Americans DID NOT Commit the Worst Genocide in History.

page: 1
5

log in

join

posted on Aug, 4 2013 @ 03:03 AM
link   
Despite common misconception, the decline of the Native populations the Americas are often misrepresented. The number of deaths that we see typically include Canada, Central America, and South America, while the causes for those losses are often portrayed as far more malevolent than they actually were. Indeed, genocide WAS committed against the Native populations, I am not here to argue that. What I AM here to argue is the gross miscalculation that many people seem to have surrounding how rampant said genocide was, and explain the cause of today's low Native American population.

Which "Americans" do YOU believe to be the masters of Genocide? The English? The French? The Spanish? They were not all working under a single authority figure, which is an important fact to remember. (You'd be surprised at how many people blame the US alone) I have noticed that the total number of Native deaths in the Americas surrounding the European invasion of the new world is often directed solely at the US. The US seems to absorb the blame for not only it's own actions, but the actions of it's neighbors as well.

( Example of this: www.abovetopsecret.com... )

I've seen estimates of Native American populations in the territories which are now the United States as high as 50 million or more. Utter nonsense - there is little to no evidence which supports such claims.



While it is difficult to determine exactly how many Natives lived in North America before Columbus,[5] estimates range from a low of 2.1 million (Ubelaker 1976) to 7 million people (Russell Thornton) to a high of 18 million (Dobyns 1983).[6]


It would also be fair to say that, despite Europeans intentionally giving some Native American populations diseases, there was a far greater number of Native Americans that died due to disease that was not intentionally given to them, simply because they had no immunity.



during the late 1630s, smallpox killed over half of the Wyandot (Huron), who controlled most of the early North American fur trade in what became Canada. They were reduced to fewer than 10,000 people.[10]


There are no real definitive figures of how large the Native American population was, and some experts argue that our high estimates of the Pre-Columbian Native American population are frankly MADE UP.



some have argued that contemporary estimates of a high pre-Columbian indigenous population are rooted in a bias against Western civilization and/or Christianity. Robert Royal writes that "estimates of pre-Columbian population figures have become heavily politicized with some scholars, who are particularly critical of Europe, often favoring wildly higher figures."[14]


Others argue that the total population of Native Americans is higher today than it ever was. (or at least larger than it was in recorded history - including when Columbus first stumbled upon America)



The indigenous population in 1492 was not necessarily at a high point and may actually have been in decline in some areas. Indigenous populations in most areas of the Americas reached a low point by the early 20th century. In most cases, populations have since begun to climb.[15] In the United States, for instance, the numbers may already have recovered to pre-Columbian levels or even exceeded them.[16]


Most of the European immigrants who came to America (British Colonies/America, Canadian Territories, Etc.) assumed the Native Americans had always had a low population. This is because the diseases which we previously discussed had been so devastating to them before records of their population were kept that once-great communities and cities were reduced to small fractal tribes. Those diseases were spread naturally, even if they hadn't existed in the Americas before the arrival of the Europeans. If the Europeans hadn't come to the Americas en mass when they did, another population would have eventually, and rampant disease would have occurred regardless.



Disease killed off a sizable portion of the populations before European observations (and thus written records) were made. After the epidemics had already killed massive numbers of natives, many newer European immigrants assumed that there had always been relatively few indigenous peoples. The scope of the epidemics over the years was tremendous, killing millions of people—possibly in excess of 90% of the population in the hardest hit areas—and creating one of "the greatest human catastrophe in history, far exceeding even the disaster of the Black Death of medieval Europe"


Something that is not typically known is the fact that Europeans also brought diseases which were common in the Americas back to Europe, which had devastating effects there. The exchange of rampant disease was a two-way road.



One of the most devastating diseases was smallpox, but other deadly diseases included typhus, measles, influenza, bubonic plague, cholera, malaria, tuberculosis, mumps, yellow fever, and pertussis (whooping cough), which were chronic in Eurasia. The indigenous Americas also had a number of endemic diseases, such as tuberculosis and an unusually virulent type of syphilis, which soon became rampant when brought back to the Old World.


I'm not saying wars and massacres didn't occur - they did. But they were certainly not as large as the ones committed by some of the more notorious figures in history. (Ex: Hitler/Stalin) One of the more notable massacres was only about 5,000 people. A massive number, yes, but a drop in the ocean compared to quite a few other 20-year-long genocidal campaigns.



While some California tribes were settled on reservations, others were hunted down and massacred by 19th century American settlers. It is estimated that some 4,500 people of the Population of Native California suffered violent deaths between 1849 and 1870.[45][46]


Eugenics and ethnic cleansing are irrefutably terrible - but try to bare in mind that these concepts were being practiced at a time when they couldn't be refuted by DNA evidence.

