Everything we have is because the natives forfeited their land (racist, military)

[Winterfall8324]

If we were not able to invest in the far west or cotton fields in the south there would be no early industrialization, which means no Spanish-American war, which means no trade powers, which means no military supremacy, which means no domination in Hollywood from the escapees of 1930s Europe, which means no soft power, which means no victory in the cold war, which means no gulf war, which means no war on terror, which means no mass migration, which means no social inclusivity movement.


My point is Americans make a big deal about accepting others, embracing individuality, and respecting natives and their culture.

But this social liberalism wouldn't be possible without the wealth and power of America, which means no one should look back fondly on the natives or mourn their passing.

You get my point? Saying Natives should be honored ignores that their total destruction was how inclusive social ideas were created.

So why don't people just praise their defeat as a necessary evil of enlightenment and social progressiveness.

Its not hypocrisy, Ataturk said he would be a dictator so their would be no more dictators and he was right (up until a point).

Its not hypocritical to bend your ideology for its greater purpose, in fact its necessary. (famous SW quote: to believe in something is to be willing to betray it)

So why don't social humanitarians who hate war and love inclusiveness, more leisure, less patriarchal rule, more democracy, and greater social expression admit the destruction of the Indians was needed to achieve this goal.

In fact humanitarians and liberal democracy advocates should own up to the event as one of the greatest moments in human history, they should praise the removal of the Indians as the final sin needed to create a more modern inclusive society without which we would be a backwards/(more) racist country?