreaks in the Americas in the 1500s are well documented, perhaps pick up a book.
I dont think spainish flew killed 75% of anyone but it was the last major epidemic. Native Americans did not keep any recordings or figure or censuses during their 15000 years in the Americas.
Yes the plauge killed millions in Europe. The native Americans did keep records and even jornals from people who died of small pox. You said earlier "The Great Dyeing" was in 1650 and came out of the 13 original colonies. Right after my ancestor Paragon White, the first European born in north America, was born. His parents co authored the mayflower compact. Then they gave blankets full of small poxs to the indians. You got like a dollar for every one you killed.
@WhitePanther88 I didn't know much about the hustory of smallpox in the americas, apparently, it was indeed first transmitted to locals in south america. I thought that was some other disease, but apparently smallpox was there.
And the Spanish flu actually killed around 50 to 100 million people around the world, so it was more effective in that regard than smallpox. Even then, it was "only" 3-5% of the world's population.
Keep your retarded conspiracy theories at home.
Here's a diagram for you, idiot.
upload.wikimedia.org/.../..._EID-v8n4p360_Fig1.png
The world pop has tripled in the last 100 years. Your number of 3 billion people in Europe is to far from reality to be considered reasonable. If you don't understand percentages I don't believe the ones you present. By the way the Spanish Flu was also known as the Bubonic Plague. Anyone can type anything in to wiki. Hiliray Clinton's age change twice during the 2016 election. How about you source a reputable research agency?
1616-1619 the pilgrims and puritans settled in a land devoid of native Americans due to old world diseases they likely picked up trading with European traders or central American natives. www.cvltnation.com/.../
So what your saying is pilgrims vunerable to Small pox risked spreading it amongst themselves by carrying around infected blankets lol.
@Benedek38 I personally don't think spainish flu was as bad and was only as deadly as it was because of how much international travel and trade there was in 1919.
If you look at Europe during the great plague, bubonic plague, black death, Justinians plague.1346-1353 the black death some sources point to maybe 75-100 million in Eurasia overall and a rate 45-50% of people in some places while 70-80% on other countries.
@Benedek38 the bubonic plague also kept coming back 1360–1363; 1374; 1400; 1438–1439; 1456–1457; 1464–1466; 1481–1485; 1500–1503; 1518–1531; 1544–1548; 1563–1566; 1573–1588; 1596–1599; 1602–1611; 1623–1640; 1644–1654; and 1664–1667.
After the native Americans died they were scalped to collect the bounty on their head. Everyone ripped of the native Americans with trade of fake peace. I'll see if I can't track down a specific instance of the trade of small pox covered blankets to the native Americans. Also the Spanish Flu was the plauge. The mortality rate dropped in 1919 because of the invention of the I. V. so people didn't die of dehydration. Watching south America on the science channel right now. 9 out 10 native Americans in south America died during the great dying and there were still 11 million left after.
Mostly Mexicans took native American scalps.
No. Up until 1940 I believe in America they were still paying bounties on native Americans because of their beliefs. The scalping bounties for any native American came to an end in the 1800's. I've never heard of scalping bounties in south America. I may be bias as an American and only really know my own countries history.
"Up until 1940 I believe in America they were still paying bounties on native Americans because of their beliefs."
1) What beliefs?
2) Maybe provide proof? I can believe a lot of things, too.
" may be bias as an American and only really know my own countries history"
Oh you are biased alright, but not the way you think you are.
@Benedek38 mexico were still hunting native Americans as let as 1915.
In 1940 native Americans were at peace in the United States.
@WhitePanther88 He was cclearly talking about the US. Either way, he is an idiot.
Ruthless Genocide more than the other options, also a reflection of another time (hopefully), and the mentality and nature of humans
Ruthless genocide and typical war go hand in hand in my opinion
Yeah it was one militarily superior race against a weaker one, inevitable defeat for the Indians, and also a tragedy.
It was conquest. The Natives fought each other over territory too, just the colonists were better at it. Plus disease killed a lot of them. It's fine.
This may be why the right wing racists are so terrified about no longer being the majority in the US... afraid they may get the same treatment they dished out back then.