As for me personally.. I'm Irish-American and my ancestors were imported to America as unwilling slaves. Later, some of them would become civil war POW's who fought for the Union. I certainly will not accept the blame which a portion of my fellow Americans intend to place onto my shoulders, and I won't be RSVPing for the pity-party either. It is my personal belief that the best course of action is to let the past remain in the past. The wounds inflicted will heal with time, assuming the damage is reversible. Shaming (include self-shaming) is productive and helpful to no one.


(All quotes come from wiki, a source now considered to be as accurate as the Encyclopedia Britannica)




posted on Aug, 4 2013 @ 03:51 AM
link   
reply to post by HairlessApe
 


I'm not sure why you felt the need to start a new thread when you could have just posted this in the existing thread?

It also seems rather dismissive of you to try and minimize the effect colonialism had on the native populations of the Americas. While you are correct that this wasn't something exclusive to the U.S government, it's disingenuous of you to include some information to make your point while excluding relevant issues that contradict it. The U.S government did have an official policy of genocide concerning what they considered to be the problem of native communities. The fact the U.S government engaged in whole sale slaughter of the buffalo and nearly drove the species to extinction in an effort to deprive native tribes of their primary food source is a documented fact.

It might be inaccurate to say that the genocide the U.S government attempted to perpetrate against native peoples was the worst in history, but it is certainly among the worst.



posted on Aug, 4 2013 @ 04:04 AM
link   
The US can't really be blamed for the first wave of death that struck the native americans, that came from the spanish, USA wasn't even born yet!

And i don't know if i would call it a genocide after, yes the land was stolen, but that was originaly from the british, not the USA.

After you got your independance (sp?), thats when we can give the US blame, and yes land was stolen and villiges were pillaged, but there wasn't really enough natives left for it to be called a genocide.



posted on Aug, 4 2013 @ 04:04 AM
link   
Just listen to the natives had/have to say?

History is written by the victors.

Is it even thought at school that millions and millions of natives where killed?

Maybe just look at this picture (bisons killed just for fun which where the most important and respected animal for the indians), then think about the indians?

Or did those bisions (which also almost became extinct) largy died of deceases brought from Europe? Could be!



edit on 4-8-2013 by Plugin because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2013 @ 04:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by DeadSeraph
reply to post by HairlessApe
 


I'm not sure why you felt the need to start a new thread when you could have just posted this in the existing thread?


You could probably figure that out if you gave what I wrote a full read.



Satire is a genre of literature, and sometimes graphic and performing arts, in which vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement.[1] Although satire is usually meant to be funny, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon.



Laughter is not an essential component of satire;[7] in fact there are types of satire that are not meant to be "funny" at all.


------


Originally posted by DeadSeraph
reply to post by HairlessApe
 

It also seems rather dismissive of you to try and minimize the effect colonialism had on the native populations of the Americas. While you are correct that this wasn't something exclusive to the U.S government, it's disingenuous of you to include some information to make your point while excluding relevant issues that contradict it. The U.S government did have an official policy of genocide concerning what they considered to be the problem of native communities. The fact the U.S government engaged in whole sale slaughter of the buffalo and nearly drove the species to extinction in an effort to deprive native tribes of their primary food source is a documented fact.

It might be inaccurate to say that the genocide the U.S government attempted to perpetrate against native peoples was the worst in history, but it is certainly among the worst.



I know that the US had an official policy of genocide against many tribes of Native Americans, but most people's sense of the atrocities committed against them are vastly inflated. As I've stated, disease spread naturally killed the bulk of their populations - not attack by the US. I recognize that their food supplies were stripped from them malevolently, their holy sites were desecrated, and their murder was often condoned. That, however, does not permit us to get the facts wrong. I would debate someone who reported that Hitler had killed a billion Jews - or that Africans have the world's longest history of slavery. Why? Because they're wrong. And just because something terrible happened does not give one the right to spread misinformation. As stated, I will not be joining the pity-party. Tell everyone I said hello, though.


edit on 4-8-2013 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2013 @ 04:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Plugin
Just listen to the natives had/have to say?

History is written by the victors.

Is it even thought at school that millions and millions of natives where killed?

Maybe just look at this picture (bisons killed just for fun which where the most important and respected animal for the indians), then think about the indians?

Or did those bisions (which also almost became extinct) largy died of deceases brought from Europe? Could be!



edit on 4-8-2013 by Plugin because: (no reason given)


I'm not forgetting/dismissing what the Natives have said or suffered through. I did not report that genocide against the Native Americans was made up.

I'm just asking you to get the facts straight. Because the average American's understand of the situation is a stretched truth perpetuated by myth and a lack of good information.

I would largely prefer "Native American Recognition Day" over "Columbus Day," but if we're going to recognize their plight we need to demonstrate that we properly recognize it. This blame-game stuff doesn't fly with me.
edit on 4-8-2013 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)


JAK

posted on Aug, 4 2013 @ 04:33 AM
link   
This topic is already available here: Americans committed the worst genocide in world history

You can support or refute there.

Closed.
edit on 4/8/13 by JAK because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join