The U.S. should seriously consider giving back the lands it took illegally

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by Wernazuma III
But compared to the way the colonization happened in most parts of Latin America (I come to that), there was never an intention of having a mixed society.

Wernazuma III, you're forgetting about the Jesuits, who were very active in what is now the USA. They did try for a mixed society or at least a happy co-existence, and were not without success. Of course this came in one package with propagating their beliefs, but the original Christian values and morale stories are very similar to those of the northern Amerinds so it was not a big step for most.

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by Proteus_MST
The former Colonies at one time or the other gained Independence from the Colonial Power and formed their own Countries, whereas the countries taken from the Indians are still Part of the USA.

And I again think, it's not comparable, as the US never had an intention to "colonize" the Indians, just to remove them and replace them, so... The only comparable events are the Russian "colonization" of Siberia (which was incomplete, leaving far greater spaces for retreat of the natives), the intrusion of the Amazonas (which was/is surely as disastrous as was the conquest of the west) and the conquest of Patagonia by Chile and Argentina (which resembles the conquest of the plains quite a bit actually).

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by Ribannah


Wernazuma III, you're forgetting about the Jesuits, who were very active in what is now the USA. They did try for a mixed society or at least a happy co-existence, and were not without success. Of course this came in one package with propagating their beliefs, but the original Christian values and morale stories are very similar to those of the northern Amerinds so it was not a big step for most.

Right Ribannah, but then again, we're talking about a catholic missions by French and Spanish. The jesuits really in many ways did a great job in fulfilling their mission of spreading their faith without being the elephant in a china shop, although cultural misunderstanings in several occasions also contributed to the erosion of old culture. But generally, the adaption to the native cultures was pretty good. However, from a Christian dogmatic stance, these methods were quite a bit cheating, actually allowing polytheistic beliefs and pagan rituals under a Christian cover (not that this was something new...).
Anyhow, such an adaption was only possible for Catholics with their strong cults about saints and the concept of "popular piety", while a strict Christian dogmatism (as shown by Protestants) can only result in the destruction of different cultural patterns as culture and religion are always inseperably interwoven and so it was...

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by Wernazuma III
However, from a Christian dogmatic stance, these methods were quite a bit cheating, actually allowing polytheistic beliefs and pagan rituals under a Christian cover (not that this was something new...).

The northern Amerind religion was not more polytheistic or pagan than the Christian religion IMHO. Both had an almighty creator; where the Amerind had 'ghosts' representing the forces of nature (but really good and evil by proxy), the Christians had angels. And the concept of a saviour was also known to both; Jesus Christ and Hiawatha have a lot in common.

Even so, countermovements to return to the pure original Amerind beliefs came up when the 'perversities' of the white man followed their religion and also entered the Amerind way of life.

[Dis]

yes there was Custer, and there have been reports of handing out smallpox infected blankets or something. But I doubt anyone knew how smallpox was spread back then. But perhaps some of them intentionally tried to spread disease.

And yes there was manifest destiny and the americans did intend to push the indians away to reach the coast. But I still don't think there was a widespread planned genocide lead by the goverment. Sure the military attacked and killed many tribes, but not all.

[Spiffor]

I think the genocide of bisons, which ended up starving many tribes, was planned by the government with this outcome in mind.

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by Dissident
But I still don't think there was a widespread planned genocide lead by the goverment. Sure the military attacked and killed many tribes, but not all.

No, I wouldn't go that far either, it was definitely not a genocide because someone thought the Indians were subhumans who had to be killed (well, Custer might have thought that), thus of course the killing was of a totally different quality than, say, that of the Nazis against the Jews.
It was simply that the US government advanced and didn't plan to really leave those tribes any place to retreat (beside some little very barren, f**** up land, not suited for keeping up the traditional way of living), so one can say that it was "planned" because everybody could foresee that there was no real alternative to go for the Indians.

[muxec]

Dissident, you should seriously consider stoping being trolling stupid.

ACK!
Have a nice day

[Dis]

stoping?

The indians could have went to Canada

[monolith94]

Yes - I think we should give the Phillipines back to the Spanish!

[Cruddy]

Originally posted by monolith94
Yes - I think we should give the Phillipines back to the Spanish!

Why not the Filopinos?

Anyway, the thread headline is a troll. "Lands taken illegally".

Colonization and ethnic cleansing may be frowned upon now - but back in 1776 it was a totally legitimate way to get land.

So which lands were taken illegally Dissident? Or did you mean immorally, or unethically, or unjustly, or some other way to look down on it?

[Elok]

Actually, that's a good point; ex post facto probably applies. It should, anyway....

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by Cruddy
Colonization and ethnic cleansing may be frowned upon now - but back in 1776 it was a totally legitimate way to get land.

Absolutely not. It violated the laws of the people living there (and let's not even start on all the treaties that were violated - against USA law, too).

[rmsharpe]

Wow, a thread of a bunch of whiny Marxists pissing about how evil America is.

Blah blah, Che's your hero. Yay Castro, death to America.

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
Wow, a thread of a bunch of whiny Marxists pissing about how evil America is.
Blah blah, Che's your hero. Yay Castro, death to America.

Sure, America will fall. It's historically inevitable. Stupid gringo massmurerers.