I'm pretty sure no one in America was around back then, racist or not.
@Sixgun77 hence the phrase "back then" lol as in looking back to how their ancestors acted... since many of them feel the same way about darker skinned people
Its ridiculous to judge history based upon todays morality. Life is a struggle and is filled with groups fighting and usurping each other
Come on !
@Light_beam what? Never studied history?
@Benedek38 not the history you studied
it was genocide but in the long run it worked out not only for the colonists but for the world
I don't think it was any of those. It was just plain greed and ignorance.
plain greed and ignorance which led to genocide.
Yes, but not genocide for the sake of genocide. We weren't trying to wipe out native Americans, we just thought we had some right to take the land and resources. It's not the same. Hitler wasn't trying to claim land and resources from the Jews; he wanted to exterminate them.
Not land: they hadn't much. Resources and assets.
When the advanced alien race invades the earth to take the natural wealth of water, minerals, and value of self we will know the plight of being the less developed humans.
Perhaps your ancestors from Europe did already.
white weren't the only people who tried to conquer
its just that we were the best at it
Conquest. Not justifiable. Neither side was perfect, even though europeans were the agressors.
“Europeans were the aggressors” in what sense are you thinking?
Invading the continent and taking it over?
Many societies that didn't claim ownership of the land though right? In most places there were no city-states, but nomadic hunter-gatherers. For example those who landed at plymouth weren't invading in my estimation. Do you think they were, or was that just later as they started expanding?
True. It depends. It's not all black and white. And it didn't all happen at once.
Surely true. Like the later reneging on treaties and whatnot.
by the term of genocide, yes (ruthless genocide) it was because it was their intention of doing so.
What about all the wars between native American tribes?
It was pretty much genocide. They wiped out the whole culture.
Yeah I hate it when that happens *cough* *cough* * British empire* * cough*. Lol
So can we say people advocating for multiculturalism, and thus the dilution of national identity and culture, are actually advocating forfor genocide?
@Benedek38 No, I don't think we can say that.
Why not? Isn't the destruction of culture a genocide, according to you?
@WhitePanther88 The British Empire preserved cultures and usually left them better than when they arrived.
@Benedek38 It is if you kill most of the people and confine the few survivors on "reservations".
You guys were hunting aborigines Up until 1928. You guys wiped out native Americans in Canada. You wiped out millions alone in India, slaughtered the Zulu, Basically wiped the Mauri out in New Zealand, killed thousands of boers, committed genocide in Sudan etc. Committed God knows how many genocides.
Sounds like the aborigines and Mauri in Australia and New Zealand. The British used to hunt the aborigines for sport up until 1928.
@WhitePanther88 So we sent our convicts to Australia... who knew they would commit crimes?
Not the convicts but the British authorities, you know the Red coats and British governors who were in charge. But it's ok you gave the aborigines trains.
@WhitePanther88 Who knew? They don't teach you this stuff in British schools.
"Yes play up, play up and play the game."
To be fair we too spent 5 years in GCSE history class learning about the holocaust and the atomic bomb drops.
"It is if you kill most of the people"
90% of the native population died from diseases they were not protected against. The smallpox blanket thing is bullshit, the native population has been steadily declining between the 15th and 16th century.
Reservations were actually created with the consent of native americans to help them reserve their heritage, and still assimilate into society. They were a clever way of solving a potentially endless conflict. Sure, it might sound cruel - on the other hand, you can't just transfer potentially a thousand years of culture and social change int he matter of days. You need again, ASSIMILATION.
@Benedek38 I agree the natives loving in the Americas were not soft, they were well trained warriors. Some tribes went from 30,000 warriors to just 300 thanks to epidemics. Pilgrims and purtitans thought God was clearing the land of Native Americans because the natives were dying out before they came into contact with them and they just moved on to their then unoccupied land without opposition.
Invasion?
How do you figure?
Cause they came into a country where there was already many societies.
Many societies that didn't claim ownership of the land though right? In most places there were no city-states, but nomadic hunter-gatherers. For example those who landed at plymouth weren't invading in my estimation. Do you think they were, or was that just later as they started expanding?
