The United States was founded by......... (work, propaganda, guns, Mobile)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So YOu are saying that the Amerindian tribes needed a written language, unified across the entire landmass that laid out their immigration rules to be in effect, but when it came to treaties of offering beads in exchange for land, those sorts of transactions didn't need to be recorded in writing on both sides, or even approved by all of the Amerindian inhabitants across that same landmass?...
Isn't there some disparity in that statement?...
Amerindian tribes
is the equivalent of calling a wolf a poodle by way of being a dog. They were not all the same.
So YOu are saying that the Amerindian tribes needed a written language, unified across the entire landmass that laid out their immigration rules to be in effect, but when it came to treaties of offering beads in exchange for land, those sorts of transactions didn't need to be recorded in writing on both sides, or even approved by all of the Amerindian inhabitants across that same landmass?...
Isn't there some disparity in that statement?...
Indians didn't own land, their beliefs were they lived off the land, they entered into treaties of land use with settlers in the beginning and later with the formed Colonies, States, and eventually the Federal Gov't. Each tribe understood itself to be it's own nation, with a different language and culture than all others. Why else were there so many different treaties? They had no immigration rules, they simply managed their territories, traded with other tribes, fought with/against other tribes, etc. The Spanish pretty much came in and took what they wanted, while the British came in and purchased the land from the tribes.
Quote:
We could say that all conflicts between European settlers in America and American Indians were about land. The Indians had it; the Europeans wanted it. In many cases, Europeans simply took what they wanted. In most of British North America, though, settlers actually purchased land from natives. You might think that buying land rather than taking it would prevent conflict. But because Europeans and American Indians had very different ideas about what it meant to buy and to “own” land, these deals actually could cause as much conflict as they prevented.
The traditional view of European-Indian land deals is that Europeans tricked the Indians, who failed to understand the consequences of their actions. In fact, though, Indians often proved savvy negotiators, and most European settlers understood far less about Indian ideas of land ownership than the Indians understood about theirs. In the long run, the colonists won nearly every conflict over land ownership, because there were more of them: Their numbers grew continually, while the native population dwindled from disease, warfare, and slavery.
But if force often settled land disputes, what caused them in the first place were vastly different assumptions about what it meant to “own” land — assumptions deeply rooted in European and American Indian cultures and religions.
Do you have a written letter of LEGAL Settlement on Indian Land (Jamestown)?
The British were hostile to the natives (and vice versa)! They did not abide by each others' laws! Seventeenth century European/Native relations were not civil nor were they ethical! But that was 1607 and this is 2012!
So because King James I signed a document allowing the creation of Virginia Company which became Jamestown, that was legal in the eyes of the Indians?
So basically any land without written law and borders (upheld by European standard law) can be taken?
Through war and expansion the British conquered what is now the United States and Canada. Was it ethical? No. Did it happen? Yes. Are you implying that Mexico should essentially declare war on the United States? Seems like it.
Through war and expansion the British conquered what is now the United States and Canada. Was it ethical? No. Did it happen? Yes. Are you implying that Mexico should essentially declare war on the United States? Seems like it.
By today's rules it'd be wrong. By the rules back then, it was OK. Some people forget the native American Indians did the same things to each other. Even before Jamestown or Cortez.
IF Mexico did try to take our land; they'd lose and lose big.
So. Our missiles are based on Nazi Technology. How ironic is that?
The Aztec, Navajo, and so on didn't have guns till white people came here. The Indians didn't have horses either before Columbus.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.