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.
The original post is just a classic example of the dangers of "revisionist" history, and the goals of the so-called "progressive" mindset; this is a thread that separates the serious scholars from the overgrown children.
None of those come anywhere near the depopulation of an entire continent. If you plan to argue that a few minor actions like the holocaust justify American genocide, your ass is hanging out.
'The depopulation of an entire continent'
I thought you were talking about actions by U.S. Citizens or the U.S. Government, but I find that you are really talking about the actions of natural disease pathogens and their effect on non-immune indigenous peoples.
Did you know that the continent of North America includes Canada, the USA, Mexico, and all of the 'New World' countries north of Columbia? Who do you think Mexicans, Cubans, Inuit, and practically all Latin Americans descend from? I'll give you a hint; they are Native Americans, with some addition of other genetic strains. Does Mexico look like it was depopulated to you?
The vast majority of Native Americans then living in the current boundaries of the continental USA in your 'genocide' scenario died from accidental transmission of disease without ever even meeting a European. Do you really imagine that the first explorers intentionally brought diseases with them?
The final stages of the removal and encapsulation of the Native Americans in the US and Canada are undoubtedly shameful, but affected a much smaller number of people than your grandiose 'depopulation of an entire continent' statement implies.
I want to be rid of only the lies, half-truths and politically motivated propaganda. History should be based only on the documented facts, and nothing else. Nothing important that actually happened should ever be omitted either.
What part(s) would you consider embarrassing/shameful enough that you wouldn't want someone else to read, either a foreigner or a younger American citizen having not read much history before?
I'm currently reading Dispossed/America's UnderClasses from the Civil War to the Present by Jacqueline Jones.
Now there's parts of this book that American History scholars in China, in particular, shouldn't have access to. Especially, the usage/abuse of convict labor in the labor camps in the late 1800's, early 1900's, where you could "buy" a convict for $200 a year.
This information gets into the heads of some Chinese History scholars, the next time a President points a finger at China and brings up Human Rights violations, they'll point a finger or 2 right back at us!
You and the Chinese should remember that we saved the butts of the Chinese from the Japanese warriors during WW2. They should be forever thankful and owe us big time, but all they have done is wage war against us since the end of WW2.
Wow, how do you even respond to that? This is too far off the deep end - conversation ended with you dude.
Your denial is absolute. The American genocide was an order of magnitude larger than the holocaust. You are a good example of the dishonesty of historians.
This is nothing new. Even back in the 1980s, when I lived in the area, there was a substantial Haitian population in many parts of western Palm Beach County, including Belle Glade. And there has been ongoing friction between Haitians and American blacks. Though, if you didn't live there like I did, there wouldn't really be any reason that you would know about this; so I'm impressed that you are aware of it at all.
I've heard the Holocaust called many things, but this is the first time I've ever heard it called a "minor action"! The Holocaust and what you call the "American genocide" do have some things in common, but never have I heard anyone claim that the genocide of Europe's Jewish population (and others) somehow retroactively justifies what happened to the Native Americans.
That's not the claim. My point is that historians cover up what their own ancestors did so they don't have to feel ashamed. Rah Rah for Manifest Destiny. Your reaction makes my point. The thought of 60 million deaths and the extermination of whole civilizations is so inconceivable that you can't even wrap your head around it, but it happened. Historians systematically underestimate the number of native inhabitants because they can't comprehend what happened.
I thought you were talking about actions by U.S. Citizens or the U.S. Government, but I find that you are really talking about the actions of natural disease pathogens and their effect on non-immune indigenous peoples.
Did you know that the continent of North America includes Canada, the USA, Mexico, and all of the 'New World' countries north of Columbia? Who do you think Mexicans, Cubans, Inuit, and practically all Latin Americans descend from? I'll give you a hint; they are Native Americans, with some addition of other genetic strains. Does Mexico look like it was depopulated to you?
The vast majority of Native Americans then living in the current boundaries of the continental USA in your 'genocide' scenario died from accidental transmission of disease without ever even meeting a European. Do you really imagine that the first explorers intentionally brought diseases with them?
The final stages of the removal and encapsulation of the Native Americans in the US and Canada are undoubtedly shameful, but affected a much smaller number of people than your grandiose 'depopulation of an entire continent' statement implies.
The native population of Mexico is still a majority, as is the native population of most of South America. They encountered the same diseases as the North American natives, but did not encounter the rabid intent to exterminate the native population that happened in North America. The extermination of the buffalo was intended to starve the Indians to death, and it worked. They starved with no meat, and froze with no robes in the midwest winters. On the Pacific Coast, settlers formed mounted bands to exterminate the natives.
Your denial is absolute. The American genocide was an order of magnitude larger than the holocaust. You are a good example of the dishonesty of historians.
Of course, since the holocaust in your words was a "minor action", and I am the one in denial.
wow.....I have no words
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.
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.
The Holocaust and what you call the "American genocide" do have some things in common, but never have I heard anyone claim that the genocide of Europe's Jewish population (and others) somehow retroactively justifies what happened to the Native Americans.