BOOM!
Well said. Natives had no conception of owner land, so invasion wasn't possible in the first place.
Ownership of the land wasn't a concept they practiced. You're applying all these western terminologies and ideas to a completely foreign society. It doesn't justify conquerng an already occupied land. Just landing of course wasn't an invasion, but continuing was.
Cool, thanks.
Your stance?
Don’t know. Listening to an argument and watching these discussions.
oh okiess
The natived were trying to press. back the colonist advancement, and reclaim territories as well. This was a two way street, only natives sucked at fighting.
yah but whose the one randomly barging in? just cos there was retaliation doesn't mean it wasn't an invasion lmao
As it was pointed out, it can't be an invasion, because the natives didn't occupy the territory. They didn't form ownership over it. And they (initially) didn't use military force toget their lands. They literally jsut settled down, and everyone was singing kumbaya. Then probably at some point the natives felth threatened, and a war broke out.
@Benedek38 alt-Right skewed history. If someone invaded your home with advanced weapons and bilological warfare, you would call it what it is.
@Jonny317 yes 👏
@Jonny317
You brought contemporary politics into this, and played the "alt right" card. You've already lost the argument.
@Benedek38 So just to be clear, you're "alt-right"
@Benedek38 Land was owned by the tribes www.blameitonthevoices.com/.../...nd-cessions.html
www.emersonkent.com/.../native_american_map.jpg
@Jonny317 He knows it
@jacquesvol It's funny because I didn't know the natives were writing with latin letter, and had maps.
Fuck off. A territory you defend is not the same as a land you own. Apex predators like lions or tigers split up their areas into their hunting territories, but they don't own the land, because they haven't recorded it, and solidified the borders with peace agreements. Same with the natives.
@jacquesvol Private ownership requires a legal framework in which it can function, whether that be a feudal bond, a government contract, or anything. You have to write it down. If you don't, you can't call it your own, because others can just say they don't recognize it and boom, it's gone.
@Benedek38 ethnologiists' work.
@Jonny317 It's not even a secret that he's a white supremacist. He (like all these Alt-Right pussies, on here and anywhere) just tries really hard to be crytpic enough about it. lol
@Benedek38 You're not an apex predator otehrwise you wouldn't be posting on GAG. Stick to what you know, cross burning, tiki torches, etc.
@Pamina Out in the real world he's a sad little man
@Jonny317 @Pamina
I suggest looking up what the fuck "alt right" means. It means ethno-nationalism. I am not even close to being an ethno-nationalist. So I also suggest getting your head out of your ass.
@Benedek38 So what do you stand for? I stand for equal rights for all, unity among races/ ethnicities, progress and moving forward. Ask me anything. Now how about you?
@Jonny317
I simply don't give a shit about race or ethnicity, I am probably center right or centrist in terms of political beliefs. Equality is a basic human right as it should be, and I that's all I am going to say about it.
I don't wish to ask you anything, unless you dial back the accusations and ad hominems.
@Jonny317 Not only out in the real world. I always find it entertaining to see how he (and the other Alt-Righters on here) try everything they can to always make sure to never be open about their beliefs. The whole "I don't care about race" thing for instance. Straight out of the Alt-Right playbook. It's all about disguising their true beliefs. So pathetic, yet so amusing to watch. Little worms. :)
@Pamina Exactly, he'll never own up to his despicable intentions. Little men are little always.
@Jonny317 To be fair, it's a strategy that's been highly successful these last few years. Open fascism isn't popular, so they have to be cryptic about it.
@Benedek38 No need to ask, I'm an open book, but I don't understand the whole Alt Right thing. What makles you hate people because of their color/ ethnicity? I just don't get it. can you explain?
@Pamina You're right. I think that when electoral-college-appointed DJT is impeached these guys will all crawl back under their rocks again.
Mr. Annoyous is correct, just DON'T repeat the bad shit we've done already...
I thought it was pretty typical for a war.
Everything Changed when the white people attacked😂😂😂
Firenation for dummmys
Most Native Americans were killed due to disease, which was inevitable. Since they were isolated, Native Americans never built up immunities.